Interviews by Aurora
Even three years ago, gamers and their websites have been keeping
track of
id Software and the Quake series of games. From Quake
to Quake II, gamers saw a big jump in gameplay, AI, and in the
technology of the game itself. With the recent release of the Quake
3 Arena tests, and the copious amounts of information and news
available on the game, we thought it would be interesting to see the
gamerz' views. Many of the people we asked to give their impressions
of Quake 3 Arena are gamers and id fans who have been following the
"Quake Era" for a long time. So, here are their opinions on Quake 3
Arena!
[Aurora]:
The single player Quake 3 Arena game
will be exploring maps or playing a ladder system of bots. Do you
think this will make the single player game boring, challenging or
fun, and why?
Redwood:
It will be more challenging skills wise
but it won't be as challenging mentally as the single player game in
say Half-Life. I know many people that have fun playing Eraser bots
all day long so I think it is something that people will be
interested in. How many remains to be seen. It's definitely a good
thing to help newbies get prepared for online deathmatching.
Fargo:
Well, it puts all of the single-player
game's success in the hands of the bot. I haven't seen anyone create
a bot that's as interesting to play as a friend, but that's not to
say that they won't do something clever. When John Carmack talked
about Quake 3 to the people at the PGL season 3 finals, he mentioned
that single-player was basically just there to "train" people for a
multiplayer experience. If that's the case, I suspect it'll be
pretty cool to play through the levels the first time, but
ultimately the bots aren't meant to replace the guy in the office
down the hall.
BostonChick:
I think that putting single-player
into Quake 2 made it possibly unappealing to the first-time
players. It wasn't very challenging and after playing Quake 1 so
much in multi-player, it just didn't "do it" for me. I think it is
a brilliant idea having Q3Arena geared towards the multiplayer
aspect. Multi-player, in my humble opinion, is the most worthwhile
part of a game. Playing with yourself is never any fun. ;)
Sharky:
I'd wait for Duke Nukem' Forever in terms
of a 'single player' game. If you've got a NET connection why you'd
want to spend hours and hours chasing bots I don't know. I guess
it'd be fine for a while and good practice. Then again I can't
imagine too many Quake III owners not having put in a few hours
playing Quake 2 during the past year.
Dolomite:
The SP (single player) version of q3a
will be remarkable. I've always thought that bots should be the way
to go. When I was working on a project with Future vs Fantasy dev
team, I mentioned that for the SP project we should kill the monster
AI garbage and really focus on an intensive bot game instead with
realistic enemies that actually match the strength of players,
rather than the usually pathetic weaklings that FPS games throw at
SP crowds. I mean it was really fun to play most single player FPS
games, but I must admit that it's boring to be deprived of good
weapons at the start of a game.
[Aurora]:
In all the current FPS that I know about, you start off with weak
weapons because the monsters are weak. Would that really happen in
a realistic situation? Hell no. Uncle Sam would give you
everything you could carry and send you on your way! Who ever uses
the blaster in q2? The only reason that weak wep was there was
because of SP. Now with q3a we don't need to worry about weaker
weps and the maps will be designed for gameplay and not LOOK.
Well... at least I hope that's what happens. :)
Ted:
If Dynamix can release Tribes, and have it
become a moderate success, I don't see why id Software can't do it.
DogStar:
Like every other game the bottom line always comes
down to "what kind of game is it that you like?" If you aren't a fan
of the deathmatch style of gameplay then it doesn't matter what id
does; this game won't be for you, and they've made no attempt to
convince us otherwise. I think most players understand, however,
that deathmatch is generally the most popular element of id's Quake
series, and the decision to make Q3A into a multiplayer-only game is
a smart attempt on id's part to respond as best they can to what the
player wants.
[Aurora]:
What's nice about Q3A's single player setup is that you'll always be
able to play the game. In other single player games (like Q1 or Q2)
this wasn't such a big concern, but sometimes you can't get a net
connection for whatever reason, or maybe you are just not ready to
play against real people because it's a little too difficult for the
stage you're at. Playing against the bots will give you ample
opportunity to hone your skills as you like in order to be ready to
play against others. Ultimately, yeah... the single player game *is*
going to be both fun and challenging, but it'll also be a change of
perspective for those who are new to it... but it'll only be an
appetizer for the online/LAN game.
Buzzkill:
I think it will be both challenging and fun. I play
Lithium Eraser bots, and find that sometimes, it's more fun than
playing online. Now that everyone will have bots on their computer I
think the average skill level of most players will get much higher.
[Aurora]:
When someone gets quad, everyone in the game is notified.
Not only that, but the person glows with this blue electricity. Do
you really think "going for Quad" will be worth it anymore?
Redwood:
In Quake 1 there was a glow that let
people know you were about to come around the corner and you could
hear when it was being fired. It didn't stop the gibs from flying
and the new "Quad" in Q3A will still help rack up the frags. So yes,
it will be something to grab.
Fargo:
I've heard that it's only triple damage,
now. :) Does that mean when you get it, you "take a
trip?"
[Aurora]:
Anyway, really good players know where the quad is and who has it at
all times, anyway. And the old Quake used to make people glow and
made loud noises, so this isn't really that different. A Quad by any
other name...
BostonChick:
This goes more towards giving everyone
an even chance at the Quad, it's not to fun to play on a server
where you have a Quad camper who stays right on top of the Quad or
has a egg timer next to him timing the seconds between when he picks
up the Quad and when it respawns again. If you are a Quad hog... be
prepared to be found out and have the rest of the server after you
to get you away from it.
Sharky:
Yes. If you're good enough then you can
glow rainbow colors for all I care.
Dolomite:
Sure. You gotta have guts to win a game
of Quake. Anyone too chicken to go for Quad will find themselves
behind the 8-ball -- er... rocket launcher. :)
Ted:
Of course it will be worth it. Though, I do
worry that my butt not might look as sublime with blue electricity
shooting out of it!
DogStar:
I think the new quad is great. Even though I love
the feeling of grabbing that powerup and then putting the boots to
everyone in sight as they run like scared rabbits, I have to say
that the new Quad makes for a better, more balanced style of
gameplay. Whoring the quad no longer buys you a one-way ticket to
the winner's circle unless you've got the skillz to back it up.
Given the changes, I think grabbing the quad is now more than ever
the way it was supposed to be; an edge to score you a couple more
points without turning you into an unbeatable killing machine of
some kind.
Buzzkill:
I haven't seen much difference with the Quad since
Quake 1. In GLQ1 you would have a huge blue dome around you, in Q2
you were in something that looked slightly like the Q3 quad. As for
being notified about getting the Quad, I don't think it will make
any more difference than the loud sound you made when you got the
Quad in Q1 & 2.
[Aurora]:
According to the
Unofficial Quake 3 Arena FAQ There will be three classes in
Quake 3, similar to TF or TFC classes. (Heavy, Medium, and Light.)
Do you think that by having classes, this will change the feel of
deathmatch playing? If so, will it be in a good or bad way?
Redwood:
If id decide to keep this feature, it will
change it definitely. I think it is going to be really hard to
implement well though, with a lot of tweaking necessary. I found
use for them during playtesting depending on who I was playing
against but I'm not sure if it really adds enough to the game to
make it worth the bother.
Fargo:
It'll change the feel, but my impression is
that it's not going to be a major component of gameplay. The same
weapons will be used for all the different classes, so it's still
just a matter of skill. I wouldn't be surprised if id decides to
remove this feature when they discover through playtesting that it's
hard to balance the classes. From what I've seen the Q3test doesn't
have this feature.
BostonChick:
Oh, I think it will definitely change
the 'feel' of the game, although, I don't see why it would be needed
outside of a teamplay environment where you would want the lighter
class to get across and steal the flag and the heavier class to
guard your fort. Its really hard to say if it would be good or bad
due to the fact that I have never played deathmatch with different
'classes'.
Sharky:
It'll probably split up the newbies from
the veterans. The likelihood of a poor and unsuspecting newbie
entering a game with seasoned veterans like Blue and/or Redwood
won't happen too often!
Dolomite:
Classes isn't really what they have
planned for q3a. Usually classes are a gimmick to add more elements
and STUFF to a game. I think the reason they have the players in 3
different styles is to give the public what they want and to make
the game interesting. Each style will be able to use any weapon,
I'm told, so that means they aren't technically classes, or even
remotely as complicated as TF / TFC. I don't think anyone should
really compare any Id product to that of Valve. Although I highly
respect Valve, Id is the true FPS company, and hopefully always will
be.
Ted:
This is key id will have to do this perfect,
if they're going to implement it. They're taking a chance with this
idea.
DogStar:
The gameplay will certainly change, but if it'll be
for the better or worse I have to say that I just don't know. I
think the responsibility is completely id's right now, and that they
have to take extreme care in creating player classes that allow for
variety and enjoyment while being extremely careful not to tip the
scales. It's a tough job, but id has exercised such care in
everything they've done up to this point that I believe they'll take
the impact on gameplay very seriously. I do, however, think that
people are worrying a little too much about it and whether it'll
"spoil" everything. It'll be a change and it'll probably be a little
weird, but it'll be incorporated into the vocabulary of our
deathmatch games just like other changes have been.
Buzzkill:
I can't wait for the classes to be implemented. As
I have seen by playing Starsiege: Tribes, and Team Fortress, players
have different skill levels with different classes. Therefore, I
think it will be a great change to the game and it will definitely
change deathmatch games.
[Aurora]:
Here is my best ideas at a good system configuration that
will run Q3A as it was meant to be
Pentium 2 Processor, 300 MHz, 32 MB RAM, 12 MB Voodoo Video Card, 32
X CD-ROM, ISDN Modem (Will virtually eliminate lag, although 33.6s
will be decent).
Do you think the system requirements are quite high (or is
this going in the way of soon-to-be industry standards)?
Redwood:
I don't believe this is too high. 366MHz
Celeron processors sell for well under US$100. At those prices, most
people (not all) can afford to upgrade. I don't think the ISDN will
be required either, but certainly desirable. Q3A will have better
networking and may make modems slightly more tolerable. 56k should
definitely be the minimum though. Also, if you go by what the
computer industry says, most people that buy games, buy them at
purchase time or within 6 months so they probably have decent
computer systems to begin with. id also needs to take into account
the fact that this game will likely be played for several years to
come and computing power will increase dramatically. If id took out
some features to make it run fast on several year old systems then
people would be disappointed with the game more quickly and move on
to something else.
Fargo:
Those specs are all speculation, to begin
with. Personally, I'd prefer having a TNT or TNT2 card in there,
because the colors look so much better. And cable modem is probably
a better choice nowadays than ISDN, since it's so prolific and
relatively easy to install. The fact is, the only way to get the
best gaming experience is to buy whatever is the highest high-end
system available. And people with high-end systems expect games to
push them, so games are always going to have "high" system
requirements, unless you're going for Chess. :) Quake 3 is going to render some pretty hard-core stuff -- don't be
surprised when it eats your machine alive. ;)
BostonChick:
I definitely would have to say this,
for today, will have to be the industry standard. Games are
becoming more demanding and graphic intensive. If the technology is
out there to make the games like this... then why not do it? I
realize it will be hard on alot of people to keep up with the ever
changing technology, I know it is for me, but considering the
rewards for doing so.... I think its definitely a must for the
serious gamer.
Sharky:
Yes the system requirements are pretty
hefty but this year we'll see more games than ever that REQUIRE 3D
acceleration for starters. In fact, a Voodoo1 won't exactly cut it
either. We're talking Voodoo3s, TNT2s etc.... As for the CPU well
with so many end users being able to go for the cheaper Celerons and
then overclocking them.. well there's some solace in that fact.
Dolomite:
That will have to be determined
from in the game. I can remember people saying q2 would play well
on lower end systems than it really does. It doesn't mean that I
don't play q2.
[Aurora]:The real question is when are the hardware companies going to stop
charging an arm and a leg for new tech? No matter how you slice it,
the newest tech is overpriced only because the design cycle must
feed itself. The industry now must really look at balancing out
prices in a better way. When you sell something, the price drops
eventually -- even a couple of weeks after release. If that drop
was eliminated, companies would be able to charge less on release
date.
Unfortunately, the hardware biz is in a big vacuum and it has been
since the seventies. The real system that should be out today is
about 1000x faster than anything currently out because the design
cycle of the big companies needs to be met. Sure they are testing
tech and designing it, but I can guarantee that if schools could
afford the kind of computers available today, there would be much
less violence. I guess it comes down to dollars and cents.
Eventually, I believe that any computer will be upgradeable in a way
that is more cost effective for everyone.
Most tech should lean toward this early on in the new millennium.
Companies would then make money on CUSTOMERS rather than sales. When
you increase the frequency of spending, rather than the amount
spent, you increase market economy's flow in a pressurized manner
that is not stagnant. Designers then have the power to really be
free and would not be held back by industry standards. I see in the
future a type of system that will not need the kind of hardware we
have today. It would somehow maintain and upgrade itself. That
kind of internal engineering might be under development today. If
not, it should be.
Ted:
Wow, those are steep. Obviously, I'll
probably have to remove my copy of Deer Hunter, yet Barbie Fashion
Designer is staying -- Can outfits (skins) be imported into Q3A?
DogStar:
I do have to say that I think Q3A is just a little
bit ahead of its time in terms of system requirements. I mean, let's
get real here... these are some hardcore specifications that this
game is asking for, and frankly I don't buy into the myth that most
of the world upgrades just because software developers think it's
time for them to do so. I'm extremely turned off by the arrogance of
that supposition. I admire id for pushing the envelope, however, and
I think that they take great pains to allow the user to switch
features off and gain better performance (this is something that
Unreal should have done a better job at). I do applaud id for
creating such a fantastic game, but I do wonder if it sends a
message to other game developers that they can ask for whatever
machine specs they feel like without considering the fact that most
people would rather use their money on rent and food than a Riva TNT
card.
Buzzkill:
I think those specs are fine, You can't run it on
anything less. ( With emphasis on ISDN - my 56K modem can't hold up
against LPB's anymore)
[Aurora]:
Will you be upgrading your computer to play Quake 3 Arena?
Redwood:
Yes, either shortly before or shortly
after Quake 3 Arena comes out I am going to try and get a Pentium
III system. I may go from my current Celeron 333 I have now to a
433 or something just to tide me over. I'll definitely be getting a
TNT2 Ultra soon but that's for all games, not just Q3A.
Fargo:
My personal machine is overdue for an
upgrade. Fortunately, my work machine is pretty pimped right now, so
I think I should be able to play a pretty good game when it comes
out.
BostonChick:
Right now, I do not have a need to
upgrade my PC for Quake 3 Arena, at least I hope not. If I find
out that maybe something needs to be improved, then I may HIGHLY
consider doing so.
Sharky:
No. I'm one of those sad bastards that has
every single next-gen PC with all the trimmings when it still costs
more than my life is worth. A P3 550 with 256MB, UltraTNT2 (or
Voodoo3 3500) with ADSL will be plenty fast enough. See, I told you
I was a bastard.
Dolomite:
Somewhat. I will be getting a TNT2 card.
The biggest & best I can find. Otherwise, I'm holding out for a
Merced, unless something better is around.
Ted:
That depends on if the game is bug-free when
it's released.
DogStar:
I'm probably going to get an entirely new machine :)
I'm diggin' the look of the upcoming Mac G4s right now, and I wanna
buy something that I won't have to replace or upgrade for as long as
possible. Not just for Q3A, but that'll definitely be one of the
great benefits (and I must confess that it was part of the
decision-making process... I mean, I run a site called MacQuake
Infinity. How can I NOT play this game?).
Buzzkill:
I have already upgraded to a AGP 16MB Viper 550 (Riva
TNT). Though, I am going to get an Ultra TNT2 (or 2 - if Metabyte
will release more info on SLI) soon.
[Aurora]:
With the high system requirements, and the emphasis on
multiplayer (and lack of story for single player), do you think
Quake 3 Arena is going to sell as many copies as Quake II did?
Redwood:
I don't believe so because that just
doesn't interest some people but I believe it will be a good seller
and will likely pick up steam as more people get newer, faster
computers, more mods comes out, and word spreads about the quality
of the game.
Fargo:
As far as I know, Quake II still hasn't
outsold Quake I! I can't estimate how sales will go until I play the
game. How fast does it run? Is it fast-paced? Is it fun? Will we
immediately give up Quake I and Quake II to play it exclusively?
Will it require fifty gabazillion patches? Will it be easy to code,
will the source be released soon, will mod-makers take to it? All of
those will build word of mouth that'll give the game sustained sales
well after its release, and THAT's what makes a hit.
BostonChick:
I think it may sell more. The eye
candy in this game is amazing and the online Quake community is
HUGE. Even if people do not think their system will handle it, I
have a feeling they will be buying it. Once a Quake fanatic, always
a Quake fanatic.
Sharky:
Hmm who can tell. But the fan/install base
is certainly there. id has done well to build that up with Doom/DoomII/Quake
and Quake II. All of which were at their very best in multiplayer
modes... Tell me which one had the 'best' story. I can't remember?
:)
Dolomite:
I don't know. That really depends on
marketing. Id Software is in a position unlike any other vid
company today... they sell copies based on name brand
attractiveness, not necessarily content. When someone says that a
new Id product just came out, people want to see what it is --
because it's Id... not because it will work on the customer's
system. This kind of phenomena is what lets designers know they
have made it in the industry. I think even with q2, a lot of newbies
couldn't run it properly and after they bought it they were angry.
They said it was slow. Um... it's not that slow when you don't
have to use a file swap cuz onboard RAM is there to speed it up.
It's also not slow when you have a good 3d card.
Ted:
Out of the box, yes. Long-term, we'll see.
DogStar:
I think Q3A will sell fewer copies, but not because
of the lack of story or the system requirements. I think that the
first person shooter market is now quite saturated with quality
titles. I don't know if everyone will be able to buy Q3A as well as
Descent III, SiN, Daikatana, Shogo, Unreal Tournament, etc. etc. My
guess is that someone with $50 in their pocket who wants to buy as
much game as they can for the money will probably go with something
like Half Life, which has an excellent single player game and
passable network play. This isn't a reflection on id's work, because
Q3A is quite outstanding... but they did narrow their audience
somewhat, and (to their credit) they seem ready to gamble on that. I
think it's also worth mentioning that sales don't represent quality,
and if Quake III: Arena sells less than id's other titles that is in
no way the signpost of a failure. Instead... check the Internet for
Quake III servers and then decide if you think the game isn't
popular :)
Buzzkill:
I think it will sell a significant amount more than
Quake 2 sold. Since both Quake 1 and 2 were marked for a November
release....and went out in December, just a little before Christmas,
I think Quake 3 will follow in their footsteps.
[Aurora]:
With the emphasis on multiplayer gaming in Quake 3 Arena, do
you think this game is going to make the Quake clan scene bigger?
Redwood:
I definitely thing we will see a revival
in the clan scene after Q3A comes out. There are clans that are
just plain bored of QW or Q2 at this point and are ready to move
onto something else, namely Q3A. I've already seen it happening.
Fargo:
I think the clan scene will continue to
grow, not so much because of Quake 3 but because of games like
TeamFortress II or Tribes, which are making teamplay into more of an
institution. That kind of fervor bleeds over from one game to the
next.
BostonChick:
It may just rekindle older clans that
have "gone out of business" and are just lurking there in the
background waiting for someone to light a match under their ass, and
I would have to say, Q3 is going to be a bonfire!
Sharky:
In a word YES. It's going to get bigger,
badder and dirtier.
Dolomite:
No. I think clans are more or less dead.
There are many that exist and I know some of them, but I doubt that
clanning will happen much in q3a, at least not to the extent that we
saw with quake 1. Even q2 had a falloff. There just isn't enough
concentration of gaming because of the amount of good FPS out, so
designers need to gear their products to suit individuals and not
groups. Most people I know, hit a server when they have time, play
for a while and then take off.
[Aurora]:
I think that it may have been discussed somewhat, or I read
something about this. Id might include an automatic IRC station
that lets people talk to one another in a big network of q3a games.
Kind of like Gamespy but more newbie friendly. As in... you could
chat with people in IRC even during a match. Perhaps have instant
messaging... I'm pretty sure that was discussed. IF that was the
case, clans would form easily, and perhaps revolve around timetables
and time zones better too.
Ted:
I hope not. I'm my own clan!
DogStar:
Probably. If multiplayer is the only way the game
can be played then people are going to make the most of that
element. Clans make deatmatch fun and they re-enforce a sense of
community. What I'm wondering is whether or not deathmatch will take
some kind of "evolutionary step" because of Q3A. That is to say, if
people have so much to work with (great graphics, great net code,
etc.) then I'm wondering if some creative programmers/designers will
use Q3A as the base upon which to create the next big multiplayer
paradigm (the next Team Fortress, for example), and if so... what
kind of role will clans play in that context.
Buzzkill:
That is always hard to tell. Since a lot of Quake
clans went to Quake 2, but a good many stayed with Quake 1, I really
don't know how the split (if any) will be with Quake 3.
[Aurora]:
From what you have seen/heard/read so far, what is your
initial reaction to "Quake 3 Arena". Are you looking forward to
playing it, or are you going to wait until it hits the bargain bins
before buying?
Redwood:
I'll get it the instant it is out of
course based on having played it.
Fargo:
Hey. It's Quake. I'd buy "Quake-Tac-Toe" if
id was behind it.
BostonChick:
I will be one of those waiting for the
truck to pull up so I can get my "sweaty from anticipation" paws on
it. I don't think I can wait more than a day after it comes out....
I'll probably be sacrificing sleep to play this game day in and day
out.
Sharky:
Bargain bins? No that's only when I'm bored
and find junk like Pitfall etc... I'd be first in-line for it. I'm
looking forward to playing it as I've only played it for short
bursts at various trade shows. I'm really impressed by what I've
seen thus far.
Dolomite:
I will have a copy before it hits the
shelf. I understand that John Carmack was thinking of emailing me
it, but due to the lack of space in my ISP he may have to fax it to
me instead. *snicker*
Ted:
The mental orgasms have not been going off,
yet maybe that will change now that the test has been released.
DogStar:
Actually, no. I'm saving my money for Trespasser II:
Arena. :)
Buzzkill:
It will definitely be installed on my machine the
day it hits the shelves!
[Aurora]:
Which is going to be (or is) your favorite: Quake, Quake II,
Quake 3?
Redwood:
I'm going to say Quake 3 definitely. It takes the
best from previous id games (Doom 2, Quake, and Quake II) and makes
one new, polished game.
Fargo:
Right now I like Quake I because of the
fast-paced deathmatch, but I play a lot of Quake II for the great
mods. They both feel very different, and here at PlanetQuake
everyone has favorites. According to Carmack, one of his goals for
Quake 3 is to bring all the groups together, to have a fast and
balanced game that everyone will want to play. I hope they pull it
off. :)
BostonChick:
That is a tough question, I know I no
longer like playing Quake I, but this does not mean that I have lost
my appreciation for the game. It was a milestone in online gaming,
it made the community that I have grown to love. This is the longest
that I have ever stuck to one 'hobby' and I definitely think it is
due to the community and the passion that it has for the game.
Sharky:
It'll be hard to beat Quake II.. really
hard but if I were to put my money on something I wouldn't put it on
any other horse. Love 'em or hate 'em id has IS the leader when it
comes to snazzy 3D engines and FPS games. Ok so their stories and
single player modes need work. But hang on... that's WHY they
license the engine out. I'm sure I'll play some great single player
3D fps' later on in the year.
Dolomite:
Q3A will blow away anything else. It's
new and there aren't any other products that can contend with it.
No software house has something set up to pull away the audience
like we saw shortly after Q2 was released. IT would be very wise if
id held off on releasing publishing rights to developers to keep
community together. Better yet... if Id released the rights, but
somehow made it so that q3a was compatible to new games... hehe
that's prolly not gonna happen tho. But it could under the right
circumstances. :) Realistically, q3a spells doom for any other game
company. At least for a few months after release. Hopefully
longer.:)
Ted:
I still like Quake. Q2 has great technology
and graphics, yet not much of anything else. Q3 sounds impressive,
yet the proof will be in the pudding! :)
DogStar:
I think this is a question which clearly illustrates
how good the design of all three are, because I can't pick just one.
They're all different and they're all so good in their own way that
I wouldn't want to have to just play one. Hell, I even play Doom
still. What I do like about the way that Q3A is being developed is
that there is an obvious attempt to bring the best qualities of each
(including Doom I think) to one game so that everyone can be playing
each other in one venue. That's very cool.
Buzzkill:
Quake 3, of course! :)
Back to Interviews >>
|
