5 stars (More like Halo than Doom.) - Doom 3 is my favorite FPS of all time, due to the atmosphere and total immersion. Quake is nothing like this. Half Life 2 was good if you like long stretches of boredom with small spurts of easy combat. Quake is better than this. While I had hoped Quake 4 would be based on the original Quake, a game which was the Doom 3 of its time as far as scary atmosphere, and the Counterstrike of its time as far as multiplayer, Quake 2 served as a suitable base for the game.
Quake is an action game, pure and simple. It is very immersive in the war against the Strogg, and reminds me a lot of a more adult, mature, and bloody halo. Lots of Baddies, great vehicles, linear, and even better weapons. The storyline is good enough, with some twists here and there. People love to whine about the AI, well you dont need good AI when you have like 5 ppl attacking at once from different directions. Whats the point? Your squadmates have the best AI I've ever seen.
Graphics are unbelievable if you have a good system, but there is no darkness to hide the flaws if you have a mediocre system. Doom 3 runs much better than Quake.
Multiplayer is a quake 3 clone + lag, dont buy it for that. Half life 2's engine is so much better for multiplayer.
So if you like an overrated doom 3 clone system hog with japanese-style horror over the red white and blue gore of ID software, buy F.E.A.R. If you like non linear games, buy Far Cry. If you like boring puzzle games that mix shooting with Tetris, but Half Life 2. And if you like Halo style action + a hard edge, buy Quake 4.
4 stars (Not to be compared to Doom 3. An amazing game from the masters.) - First off let me say that I'm very, very tired of people who trash a game like this for a few reasons: 1.) they focus too much on graphics, 2.) they compare it to similar games which have a different focus, and 3.) they show no reverence for the people who paved the way for one of the best genres in the business.
I have been playing games since Nintendo and I've noticed a definite change in how people judge a game. Since the advent of the 32-bit systems like the PSX, people are becoming more and more concerned with how "realistic" a game looks. This is not all that matters, people. In fact, the importance of graphics are minimal when considering gameplay. The idea of trashing a game because of "jaggy edges," visible polygons, or bad backgrounds is ludicrous. While I have seen better outdoor environments than Quake 4 offers myself, this really takes a back seat when you consider what else a game has to offer. Backgrounds are just that: BACKGROUNDS. Atmosphere is really more important. When you look at the AMAZING lighting effects and jaw-dropping models for the enemies (the art direction is without peer), it seems picky to give credance to these minimal complaints.
All comparisons to Half-Life 2 and Halo are, to me, null and void. Halo is a multiplayer-based game, as is Half-Life. Both are squad-based shooters. These, I admit, are not my cup of tea, but I praise id Software for doing what they want - delivering a rich single-player experience, and giving game players, once again, that amazng feeling of being a lone space marine in the dark, out of ammo, injured, and wondering what the hell is making that ungodly sound just around the corner. This is what id Software DOES. The vehicle combat and squad-based sections are not the focus of the game, and if Halo/Killzone type gameplay is what you like, then those are the games for you.
Without id Software, we would not have the aformentioned games that you all seem to want to compare Quake 4 to. I have a lot of respect for id Software. I absolutely believe that they'e delivered their best game since Quake II with this one. Other shooters these days are getting less and less creative (Call of Duty and all its billions of sequels and "war based games come to mind). id isn't content to just churn out the same war games over and over again. As for the seemingly constant comparisons to other games with "better A.I.," I don't even know where to start. I've never seen A.I. It is industry hype of the sort I haven't seen since terms such as "blast processing." A.I. may very well be programmed into the game, but I rarely notice any difference between games, and that is because, in the end, it is all shoot, hide- run, shoot, hide, etc.
The new gimmicks of shooters, such as A.I., physics, and squad-based combat, are small steps in the evolution of the genre, and are of little importance to the game as a whole. I defy anyone to find enemies and artwork as intricate or staggering as some of the creatures found in id's games. As for the physics, graphics, and "A.I." in Quake 4, all are excellent. The Doom 3 engine has been put to the test, and Raven has done an extraordinary job. More importantly, the game is as fun and engaging as they come.
|
