id.
Raven.
Quake.
It's outrageous to me that - given such a pedigree - it would be even
remotely conceivable to compare it to some chump-change like GUN, yet the two are of the same ilk.
I mean, seriously -- doesn't that seem weird? Or at least somewhat disappointing, given that a new Quake game
should be setting standards around the place?
In attempting to understand people's vitriol, please at least make an effort to realise that this game is - compared to its contemporaries - average to not great, and compared to the rest of its lineage only remarkable in how utterly unremarkable it is. The game is not HORRIBLE, it's just NOTHING SPECIAL, which is out of place in the franchise and a huge disappointment to lots of us.
I'd put GUN and Quake 4 about even in terms of score...and if I had to choose between one of them to play again I'd have a hard time deciding.
Does that seem normal?
At a time when we have a new Quake game to play, you're having difficulty deciding between it and a deeply flawed, sporadically somewhat-entertaining but ultimately completely forgettable and derivative shoot-em-up?
Ok then. Guess they're more similar than I thought.
Just as long as people realise that this was just an attempt to get in your pockets, I don't really care anymore. As good as it ever managed to be, the game is
really not worth all this back and forth.... OH WAIT!
They called it Quake 4, so actually it fucking is!id and Raven should be ashamed IMO.
-----
GW: Tashen Boke [R/Me]; Rosti The Ninja [Mo/R]; Gort Grimley [W/Ne]
-----
I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now, even though you broke my heart and killed me.