Thread: Quake 4
View Single Post
Unread 27 Oct 2005, 05:20   #17
djbass
mmm.. pills
 
djbass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,152
djbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond reputedjbass has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Quake 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psi_K
If anyone could create a game with the physics of quake 1 with good graphics(By far best system to date), they'll make a killing.
Quake 4 is decent (from what I've played so far), and multiplayer is sub-par as usual...
Get rail gun, snipe people, use rocket launcher after hitting with rail gun.
Repeat.
I've often wondered if that was infact a catch-22 and why this may not be possible. Having worked with the quake engine myself I came to the conclusion that many of the whacky physics that made the game fun are the result partially of the moderately low detail models & resolutions used with quake. The physics feel OTT because they are enacting on a disproportionate world, once you bump up the size and detail of the polygons to match the higher resolutions of todays computers, it loses its feeling of being a super-man of sorts and bouncing around on rockets and grenades. I've even tested this theory by the likes of projects like fuhquake which bump up the detail and resolutions possible for the quake engine and the feeling is just ever so slightly different.
__________________
CSS : the result of letting artists design something only an engineer should touch.
djbass is offline   Reply With Quote