The Fall of ID

Umm, it's not ID, it's id (pronounced id, not I.D., look it up). And Sepht is right, id didn't make it.

Disappointed by the review scores. I mean 8.1 is good, but ign tend to give most games high scores. I liked the old quake games cos of the moody surroundings and music. It was something different to Doom, and I'll be sad if Q4 ends up as a Doom3 clone. Im hoping even if it ends up looking the same, the story and atmosphere'll be different enough to make it Quake.

Personally wasnt interested in the Q3 mp. I thought it was an outdated mechanic back then, and still done better by Unreal '99. So Q4 mp just seems pointless to me.

Still I dont tend to agree with most reviews, and I quite liked Doom3, so my hopes are still up.

(And Im still gonna watch the Doom movie too! Man it looks even worse than the resi evil movies! It's just....wrong... :s)

yea

I'm still getting the game, because i believe that the person in ign who was playing quake4 was retarted because he repeated the same things over, and in one part he said the mp was fun and at the end he says, " not fun". Now tell me he aint retarted?

Originally posted by SprigganX@Oct 16 2005, 07:45 PM
I'm still getting the game, because i believe that the person in ign who was playing quake4 was retarted because he repeated the same things over, and in one part he said the mp was fun and at the end he says, " not fun". Now tell me he aint retarted?

I didn't even really read the review, I just noticed a trend for iD... hmm let me take a look.

First, same guy that reviewed FEAR for a 9.2 just a few days ago. Gave Dungeon Siege 2 an 8.5, and Bet on Solider with a 7.0.

For the Quake 4 review, he seems to be very critial, almost biased against the game. He always starts off saying a good point, and then nearly forces himself to say something bad, relivent or not.
"At least the environments look good; there's a lot more color and variety than in Doom 3, and previous Quake games, for that matter. While some areas smack strongly of Doom 3, the bulk of it quickly departs from the "science lab corridor" syndrome. There are a lot of outdoor areas, for one thing (although the sky texture could look better)."
Can't the sky always look better? was that really needed?

"And while the shooter purists will roll their eyes at the notion of vehicles in a Quake game, they're actually fun and intuitively controlled. Their presence in the story doesn't feel necessary, but I find it hard to believe that a gamer wouldn't want to bomb around in a hovertank, blasting the crap out of bad guys and inflicting general mayhem"

"But like I said, the production values are great. You'll fight some truly huge beasties and wend your way through some cool and varied environments. The voice acting is uniformly excellent too, except some incidental lines of dialogue do get repeated a bit too much, sometimes with the same line from the same voice actor issuing from two different people within the span of a minute. That's relatively rare, but it is noticeable."
The same voice command used twice in 1 min, does this guy ever play games?

"Multiplayer was fun across the board."

"However, it is disappointing that the game doesn't ship with a map that feels good for more than 16 people. "
Yeh but the MP is capped at 16, so what do you expect, BF2 maps to be comfy for 128 players?

"Quake 4 is a genuinely fun game"

"If there had been a vehicle-based mode with only one map, I think things could have been much different, because I had a lot of fun with those."
Didn't he just critisize the game's MP for being to different the he was used to? And he just controted a postitive point(vechiles being fun), into a negative(the game being lacking)

"Short singleplayer, and not enough MP flavor to truly set it apart."
Since when does MP need to be unique to be solid? especially when it's really fun (as he said), does that earn a 7.5 for lasting appeal? Also it sounds a bit like he fell into trap of over-expectancy, half the review is how much fun he had with Quake2.

In his reviews, Presentation and Graphics are the nearly same for FEAR and Q4, at 9.0 for all but FEAR's 9.5 in graphics. As for sound. How is this 1.5 of a difference for sound?
"Hollywood actors lend some key voice talent, and there's plenty of ambient sound. Music is tasteful and well-placed."
"Gorgeous music, spooky ambient sound, and great sound effects abound."
Which is the 9.5 for FEAR and which is the 8.0 for Q4?

Oh and guys, for the length of the games, SP for Q4, 10 hours, SP for FEAR, 12 according to him.
"The main game is relatively short; multiplayer, while having some neat tricks up its sleeve, won't replace Counter-Strike any time soon." FEAR
"Short singleplayer, and not enough MP flavor to truly set it apart." Quake4

That there is enough to show you the difference. Lets rewrite them both in shorthand
"Short game; fun multiplayer but nothing notably exceptional" FEAR
"Short game; fun multiplayer with nothing notably unique" Quake4


He never dives into the quality of the MP for Q4, he just says it's fun, and cuts it at that. There are at least 12 MP maps in Quake4. Review Doesn't mention it. Fear has, well he calls it "several."

So for him it's because FEAR has such an original DM, TDM and CTF, generic+so-mo, and because Quake4 has not enough new stuff in the MP that FEAR wins out.
He never mentions that apples to apples, Quake 4 probably has the better multiplayer.

He describes them both as presented well. Says they both look good, Says they sound tasteful and good. Says FEAR is fun and unique and Quake4 is solid, undeniable fun, and says they are both games that are going to take only 10-12 hours for SP (he says 12 for FEAR, Gamespot says 10). Quake4 also has varied enviroments and FEAR's enviroment's get repetative; So the quality is of both is good, and it gets down to MP, and Quake's is loaded with more maps and a more balanced and proven style; Is the slow-mo you find in a certain HL1-mod really that unique? well maybe it's just me.. but it sounds like Quake4 might win out to be a more bang-for-your-buck kinda thing. FEAR might give you a new and cool expirence.. but if Quake4 leaves you spending more time with it having fun in more varied enviroments.... :bucky!:

Bah, I've confused myself now, anyways back on topic, iD is Falling as a company.

EDIT: Some more comments

good post septh. it's a shame that people have overly harsh views on quake 4 just because it got popular to hate doom 3. my main system still needs a cpu and vidcard, so I haven't played it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a perfectly ok game for fans of the series.

Originally posted by Fycus@Oct 15 2005, 12:48 PM
Yeah, so PCGamer gave Quake 4 a 70%, IGN gave it a 8.1. What do you guys think about these ratings? Do you think that ID has ruined their future of video games, or do you think there is still hope? Do you think that Quake 4 will be a rehash of Doom3 with better multiplayer and a different story, or do you think it will be an epic adventure that changes the way games will be played forever? I personally think Quake 4 is gonna suck as bad as Doom 3

omg the only thing that sucks here is your point of view LOL

Well i tend to agree to the title, however this not cause of the fact wich most people judge id on, Quake IV and Doom3(havnt tried Quake IV nor read a review about it at all, played Doom3 and gotta agree about most people's opinion about it)but more cause of the fact Sepht's naming(very good text man)in his first post.
cheers wd

anyone else think that the co-op mods for doom3 mp were really reallly fun ?
:thumbup:

Sepht kicks insurmountable ass with posts like that.

and nice reference to TS, the hl1 mod with slow mo