Doom 2 feels like a collection of maps with uneven difficulty spikes and design ideas, while Quake 2 campaign feels like a clear progression with gradually increasing difficulty curve (cue DraQ complaining about how easy it was)
Well, technically an increase with a slope of 0 is still an increase if you really want to stretch it.
As for difficulty spikes, smooth difficulty curve is overrated, it's supposed to be an adrenaline pumping shootan, not a lulaby.
It also tries to have a narrative without ever doing Half-Life retardation on you.
True, HL has got nothing on sheer magnitude of Q2's derp.
The world of Quake 2 feels like it all fits together, while Doom 2 was a collection of random monsters in a collection of "experimental" level designs.
The difference is that Doom 2's less coherent world wasn't boring and homogeneous. Neither were far more coherent worlds of Hexen, Strife, System Shocks, Blood, Shadow Warrior, Quake, Unreal, Half-Life and so on.
The only concession I'm willing to make here is that Q2's levels often had nice connectivity - if only it wasn't such a complete waste of talent in every possible way.
For the lack of a better word, Quake 2 campaign feels "mature"
Those two letters aren't even adjacent, FFS.
Q2 is "mature" in the same way every other dudebro militaristic shooter has been - cowaduty, SoF, etc.
Accusing HL of somehow spoiling the genre while earlier Q2 was both more hitscan dominant, rewarded popamole tactics and appealed to the same sort of dudebro aesthetics as all the decline bringing shooters we so like to complain about is hilarious.
Oh and Quake 2 backtracking has nothing on stuff like Hexen. Maybe it's because I nearly passed Hexen, which was an insane fucking game, but Quake 2 backtracking seemed just perfect in length and "puzzliness" to me.
Since when is backtracking a bad thing?
The opposite of backtracking is being stuck on a rail.