Your best bet is to ask at the Q2 Cafe, they're more knowledgeable on the Q2 scene. 

isn't your best friend for this kind of things, you have almost the same chances for finding Quake 2 maps than for finding the map of some earthquake. Instead, check the link sections in Quake 2 player or mapper's communities, and this:

https://www.quaddicted.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=1305#p1305 

Thanks! had no idea about Q2 Caf� - and lots of tips in the linked thread as well. 

ten-four forum continued to be active for a long time, though it doesn't look like it's too active now. it was mostly q2

http://tenfourmaps.telefragged.com/phpbb2/viewforum.php?f=1&sid=575b9b6ccec82a139b3bd00a969e7fe1 

I'm a bit surprised by how small the Q2-community has become. In fact, the Doom-community is probably more active.

Granted, I prefer Quake over Quake 2, but the latter was the very first game I played with my very first graphic card - a Voodoo2 - so it will always have a special place in my gaming memory. 

I think the trouble is that Quake2 has a fairly limited creative palette. It's Stroggos and the Strogg. Quake and Doom have more options so I think that keeps people more interested. 

You're probably right. The bestiaries in both Doom and Quake are more fun and more diverse. The game worlds are more ambient in them as well, although Q2 has a solid engine and still looks great IMO. 

I laughed. 

Yeah, the things that made Quake2 more cohesive as a game made it less appealing to make content for. As art grows in fidelity and art direction tightens in consistency, it squeezes out the end user's imagination. I've written about this before (albeit poorly). 

The question is, is the dress blue/black or gold/white when looked at under orange light? 

@dwere, well check out Doomworld's WAD forum:

http://www.doomworld.com/vb/wads-mods/

And compare it to Quake Caf�s map forum:

http://leray.proboards.com/board/42/new-quake-2-maps 

I think he was joking. The Doom dev community is more active than all Quake communities combined at least on quantity of output. 

has really good and consistent design, but it's fairly bland when you think about the theme compared to Doom and Quakes abstract environments. 

It's just that it sounded like Doom community is also very small and/or dying. It's probably not what was meant, but I interpreted it this way. 

Shouldn't have had any humanoid enemies in it, and should have had a bigger variety of areas than 'Strogg base'.

Also, the player is a forerunner of modern FPS's - a low speed tank where the game becomes less about dodging around enemies and more about retreating while shooting.

Q2 happened at a time when 'realism' was supposedly the brass ring everyone was going for - which is fucking depressing when you consider the game it could have been. 

I actively avoid apologizing when making games.

This is where the 'realism' thing comes in again; things are like they are because I wanted them that way - the game's internal logic must speak for itself.

It's a pretty arrogant view, but it holds true that people often don't know what they want until they see it. 

Also Q2 had much more of an emphasis on instant-hit weapons than Q1, both for player and enemy, which makes it more of a "find cover" type game.

However, it was definitely Half-Life that killed off the doom-style shooter and ushered in the "realism" era 

quake2 wasnt the culprit, it was faster than say Unreal.

HL definitely was the success that others wanted to capitalise on, and so they concentrated on both 'realism' and slower pace. 

^ And on pre-authored story, and levels on rails, and the invisible hand of the designer always guiding you through what he wants to happen to you.

Critics hold up half-life as pivotal and amazing and perfect, and then also decry games that give you no choice and hold your hand through everything. I often wonder what they're thinking. 

It pays to be first. It pays big. 

And when it's done paying, it pays to be retro! 

>> Critics hold up half-life as pivotal and amazing and perfect, and then also decry games that give you no choice and hold your hand through everything. I often wonder what they're thinking.

People often don't know exactly why they like one thing and dislike another. But when your job is to look smart, you have to find a reason why a certain game suxxorz. Linearity is as good a reason as any. Or the lack of plot. Or anything else, really.

When in fact a linear (or plotless) game can still be good or bad, these characteristics don't define everything.

Then there's the matter of novelty, of course. If you repeat a certain formula many times, people will grow tired of it, no matter how good you are. 

Wait, are you people actually hating Half-Life (1)? 

I'm not. 

Was it any more linear than Quake 2?