 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
A truly shit logo. For the obvious reason. I mean, you can take a crescent, the quantity of 4, and as many spikes as you need - it shouldn't take a genius to make something that looks like Q4 rather than Q1.
I like it, very simple and effective. Much better than there was 4 spikes in the middle or something busy like that. I'd only wish they'd gone with the strogg-esqe wings on it's side (like the strogg's logo of 4 wing things with skull in the middle) rather than the small gears.
Personally I think it's fine - not quite as effective as the Q1 logo obviously, but straight forward. Trying to add 4 spikes to the simple symmetrical elegance of the Q 'blade' is not as easy as RPG seems to think. Believe me I've tried :P
I'm more surprised that they went with a variant of the Q1 'flat' logo; I thought they'd do with the Q3 curvyness what they did with Q1 -> Q2 i.e. add an extra spire in the middle and modify the bottom 4 points to look like metal fangs. Maybe this is another example of returning to "brand identity"... What I was referring to is that "brand identity" is part of the reason id decided to call Q2 "Q2", even though they didn't intend it to be a sequel to Q1.
I don't disagree that the basis of the logo is the only element in the game that has anything to do with Q1 Although this topic has been rehashed countless times, I feel it's probably worth adding some input. Quake was a complete accident of design. In its conception, it was intended as a sort of multiplayer fantasy hack-em-up with some RPG elements (maybe a little bit like how HexenII turned out, although we will never really be sure). For some reason, id decided at the last minute that this design spec was fundamentally flawed, and thus they crafted the game into a vaguely Doom-like shooter. (I still hold on to the belief that if id had a clearer idea of where they were heading, this game would have ended up as "Doom III").
Further blurring the distinction between the two "franchises" (that word should only be used for restaurant chains btw), Quake II comes along with effectively the weapons from Doom II, and a throwaway plot that could have easily been interchanged with Doom's (along with changing the human-cyborgs into more demonic monster models), and we'd have a bona-fide sequel to classic Doom. Quake III was a cheap spin-off of the previous Quake games, having no real single-player component, and if anything they should have just Called it "Quake Arena" rather than using the misleading "III", which implies a true sequel to Quake I/II which it is far from being. Doom III comes along, and although it bears a superficial similarity to the classic Dooms, there's nothing really gameplay-wise that makes this more worthy of the name "Doom" than Quake or Quake II are. (while we're here, I'd also suggest that Doom I and II are effectively the same game - Doom II just being a glorified Doom expansion pack). So to conclude my rather tedious rant, i'd like to suggest that in the wibbly-wobbly world of id software game naming conventions - names mean pretty much sod all. Yeah.
Quake 1 wasn't that special.. I mean, the weapons were not anything super-fancy, the textures were nice but nothing very special either, the maps were average mazes, the combat and monsters were a bit boring and the ugly models were the weakest part graphically I think. Duke 3d was more innovative and better-looking in many ways. (Although its monsters sucked bigtime.) Part of why quake has lasted is it's inspecifity I think. And of course the source code release and modern full-3d background and the introduction of opengl. Quake didn't try to impress you so much on the first time - so you don't get bored of it when you play it again. It's not like "hey here's the gimmick that was awesome the first time, but now looks cheesy" - since there weren't that many such gimmicks. It's also just that the fast-frag-multiplayer games since then have only introduced flashing colored lights, bigger textures and a few more polys in maps and models - all often just distractions and not improving the basic gameplay much. Quake 3 has a wobbly uncontrollable netcode and the maps look so clean and cheesy that they make me puke. I haven't tried the unreal series. I actually think quake was not fully an accident. They had guys like John Romero on board. Remember that Doom had a nice coherent single player and furious and interesting multiplayer too. Even if quake was quickly redesigned in a lot of aspects, it still is somewhat consistent with its weapons and powerups. I see these games being played at the computer science student's living room at our university and I can tell you that Serious Sam on Xbox loses hands down to Doom II on an old 486 in almost every category - The first just looks boring and uninspired as hell, while the second is exciting and thrilling to watch... will he make it past the enemies? Now there's some imps throwing fireballs. Oh! A revenant! You hear some sounds... The guy really has to use his reactions, aim and wits all the time to outdo the enemies... and he does die but tries again. Carmack's been coding approximately the same thing almost his whole life: a raycaster or similar game at softdisk, raycaster for wolfenstein, first fast semi-3d in doom 1, real 3d introduced in quake, just a few extensions for q2 (colored lights) and q3 (shaders, better models, curves in map compiling), some lighting improvements for doom 3. This group could probably create some really good shit for a new quake quake (adjective noun as compared to non-quake quake) if it had a decent engine (don't know of one, is darkplaces too limited?) and game design. Sorry, had to rant. Increasingly off-topic, but I still maintain that with the right textures and artwork, the Doom3 engine would be the perfect vehicle for a true Quake sequel/remake.
For me, the original Quake was all about the contrast between light and dark, and the nameless horrors that it spawned in the subterranean dungeons of that dream-like netherworld. Well, I haven't played it so I don't really know. I've heard it looks plastic. Maybe that can be fixed in the future with more machine power to calculate the speculars right or something. :( How often do you need to see shiny stuff anyway? I don't think almost anything could be shiny in quake - maybe water. Everything is rusted and oxidized in lava and acid fumes. I mean come on! The ogre has a dirty apron.
It seems a bit hard to make quakeish gritty dirty rash brown stuff - everything seems to come out so smooth, clean and shiny nowadays. :) Especially in other engines. But I mean even the new high-res 24-bit "remake" textures for modern gl quake clients that are almost carbon copies - they just don't have that something. [1] Maybe it's some magic Adrian Carmack or Kevin Cloud personal touch combined with the 8 bit and low-res limits that is next to impossible to imitate. But it probably isn't. I'm not an artist. In fact, I know nothing. About anything. Just ranting off. (Where was that project of redoing q1 with d3? there were shots of start.bsp... can't google it now.) [1]: http://facelift.quakedev.com/retexture/screenshots/ Have my man-babies plz!
Yes if there was a *proper* ( u all know what I mean) q1 remake on d3 tech, it would fucking pwn everything ever, you all know it... q4 yay striders, I get to be strogg with a 24 inch electronic penis and shoot stuff. whatever as long as its fun. How often do you need to see shiny stuff anyway?
Look around you and you'll be really surprised. All surfaces reflect some light, even gritty old castle walls. I've seen loads of sci-fi games, loads of single player games, and loads of teamplay games, but not very many at all that combine the 3...
Republic Commando. Yes, a Star Wars game. Yes, worth playing. Go get it now! The demo (if there is one), anyway. </derail> The whole "Doom3 looks plastic" argument is bollocks and anyone who has an elementary knowledge of how materials and specular maps work will realise that rust, dirt and other gritty stuff is easily done on the Doom3 engine.
The whole "Doom3 looks plastic" argument is bollocks and anyone who has an elementary knowledge of how materials and specular maps work will realise that rust, dirt and other gritty stuff is easily done on the Doom3 engine.
Yes, with a wonderful layer of Saran wrap. Yes, with a wonderful layer of Saran wrap.
And thus Phait demonstrates that he does not, in fact, have an elementary knowledge of how materials and specular maps work. graphics engine tech to know that real life rust does not give off the same specularity of say a polished marble countertop.
Now, do you know what a specular map is?
Highlight size and highlight intensity are not the same thing.
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |