nicked on 17/10/2010 at 15:21
Shouldn't have used the word "story" - I was more thinking of the way the level design in Quake 2 and Unreal felt more like it was a real place than a lot of previous 3D games. They were less obviously "game-y" in design, particularly Unreal. With that game it feels like they mapped out this alien world and what it was going to be like as a whole, and then built levels to fit that vision, resulting in a consistent game-wide experience.
In most earlier games, it felt like each level was a self-contained challenge, more like a puzzle game than what we think of as an FPS today, sometimes wildly varying in style from one level to the next. Blood fits into this older style and seems to have come out right around the time people were clamouring for something new.
june gloom on 17/10/2010 at 17:12
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Also Hexen did what Q2 attempted a lot better.
I know you hate Quake 2 for some reason but this is just fucking insane.
Chimpy Chompy on 17/10/2010 at 18:15
I didn't hate Quake 2 but it was a struggle to make myself play through another generic scifi military base to shoot some more cyborgs. It got all samey and dull pretty quickly. I'd definitely rather play Hexen myself, even with its sessions of hunt-the-switch.
lost_soul on 17/10/2010 at 20:00
People may dislike the Quake 2 single player experience (I certainly do), but the multiplayer in that game was the high-point for the Quake series. Maps like Mckinley Revival, Stronghold, and outlands provided for dozens of hours of fun.
In Q3, they took away our precious grappling hook and replaced it with bounce pads... bleh!
As for Unreal, it was just beautiful at the time. There is no in-game speech and all of the plot is revealed through text, which wasn't very exciting. The best way to play through Unreal is with a friend.
nicked on 17/10/2010 at 20:03
Quote Posted by lost_soul
As for Unreal, it was just beautiful at the time. There is no in-game speech and all of the plot is revealed through text, which wasn't very exciting.
On the contrary, I'd say that's a massive strength - it helps convey a real sense of atmosphere and loneliness throughout the whole game, and makes it feel all the more alien and beautiful for it.
Renzatic on 17/10/2010 at 20:20
I agree with Nicked here. Unreal wouldn't have been nearly as memorable if it went with the usual cutscene/loud talkative characters route. The quiet world and soaring music did more to build the atmosphere than any exposition would've.
Hell, I'm playing Unreal again. I know I've said that before, but this time I mean it.
june gloom on 17/10/2010 at 20:43
One of these days I'll replay Unreal and see if it does anything for me this time around. I got it after I got Half-Life and back then it just didn't fucking hold up.
lost_soul on 17/10/2010 at 21:13
Try playing it with headphones on and enjoy the sounds bouncing off of the cliffs in the distance, along with the great music on maps like Harobed, Spirevillage, Skytown, Nyleve, and others. There was nothing like it in 1998. I remember playing it during a bus ride on a friend's laptop around 1999 and being blown away that a *laptop* could render that game world. Now it runs on my 9 inch netbook.
Shame about Unreal 2 though... The only good thing it brought to the table was the whole "hold off the enemy by placing defenses" thing. I don't think it was made by the same people.
nicked on 18/10/2010 at 07:59
Same people, but for some reason they all went insane. Just think... Gears of War came from the same people that made Unreal. :(
june gloom on 18/10/2010 at 08:37
I'll put it in perspective for you guys.
Gears of War came from the same mind that gave us Dare to Dream and Jazz Jackrabbit.
Now do you see why I tend to kick big name egos like Ken Levine and Tim Schaefer around? No matter what awesome games they may have made 20 years ago, they all inevitably turn into this.
