What are some spiritual successors to Quake 1, seeing as Quake

Unreal.

>>3078335
Wasn't there some really well-made total conversion made from Quake that was almost like a whole new game?

File: Malice_Manual_Cover.jpg (42KB, 325x325px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 325x325px

>>3078356
There was Malice, a commercially released total conversion. I thought it was awesome when it was new, but really it's not as good as the original Quake.

>>3078374
>it's not as good as the original Quake.
That's setting the bar way too high. Few games can claim that.

>>3078336
This, quake and unreal are really in their own league. Closest other I can say is blood but that's more like a middle ground between them and duke.

>>3078335
Painkiller

>>3078335
If Quake2 isn't really together with Quake, does that mean that it is the Spiritual sequel to Future Shock/Skynet?

File: UnrealTournament.jpg (686KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

686KB, 1280x1024px

>>3078336
I could never play Quake after getting used to UT because of how static it felt.
They are still some players online so that's a plus (but they are beast though) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEutOjKiZSY

>>3078336
I recently played Unreal Gold for the first time and I don't get why it's considered on a par with quake.

Levels are large but empty and sparse with enemies. Weapons feel weak and uninteresting.

I was playing through the game on Unreal difficulty and felt that it wasn't that difficult but that it was more of a slog. Got to level 10 or so before giving up.

Level and enemy design aren't good. Atmosphere is alright. Weapons are interesting but feel underpowered. The game is nowhere near as good as quake.

File: Unreal-2016-03-21-18-27-20-39.jpg (166KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1280x720px

>>3078336
the most importnat difference between quake and unreal is that the former can be run in 1080p out of the box, while the latter goes up to 720p and has a 4:3 FOV

also unreal engine 1 will shit itself at high framerate, so you have to play with V-sync

>>3078756
painkiller is a game of its own, serious sam is the quake clone

>>3080438
The new renderers for unreal have max fps option, don't need vsync.

>>3080463
yeah, you can hack it, but quake just werks

>>3078465
>Few games can claim that.
Quake III can

>>3079896
>Levels are large but empty and sparse with enemies
Unreal differs in that the combat is focused on encounters with small groups of enemies who are however tougher to fight beause of strong stats/good AI.

>>3080606
Continuous, one on one fights in largely similar encounters with meat shield enemies that are slow or predictable as fuck and have very basic AI is the polar opposite of fun.

Seriously, name 5 interesting and unique encounters in the entire game.

You can even have one for free, the skaarj scout first encounter in the mines (which is the only time that enemy has been interesting or remotely threatening).

>>3080768
both quake and unreal are pretty boring games with excellent multiplayer modes

>>3080780
>quake
>boring

Ok, I'm being trolled. Well, 8/10 for effort.

>>3080794
quake 1 is more fun as a bunny hopping simulator than an actual shooter, I've always prefered doom to quake

quake 2 is a bit better, but I'm not a fan of the backtracking hub design they went for

overall 3D shooters didn't really come into their own until early 2000's, when monolith productions made their best games

>>3078335
>Quake 2 failed in all regards as a sequel?
IT
WASN'T
A
SEQUEL

Don't be a casual

>>3080497
Not even close. It doesn't have any single player mode.

>>3078335
>What are some spiritual successors to Quake 1

Hate to break it to you, but there aren't any. The closest is CoC:DCotE and that's nothing like it.

File: quake3_1.jpg (34KB, 606x480px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 606x480px

>>3080984
Uh...no.

>>3081001
Actual single player mode, not multiplayer with bots.

>>3081010
>not multiplayer with bots.
That is a single player mode though.

When you play through an FPS with a conventional, story/mission driven campaign, do you think real players are controlling the monsters?

Top kek.

>>3081001
>>3081010
>>3081023
I like where this is going

>>3081023
You're being a smartass there. Those are not single player, they're meant to train before getting your ass kicked online. The only work they put in that "single player mode" is an IA and an UI.

Quake 2 was never meant to be sequel to Quake in the first place. id couldn't be bothered to trademark some other name so they just used the Quake name and called it Quake 2.

>>3081398


I'm not being a smart ass. You're explicitly and pedantically trying to make a point and I'm shutting you down.

Almost any single player game with a multiplayer component can be considered training wheels before getting your ass kicked online. Look at Warcraft 3. Great single player campaign, but still just teaching you the ropes before the online component, albeit with a cool story (nothing you missed out on with Quake and Quake 2, let's face it).

>The only work they put in that "single player mode" is an IA and an UI.
I fail to see what Internet Aristocrat has to do with this (he now goes by Mister Metokur anyway). In any case, the original Doom, which by the way is where 'deathmatch' was coined and multiplayer FPS games really became a thing, had no multiplayer maps. It was entirely single player maps that you could fight in.

By your logic, instead of bots, the only thing they bothered to put in Doom single player (to teach the player the ropes before online ass kicking) were monsters. Which, by all accounts, are more basic and had less effort put into them than the myriad bots crafted for quake 3.

The only way you would be happy is if Quake 3 was entirely a single player, mission driven/level driven campaign with monsters to fight instead of CPU bots that have the same abilities as the player and that the multiplayer 'Arena' component was essentially quake 3 with no overlapping maps and completely new assets.

The only way id software would be able to do this with the same level of content/polish would be to release the Arena component as a separate game or an expansion. In this Berenstein universe, you would be posting on 16chan's /v/ board about how fucking annoyed you are that Carmack tried to cash in on the popularity of unreal tournament and should have focussed on the multiplayer component since that's what anyone gives a fuck about with FPS games these days. you'd still be a 400lbs virgin though

>>3081023

I do.

>>3081510
Is that some metaphysical interpretation of the game along the lines of 'we're the monsters for slaughtering so many sentient creatures' or are you just a bit of a head case?

>>3081549
>I agree with him
Then you're a moron.
>you seriously need to shut the fuck up.
I don't need to do anything.
>Q3A does not have a single player mode in the traditional sense, ie. with monsters and keys and corridors
The criteria by which you assign to something being a "traditional FPS", whatever the hell that means, is absolutely laughable. You can't even name three distinct features as Quake 3 has corridors in abundance. Monsters and keys are by no means prerequisites either. You might as well have said lives and points, as with Wolfenstein 3d, Descent etc. Just as superfluous and tenuous.

In many respects, the difference between Quake 2 and Quake is larger than the difference between 1 and 3. Quake 2 introduced a completely new and unrelated game world, it had hubs, backtracking, upgradable health and inventory items.

So far, you and Tweedle Dum have fumbled over your points and completely failed to effectively articulate why you think Quake 3 is not a valid single player experience.

Do you seriously think that fighting games like mortal kombat don't have 'real' single player modes because 'they're just multiplayer maps with bots and no new assets'?

>>3081614
One way to look at it is, with q1 and 2 the single player experience gives you something different from the multiplayer giving you a reason to play both. Where games like q3 and arcade fighting games have multiplayer that offers a highly similar experience that these games might as well not even have a single player.

>>3081619
I think you could better rephrase your point, if I understand it correctly, at the end there (and congratulations for actually making a coherent point).

>these games might as well not even have a single player

It's probably more accurate for you to say 'the single player experience was designed as a surrogate to the multiplayer experience'.

You're saying it's still a viable game mode if the game has an inactive community or you lack an online connection (less likely these days) or don't want to pay to play or don't want to be told by a mouthy 12 year old that your mother sucks cocks in hell.

But, for all intents and purposes, you're saying, it's a surrogate.

My main issue with this line of reasoning is that for any FPS game, where multiplayer is and has been an critical component for some time, the amount of time spent on the single player portion is dwarfed by orders of magnitude by the amount of time spent on multiplayer. The single player campaign is really just an extended training mission that you can clear in a matter of hours.

Bitching about a developer focussing entirely on the multiplayer-esque framework of an FPS game and designing AI bots that can competently replace humans while players learn the ropes for the 'single player' portion and yet yourself spending 99% of your time on the game in multiplayer is trying to have your cake and eat it.

It's like eating the best meal you've ever had but bitching about the olives that were brought out while you waited for the starter.

>But that's not what happened with q1!

No, it isn't. But they saw how much more popular multiplayer was, so they did it with q3.

I would rather the devs focus on one area or the other. For an example of a serious, single player only FPS game, look at half life 2. There's a reason why it was praised so highly at release.

>>3081662
Your food analogy us fitting because I do indeed hate olives.

However most of your post is wasted directed at me since the previous post is my only one in this convo. I don't personally have an issue with bots in fact I believe that it is only a good thing. What I'm saying is quake 3 single player is never worth referring to when discussing singles player games.

>>3081023
It has the exact same gameplay as multiplayer you absolutely obtuse manchild. The rules between Quake 1's single player and multiplayer modes are totally different.

>>3081614
>Do you seriously think that fighting games

Shut up right there. That's an apples and oranges comparison, but for the sake of argument there actually are fighting games with single player modes that have different objectives and rules than versus mode.

>>3080768
I don't see how quake isn't this exact same way, except it doesn't have a cool first encounter

if unreal is boring then quake is a fuckin snoozefest

Why is forest of flesh for quake the best doom map?

>>3078335
Malice was listed. Surprised Abyss of Pandemonium wasn't even mentioned. I think Half-Life 2 has the torchlight now though.

>>3081496
>single player only exists to train you for multiplayer

do people actually believe this

>>3084829
That's what they say to themselves to make them feel better when they buy a game with half-assed single player.