Why do people like Quake-type games?

[beamrider]

Bring your butt to my clan's Q3A xsiv server, and we'll see how much skill it doesn't take for me to whomp you a good one. 208.152.157.158.........

-M|ST- B3Nd3r

 

[erikiksaz]

<< Ok, even PONG requires skill. But as Dudd put it rather well, MOH has an immersive factor (substance) to it that makes it more than just reflex shooting. >>



Speaking for the single player portion:

Yes, i'm sure it's more immersive. You get a role, and that role has a job to do. Badabingbadaboom, you finish the game. Now you ask yourself, "Am i going to play this great game again?" So eventually you work yourself up to playing through a second time, maybe even on the next difficulty level. On completion, what do you do? Play again? No...I doubt it.

First point: Replay factor = severely lacking

Now, you've played through on the second most difficult AI level, and you've still completed the game, no? Let's try to take it one step further, take it up a notch. Now what have you completed? You've bested computer controlled bots. Woopdidoo, you've fragged a few bots. Where's the pride in that?

Second point: Skills needed = not very much

Take it for what you will, but you will eventually get sick of trying to better yourself against bots, and you'll eventually grow tired of the same monotonous (although they're immersive and contain substance right...) missions.

EDIT - heheh, forgot to add my comparison point.

You might wonder what the first and second point have to do with this whole argument. First of all, intense FPS games are like role-plahing games in themselves. You are trying to improve your character, which is basically YOU, the person sitting behind the keyboard/mouse. Skills are learned through replay. Or as most of us know, you learn through losing. You'll never get better at playing bots, which is the limitation of the "immersive" single player environment you find in MOH. It's this I-need-to-better-myself attitude that has gamers addicted to those *skill* FPS games.

/me thinks that you've had your 4ss handed to you too many times in Quake/UT...

 

[Xenon14]

<me thinks that you've had your 4ss handed to you too many times in Quake/UT...>

Although I've never played UT, I assume it's similar to Quake. I noticed that Quake 3 is a lot faster paced than Quake 2 (which is why I prefer quake 2), and it's annoying --perhaps it's because I was bad at it, but when random fools jumped at me with green lasers that type of strategy gets old really quickly. You can do the same thing in MOH, but MOH allows for a more dynamic gameplay by having a more realistic physics engine, and at the same time the maps are detailed to allow you to play a variety of respective roles....from rocket launchers, to snipers, to riflemen. MOH brings a lot more dynamic to a game than does quake, which essentially has the same element in most of its maps. And if any of you challenge me to a game, come to an MOH arena...and while you're gonna be jumping around like a fool attempting to "frag" others, I'll sniper a bullet through your anus so quickly you won't know what hit you.

 

[erikiksaz]

I think you'd better stick to :



<< it's because I was bad at it >>



and make sure you don't denounce Q3/UT as being skill-free.

Btw...



<< when random fools jumped at me with green lasers that type of strategy gets old really quickly. >>



Let me take a quick guess here, you didn't like getting owned in Q2 did you? Did you ever try practicing in order to compensate for your obvious lack of skill? I might be taking a stab in the dark here, but i think you just enjoy MOH much more because it's a newer game, and MOH veterans are still nonexistant, therefore you do not get owned as easily and without effort.

 

[JellyBaby]

<< Why do people like Quake-type games >>

Young people who still have reflexes flock to these games. People who like very simple gameplay like 'em, too. Mostly they're in it for the ego "boost" of multiplayer.

 

[fatbaby]

<<

<< Why do people like Quake-type games >>

Young people who still have reflexes flock to these games. People who like very simple gameplay like 'em, too. Mostly they're in it for the ego "boost" of multiplayer. >>



Eh? Not all of your deathmatch games requires just "instant reflexes"

lets take tfc as an example again, there are MANY MANY skills you can master in tfc...Each class requires its own particular skill and strategy, IE demoman requires "predictability" (thinking where the other person is going to move before they move there), same goes with soldier, while scout requires "dodging", and sniper just requires lightning quick reflexes... On top of that, you have movement specific skills such as concussion jumping, rocket jumping, grenade jumping, and nade priming. You don't instantly learn those, it takes awhile to build up. Wonder why you see all those movies with "expert" concussion jumpers doing what looks like the impossible? Tfc allows the freedom yet complexity other games lack.

tf2 will probably screw all that up

 

[LAUST]

Umm, MOH is not at all realistic... the closest so far is any of the Tom Clancy's... Sorry but for starters, put on a pack and some armor and TRY your BEST to jump, it ain't gonna happen, and a bullet to the chest from a rifle, I don't care what armor you have on your GONE.

Quake and Unreal are just fun... Heck I'm not good at them at all, don't play em enough to be, I just put in cheat codes most of the time anyway and go through the game, I upset my GF enough as it is with the time I spend on this thing I just get away with it in the evening since she works a swing shift

 

[MikeO]

<< I can't stand games like Quake and Unreal Tournement.... .....And to me the Quake/Cartoonish gameplay just isn't fun at all. >>



Same here, it's just no fun for me. Propably only games I've ever actually liked were Settlers II and Total Annihilation, that's it.

 

[Renob]

Quake requires no skill... it's very unrealistic


Spoken like a man who has NO skill, and its a game It does not have to be real.


Long live Quake!

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Doesn't anyone here play Wolfenstein?

*will be playing Happy_Penguin_II this evening again*

 

[ThaGrandCow]

Sometimes people don't want a completely immersing game like MoH.
I personally like the frantic frag-fests that q3a can deliver.

 

[LoTecha]

This is slightly off-topic (it is an OT forum though) but does anyone remember Q2CTF w/grapple? That was hands-down the best multi-player FPS that I've played. I remember this guy who called himself spiderman used to fly around using the grapple all the time and rail people from the ceilings. Anyway, that game wasn't realistic, but it definitely required skill. There were those that owned and those that got owned... and then there were gods.

 

[Phuz]

<< I recognize the immense skill level required to be a good Quake 3 Arena player, as opposed to the medium level of skill required to be a good Counter-Striker. >>



I too recognize the immense skill required.. however, having been a master at quake1/2/3, and then only after to become fond of CS.. I'd have to strongly disagree.

They require different levels of skills.
CS requires more. If you disagree you're playing with the wrong folks.

 

[911paramedic]

I have to say they all require a great deal of skill to be good at, be it Quake or Rogue Spear. They just play very differently.

Quake is for all out action, never a dull moment with that type of game.

Rogue Spear is the most "realistic" game I have played where one shot can kill you, from a rifle or handgun. The play with this is more methodical, and team based. (MOHAA is good too, but not as realistic with kills, the graphics and immersion is great though)

They each have their merits and require skill. It all depends on what type of game play you prefer.

 

[CraigRT]

<< Quake requires no skill... it's very unrealistic... aimless jumping and r >>



LoL i hope you realize how retarded that statement is.. tell that to some of the best Q3ers in the world.. they don't play hours a day every day for no reason...
I was recently at a LAN (Smackdown) in Ontario and some pretty good Q3 clans there... I can usually do pretty good in RA3 but these guys were a fair bit better which i was surprised be.. it's hardcore how good some ppl are.. you gotta watch someone play who is good, then try it yourself. then tell is it requires no skill.. it requires MORE skill than most games! a game like Civ3 requires ingenuity and thinking, but Q3 requires hand eye co-ordination skills, no question about that...

 

[Ironchefpalolo]

<< but I recognize the immense skill level required to be a good Quake 3 Arena player, as opposed to the medium level of skill required to be a good Counter-Striker. >>



Such BS, CS requires just as much skill as Quake but also requires more intelligence. I play both but CS does require a little more strategy. Quakes more fast paced.

FreAk

 

[sandorski]

Though there is little strategizing in DM, there's nothing like it for getting the adreniline pumping.

I too like more realistic fps gameplay, DoD, CS, TO, Infiltration, and RTCW are what I prefer(though not in that order) over DM. Once in awhile though, I gotta have some DM just for the hell of it.

 

[controversial]

Chess is extremely unrealistic!


I play UT mostly, and I have to say that this game rocks! It not only requires hand/coordination, it actually requires a brain in order to be good! Like chess, the good players are constantly predicting what the opponents next move is going to be. UT requires fast reflexes, strong awareness, and chesslike cunning. Furthermore, I find that I get extremely 'immersed' in the game. When I play, if I'm not focusing 100%, I'm generally playing rahter poorly.

 

[erikiksaz]

<< I too recognize the immense skill required.. however, having been a master at quake1/2/3, and then only after to become fond of CS.. I'd have to strongly disagree. >>



I used to believe that too, until a few of my die-hard Q3 buddies came over to CS for a bit. They had NO EXPERIENCE whatsoever with counterstrike, but they have been playing Q3 for quite a while. And how did they turn out? In about two months time, they were already topping servers with high ratios. And when i tried switching from CS to RA3...well, let's just say that it took a helluva lot longer to do well in RA3 than in CS. I think the quick reflexes/hand-eye coordination in Q3 can be applied to ALL fps games, whereas CS isn't as fast paced, where the real reflexes come in handy.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

If it requires no skill then you could beat someone who has played Q1, Q2, and Q3 for 5+ years without trying? Tool.

 

[Emos]

<< Doesn't anyone here play Wolfenstein? >>


Yep, I usually play at the Timelord server.

 

[b0mbrman]

Heh heh...no skill...

It's easy to get the basics but you won't be able to win anything without loads of practice

 

[yllus]

erikiksaz knows exactly what I mean. I found Quake 3 Arena to be a vastly different game when talking about aim and weapons than Quake 2, which I was fantastic at. Switching from these games to CS was way too easy, and I've truly played with great players - you can check around on AT for my references as well.

I do love CS a lot more than Quake 2/3 for one thing: the strategy! For instance, there is absolutely nothing better than hustling it around a few corners with a single teammate by your side to catch the main contingent of the enemy from the rear. These days, what's even better is going into silent stalking mode late in a round and taking down 3-4 single opponents to win it. Lousy newbies forget how to walk!