/v/ - Video Games

I liked the campaign

>>14853365

>I mean it was continuation of Quake 2, another underrated title

Fucking stop.

>but why nobody stopped ID

>Quake 4

>ID

Please do basic ass research before posting again.

>>14853569

Quake autists in general are impossible to please.

>>14853906

>But Doom 3 has the best campaign out of all three.

>Quake 2 shits all over 1.

>>14853918

>Totaled Asshurt

>Gee why isn't an ugly carbon copy of UT2004 with a shitty F2P model, a free game with no marketing and a niche community, a low-budget CPMA clone, an eternal pre-alpha that was abandoned midway through so the devs can make some meme game, and a F2P Quake 3 that was actually really popular for a while NOT not have a consistent community of 50,000 players? Why is the community for a shooter sub-genre from 20 years ago not enough to sustain these games which are largely rehashes of things they've been playing to this day? Clearly it is their own fault

What a fucking braindead faggot.

>>14854011

>Ur gay

>No im not

>Heh, just what a fag in hiding would say

>>14853365

>In retrospective, why was it shit?

Because it wasn't focused on multiplayer

>And did anybody ever enjoyed that game?

I thought it was far better than Doom 3. The only thing holding the game back at the time was it released the same year as F.E.A.R which was far better. Which was one of the reasons why the game's singleplayer wasn't seen as impressive.

>nobody stopped ID from making a poopy game instead of just Quake 3 with new graphics

It was made by Raven, they tried that with Quake live and later with Quake Champions and people didn't like either game.

>>14853430

>It was dumbed down for consoles

It released on PC first

>It was a slow Quake game, with linear gameplay that stole from COD mission design

This isn't correct, the game is far more based on Doom 3.

This game came out before Call of Duty 2. So I highly doubt they looked at Call of Duty 1 and decided to copy it. Especially since squad based games were all the rage at the time (see Republic Commando and SOCOM US Navy SEALS)

>>14853484

>had more in common with call of duty than any quake games

>Game was made before Call of Duty 2

>shitty weapons

The weapons were far better than Doom 3. They all had their uses. The shotgun, for instance, was incredibly satisfying and could straight up destroy enemies. Especially during the second half when it was upgraded with a magazine. The nailgun would eventually become akin to a minigun and got a scope that let you guide shots with it around corners.

>shitty enemies

The game's enemies were all varied, you had enemies that would charge at you, enemies that would hover in the air and shoot rockets at you, enemies with shields and a railgun, enemies that fired grenades at you etc. The enemy design in the game was far more dynamic than any of the previous Quake games and you genuinely had to switch weapons a lot more.

>boring levels

I still remember levels like the Dispersal facility to this day

>>14853941

>Why Quake 2 never got player base big enough to make custom maps for it like for Quake 1? Quake 1 has like hundreds of map packs alone.

Quake 2's singleplayer wasn't considered as good as Quake 1's at the time. Also there was more novelty to Quake 1's setting and enemy design.

>>14854740

>Singleplayer was Generic FPS shovelware someone stuck the Quake name on

>Only game in the series that was a direct sequel to another

>Actually tried to advance the story of Quake 2

>Someone stuck the Quake name on

This is funny because this literally happened with Quake 2. Quake 2 was going to be called something else by Id but they went with Quake 2 because nobody could come up with a better name.

>It was worse than what they did to Doom 3

This is definitely bait

People keep saying the game was "consolized" but I don't really see it. Nobody's brought up any examples of the game's levels being shortened or the game's experience being streamlined in any way for a controller. If anything the game's multiplayer was enhanced compared to Doom 3 considering that game only allowed a maximum of 4 players on a server (and limited coop to console) wheras Quake 4 had 16 player multiplayer. The 360 version of the game even launched with the console so it was long before a lot of the problems people associate with "consolized games" came from. Like a 2 weapon limit or regenerating health.

>>14854837

>This is definitely bait

>No.

>Look at the youtubes

>>14854040

The best I'll say about it is that the shooter gameplay isn't the dumbed down rubbish of most "shooter" games that started popping up after.

>>14854050

Generally speaking none of the weapons feel satisfying to shoot. It's especially awful with the railgun and shotgun though.

>>14853724

There are. Best thing about the speedrun is they interrupt dialogue by shooting grenades at them.

>>14853365

>In retrospective, why was it shit?

Absolutely nothing about it was remarkable in any way. It was just Generic FPS: The Game. The multiplayer was alright but that was hardly enough to save it. Also the vehicle sections were terrible. Quake II isn't perfect but it's so many leagues better than Q4 there's just no reason to play the latter.

>>14857234

>>this somehow means it doesn't play like a call of duty game with all its scripted sequences and turret sections

>Call of Duty 1 invented scripted sequences and turret sections

Call of Duty 1 was just one of the hundreds of other WW2 games when it came out. Games like Medal of Honor were more popular at the time. I remember at the time I hadn't even heard about Call of Duty until COD2. When Activision re-released Call of Duty 1 on XBLA reviews were somewhat negative toward it because the controls didn't play well on a console.

It wasn't til Call of Duty 2 that the franchise took shape into what it is now. Call of Duty 1 even had things like medkits.

>I don't even like doom 3 but the animation alone was far better than quake 4's shotgun.

The animation is retarded, the shotgun looks trashy and weird and the main character reloads it two shells at a time for some reason. The reload is also painfully slow, and by comparison, the reload in Quake 4 is to the point. (it even changes when the gun gets upgraded with a magazine and becomes even more satisfying). That's not to mention how weapon balance in Doom 3 was trash. (The pistol is useless the moment you pick it up, the shotgun is what you use for 75% of the game, the machine gun isn't as useful as the plasma gun and has one of the most unsatisfying gun weapon sounds, the plasma gun is useful until you get the chaingun, the chaingun for some reason reloads faster than the machine gun, I could go on there's so many stupid decisions they made with the guns in Doom 3. I was unsurprised a decade later there were mods that vastly improved the weapon handling and balance like Perfected Doom 3.)

>>14857390

There were a lot of small differences if you religiously played Q3A. The biggest issue was that the game was noticeably slower.

Quake 4 was marketed as essentially a replacement of Q3A which was a mistake in my opinion. It even had tournaments planned before it released. (some big Counter Strike pro I remember was embarrassed in a Quake 4 tournament because he lost really badly). That was the context the game came out in which was why it wasn't well liked by fans because most people bought the game solely for the multiplayer. It's why a lot of people who played the game much later don't see what the big deal is. Raven should've made its multiplayer its own thing and made it more like the singleplayer (slower paced, with reloading and so forth) similar to Doom 3. I'm friends with someone who still plays Doom 3's MP and he said he didn't like Quake 4 for that reason.

Quake 4 was a good game, the campaign was really fun, if sometimes stale.

The Stroggified soldiers with railguns were bullshit.

>>14857442

Not as bad as these guys