PDA

View Full Version : Quake 4 news/november magazine article


The Truthful Liar
09-13-2004, 05:39 PM
You can see/read all about it here - http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16159

Kain
09-13-2004, 05:39 PM
Shouldn't you of just posted this in that other Quake thread?

The Truthful Liar
09-13-2004, 05:43 PM
Hmm, maybe.

Oh, welcome back Kain. ;)

Sam Fisher
09-13-2004, 05:56 PM
Looks a lot like Doom 3 :)

PR-0927
09-13-2004, 06:05 PM
Actually, it is said to be based off the Doom 3 engine. :)

:fett:

Kurgan
09-13-2004, 09:15 PM
Yup, Raven's first Doom3 engine game.

My hunch is that this is the "multiplayer portion" of Doom3, much like Unreal Tournament was for Unreal (and UT2k3 was for Unreal 2). Big graphic-spazz games take forever to make these days, so making an engaging and well-polished SP & MP campaign in one package takes forever.

Plus, it seems like ID software is better at making engines than making engaging games anymore (much less engaging SP games). But there's something to be said for the "retro" feel of their FPS's. If nothing else their influence is extended through the use of the engines that are liscensed out to companies like Raven.

Not that I care much about Quake4 (Q3A was fun, the rest of the series was a bore), but how many bets that this will get finished before DukeForever?


Edit: Read the preview and it sounds like they're saying Raven is going for SP & MP. Well, if anyone can turn Quake into a decent Singleplayer game, Raven can, but it depends on how much time they're given and what other projects they have to work on at the same time.

PS: Wasn't Heretic II a "third person slasher," not a first person shooter? (even though you did a lot of shooting, I thought it was only third person, granted it's been a long time since I saw the game...)

Mex
09-13-2004, 11:30 PM
God, look at all those idiotic people moaning about the graphics.

"OMG IT L00KS LIKE D00M" "i'm not impressed :("

If it did look like Doom 3, it would only have a 4 player limit and you'd be running around trying to aim while your fps goes to around 5 every few seconds. :indif:

Crow_Nest
09-14-2004, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Majin Revan
Actually, it is said to be based off the Doom 3 engine. :)

:fett:

Yes, iD will be using the Doom 3 engine for their games until a new engine arrives. But the Source engine still wins no matter what :p

Darth Groovy
09-14-2004, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by Kurgan



(Q3A was fun, the rest of the series was a bore)

Hmmm. I actually quite enjoyed Quake II, and III. The team games got quite old after a while. But most all online games do wear out after a time.

Alegis
09-14-2004, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
But the Source engine still wins no matter what :p
It's not the "best engine" that wins. Its the game that can use an engine at its best for that game, that wins. Meh.

And that its got the doom3 engine doesnt mean the game will be like doom3...engine is code, code and code. You could make a teletubbies game off it.

Maybe i'm interested, i dunno. Wasnt really interested in HL2 until i noticed i got it for free with the card

txa1265
09-14-2004, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
But the Source engine still wins no matter what :p That is because vaporware is always better than actual product :rolleyes:

Mike

acdcfanbill
09-14-2004, 11:39 AM
quake II is one of the better SP games ever for shooters i thought. in fact, i recall reading in articles that carmack said id's next project might jsut be an update of q2.

Crow_Nest
09-15-2004, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by txa1265
That is because vaporware is always better than actual product :rolleyes:

Mike

They totally modified the Havok 2.0 from scratch, so i think that the Source is 100% Havok 2.0-free. If you know what i mean

txa1265
09-15-2004, 03:50 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
They totally modified the Havok 2.0 from scratch, so i think that the Source is 100% Havok 2.0-free. If you know what i mean Um ... I'm not really sure what that has to do with what I said.

I was saying that it is easy to say 'source engine rulez' because there is no game shipping based on that engine. Once one is released - and in particular once HL2 is out (since the Vampire game will likely come first) - *then* we can discuss the pros and cons of the Source engine.

Mike

Crow_Nest
09-15-2004, 05:34 AM
One of the bad things about Source is the shadows, in the HL2 videos you see that other object shadows are able to clip through those under it. Which looks pretty obvious to anyone.

But that was months ago, it should be fixed by now.

Gabrobot
09-15-2004, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
But that was months ago, it should be fixed by now.

Well the CS: S Beta and the Source Stress Test should answer that I guess...anyone here have either of them?
Oh, and just curious...if Valve modified Havok so much that it no longer has any trace of the Havok code, then why didn't they make the physics engine from scratch? ;)

Anyway...I like what the preview said about Quake IV going all out war. I always felt when playing Quake II that it was really supposed to be a huge epic war...now we'll finally get to see it! :)

Crow_Nest
09-16-2004, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by Gabrobot
Well the CS: S Beta and the Source Stress Test should answer that I guess...anyone here have either of them?
Oh, and just curious...if Valve modified Havok so much that it no longer has any trace of the Havok code, then why didn't they make the physics engine from scratch? ;)

I dont have the CS:S beta cause its only avaliable to CS:CZ and ATI coupon holders. Which are bundeled only in ATI Radeon 9600XT and 9800XT video cards. I got my 9600XT from Creative and they dont get the coupons

Dont have Stress Test too cause its part of the CS:S beta. But Radeons have been doing quite well so far in DX9, the FX seems to run better in CS:S than HL2. Im not surprised anyway.....

Mex
09-16-2004, 05:48 AM
I've played the beta. It rocks. :D It beats CS:CZ In every aspect.

toms
09-16-2004, 06:44 AM
Quake 4 looks mildly interesting. On the one hand i think that moving all these WW2/Vietnam team based shooters to more varied settings (such as the Q2 invasion) is a good idea...

but on the other hand i think that maybe they should have stuck to keeping DOOM3 as single player and Quake4 as multiplayer... as diluting the effort and focus seems like a waste of time.

Crow_Nest
09-16-2004, 07:06 AM
Originally posted by Pal™
I've played the beta. It rocks. :D

Heh of coruse. Theres nothing great about CS:CZ, only it has deleted scenes, and my friends still say their better than CS:S's graphics, bull****.

Besides CS:S. CS 1.6 is the next best thing. CS:CZ is basically just CS 1.6 but with only very very little graphical improvements with new maps, whats worse is that its only Single Player.

Right now people are buying CZ only because of CS:S.

Mex
09-16-2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
Right now people are buying CZ only because of CS:S.

Thats the reason I bought it. Woo. :xp:

Crow_Nest
09-17-2004, 12:59 AM
I did want to buy it for CS:S, but the beta is ending soon. So its not worth. A gold annoucement should come out by end of this week or next week.

Did you hear that the RC date has been accpted by VU?

Tyrion
09-17-2004, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest

Did you hear that the RC date has been accpted by VU?

I think it was that the RC was sent to VU, not that it got accepted yet.

Should be going gold within a week, if the RC doesn't have any glaring bugs. Even then, considering what a cash-cow HL2 would be even with bugs, I think Viviendi wont't care...:(

Crow_Nest
09-17-2004, 02:02 AM
Originally posted by Tyrion
I think it was that the RC was sent to VU, not that it got accepted yet.

I thought somewhere stated it was already accpeted? Well my mistake. VU is short of cash, so i dont think they'll care about bugs and just release the game ASAP.

Anyway, i dont think Quake 4's physics are gonna be that great, if Doom 3's physics sucks, so will Quake 4's (They use the same engine)

Gabrobot
09-18-2004, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
Anyway, i dont think Quake 4's physics are gonna be that great, if Doom 3's physics sucks, so will Quake 4's (They use the same engine)

How so? I would agree that Doom 3 has some problems with how it's physics are configured (overly bouncing grenades, zero bounce bodies, ect.) but those are just numbers in .def files. The physics engine itself is really good...you can control the mass, density, friction, "bouncyness", gravity...you can morph the rag dolls into the animations (for example when a zombie dies it has a certain death pose that its limbs tend to spring into, but the rag-doll physics are morphed with it...in fact, try killing a zombie so it doesn't gib and then turn on "dragentity 1" and grab it by its foot or arm or something and swing it around) and whatever else is needed. I'm willing to bet that Raven will use the physics engine to great effect.

Treacherous Mercenary
09-18-2004, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
Anyway, i dont think Quake 4's physics are gonna be that great, if Doom 3's physics sucks, so will Quake 4's (They use the same engine)

Nahh... I think the physics have potential, just need to be fine tuned. Doom 3 just doesn't make full use of it, but that doesn't mean another game that uses physics will suck either.

Crow_Nest
09-18-2004, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by Gabrobot
How so? I would agree that Doom 3 has some problems with how it's physics are configured (overly bouncing grenades, zero bounce bodies, ect.) but those are just numbers in .def files. The physics engine itself is really good...you can control the mass, density, friction, "bouncyness", gravity...you can morph the rag dolls into the animations (for example when a zombie dies it has a certain death pose that its limbs tend to spring into, but the rag-doll physics are morphed with it...in fact, try killing a zombie so it doesn't gib and then turn on "dragentity 1" and grab it by its foot or arm or something and swing it around) and whatever else is needed. I'm willing to bet that Raven will use the physics engine to great effect.

If it was THAT great then why the hell didnt iD make it THAT good? It would only make people think that their physics engine is just crap but havent seen their true power

Gabrobot
09-18-2004, 09:25 PM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
If it was THAT great then why the hell didnt iD make it THAT good? It would only make people think that their physics engine is just crap but havent seen their true power

I don't know why they didn't use it much...however, the fact remains the physics engine is very powerful. (Another thing you can do is bring down the console and type "map testmaps/test_boxstack" and punch the huge stack of boxes with your fist)

The Truthful Liar
09-19-2004, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
Anyway, i dont think Quake 4's physics are gonna be that great, if Doom 3's physics sucks, so will Quake 4's (They use the same engine)

Look at what Raven did to Q3. *Points at JA*

Great improvements can be made, always.

Also, the physics don't suck. I'm not a great supporter of D3, but I do know that the engine is very capable and only time will tell from furthur work with mods and such (haven't seen much of this though).

However, I'm holding out for HL2 (the editing scene inspires me). From there possibly the next Unreal engine (because I think that will blow all these games out of the water). :p

Treacherous Mercenary
09-19-2004, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by The Truthful Liar
From there possibly the next Unreal engine (because I think that will blow all these games out of the water). :p

SM 3.0 support anyone? ;)

Gabrobot
09-20-2004, 02:32 PM
Just got my copy of PCGamer today...here are a few tid bits from it:

- Quake IV is coming out in 2005.

- "Right off the bat, from the mass-invasion mission that opens the game, Quake IV will seek to definitively answer the question "What's so different from Doom 3?" When you first gawk at the gargantuan outdoor landscape of embattled Stroggos, and realize that you've now got to attack while crossing it, you'll know you're not in the Doom Mars base anymore."

- "Quake IV will take you through an impressive variety of environments, each with a wildly different style of gameplay. This is the game that ought to smash the perception that the Doom 3 engine is confined only to hallways. And you'll get to charge through these environments in a number of different vehicles."

- Enemy AI makes coordinated attacks with some enemies providing cover for each other. Quake IV has advanced AI routines and situational AI that allow them to take cover and use the environment to their advantage. (This is the same kind of AI Half Life 2 uses)

- Multiplayer is Quake III style...probably won't have vehicles.

- "The feeling I was left with, after watching several levels of the game played through, is that Quake IV will be a more human, plot-driven game than its three predecessors. The detail etched into each of the human faces, the emotional impact of visceral all-out combat, and the trench-warfare dialogue delivered with exquisite lip-synching and facial animation, all combine to invest Quake IV with a "you are there" immediacy.

Crow_Nest
09-21-2004, 12:00 AM
Originally posted by The Truthful Liar


However, I'm holding out for HL2 (the editing scene inspires me). From there possibly the next Unreal engine (because I think that will blow all these games out of the water). :p

Yeah i think the U3 engine is gonna rock too. :) Hopefully it runs on low-mid end CPUs like Source and D3 engine could.

I'd say the CryEngine is one of the worse of them all.

acdcfanbill
09-21-2004, 01:10 AM
Originally posted by Gabrobot

- Multiplayer is Quake III style...probably won't have vehicles.



haha u made my day :D