/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3325280
>In id level design, there is ambiguity in fights. There are often situations where an enemy attacks you, but fighting him right then and there may not be the best decision to make.

It's interesting you said that, because I feel that's very true for Doom, but I never really felt that way in Quake. There are plenty of times in Doom where I choose to book it instead of fight, and usually that's because there's either a really strong enemy or lots of enemies and just not enough ammo or a good enough weapon to make the fight tolerable or even possible. There is a wide enough variety between weak, strong, and heavy enemies and usually so many at one time that, along with considering attack pattern and the level architecture, I'm always in a position of picking and choosing targets and deciding what's worth running from.

In contrast, there are so few enemies at one time in Quake and so many of them take a lot of hits -- the Ogre that you mentioned being the most common takes four super shotgun hits -- that there wasn't really much for me to think about except "do I have the ammo right now to kill this guy?" It almost felt more like Wolfenstein than Doom - upon entering a room, I just quickly scanned for who's the biggest threat and what weapon will kill them fastest, and just let loose, the only real tactical decisions being ammo conservation. I only played on Hard, so I don't know if Nightmare is where that ambiguity really comes in.

I do normally hate that compartmentalization you're talking about in neo "old school" shooters like Serious Sam, Painkiller, etc., and DOPA definitely has "combat sections," like being dropped into a sewer with three Shamblers or being surrounded by enemies the moment you pick up the Quad Damage. But I guess I feel like Quake is just dumber than Doom, and is better suited toward those high-intensity shootouts.

Maybe I'll replay the base game again, or find some highly rated custom maps.