Make shitty Overwatch clone with a Quake theme

Well I mean it's debatable, but I didn't particularily enjoy it. Personally I got more fun out of obstacle course mods than any of the official levels.

Here's a version without artifacts.

Thanks

Don't you know? Bethesda invented custom maps when they made Bethesda.net. Paid maps are normal. Please don't download maps without paying for them.

It's best just to let Quake die. There's no way to recreate the magic. No company, especially Bethesda can make a decent arena shooter these days. Unreal Tournament was always better anyway

The thing about Quake is that the old games are so well made you don't need to make a new game.

Is this game out, or in beta or early access or some shit? I feel like it fell off the face of the earth already

Early Access

Quake 1 has some really washed out graphics and ugly 2fps enemy animations that makes shooting them feel unresponsive, otherwise a good game. Quake 2 was just boring. Quake 3 and 4 are shit.

I can tell you've never actually played the game. The hero aspect is blown out of proportion, but it's bad for other reasons.

It's still in early access. But don't worry, the store is fully operational:^)

what a surprise

Quake 1 had technical limitations, but
I certainly like the first game better but you can fuck off if you think 3 is a bad game.

That's because the maps are made with the Overcucks mechanics in mind.

At least Nyx is nice.

I keep forgetting Quake 4 even exists

bethescucks btfo
toddposters btfo

It's not worth remembering.

Wait, did this get released?

Wait, what? Are you one of those idiots who thinks Toddposting is done by bethfags?

I think he's just eager to smug.

...

Every time this game gets brought up, I have to add more to this shitlist.

I swear looking at how nobody fucking remembers shit like this or HZD, including me, I would think this is just shilling.

thanks gay ben

Reminder that ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

Kill yourself.

Someone post the video of the director begging people to stop playing Quake Live.

Hey guys, can we play quake 3 together?

If you're down, I'm down to make it happen if only for a short while.

What truly turned me off of Quake Champions was their 'hero design', gone is the crude and gritty cybernetics, along with a theme that very much oozed hate, despair and rage, and instead we get tumblr chicks. Though I suppose there's some semblance of it.

And hero abilities are fucking retarded.

Create a separate bread for it then.

Fuck, I just remembered the machine I'm using doesn't have a mouse. I'd be down to play, but I'd have to play much later. Perhaps another time.

I'm interested

You forgot that the champions gimmick doesn't even matter because they can't stop Anarki from being broken

Perpetual early access that was supposed to release fall last year. They probably got cold feet after Lawbreakers and Wolfenstein both flopped hard.

Hardly. The focus of the game seems to be Deathmatch and using\abusing your unique skill as well as your stats to gain the upper hand which obviously devolves into meta tiers for characters until everyone is playing the same guy.
Overwatch is more about the combinations of different characters and how to exploit said combinations. Helps keeping the meta a bit less stale and makes for some interesting moments.

Also, unless you gain the use of your ability faster by damaging your oponent, Overwatch does this better as well, rewarding players for doing their specific role by giving them charge for their Ultimate.

Not saying this was a good idea to begin with, but what where you expecting? If they included a mode without the skills, everyone would just ask themselves "why play this instead of Quake Live?"
It was either the gimmick or nothing and not even their choice there.

Better graphics, bigger community (since advertising), continuing updates and support. They could change things up by adding alt fire to their weapons but instead opted for abilities.

how many we up to now, 30? 40?

Is Overwatch and TF2 also Arena shooters? Don't listen to what Bethesda says, this class based Overwatch clone is in no way an Arena shooter.

I would call tf2 and overwatch class based objective shooters. tell me if this looks more like quake 3 or overwatch:
youtube.com/watch?v=7ESipcQunHc

Maybe if all you count is the art style but even then with the shitty skins it looks more like TF2/Overwatch. You can't have an Arena shooter with classes, that goes against the entire point of an Arena shooter.

no, I'm going by game play. Do you also have trouble determining who is white and who isn't?

q3 had a few game modes with classes. other arena shooters also did similar things, but the design of the levels (which is the most important thing in a fps game) were all designed like arenas.

Those weren't the game modes and many fps have arenas. Overwatch has arenas.

Wait, you mean the Runes? The ones that only appear on certain specific CTF maps? The ones that don't change your weapon selection at all and only give you a small boost of some kind, leaving all your base abilities the same? That's not a fucking class change.

CTF had ammo regen, scout, doubler, guard. TA but Q3/TA are referred to as the same game these days.

they make for a convenient way to design levels, but afaik you're usually sitting around in capture zones or escorting a payload through them.

Moot point when that player base chooses instead to play in that shitty low-poly mode for optimal performance.
Never a selling point since it doesn't exist at launch and there was no indication that this would actually appear. Advertizing does jack shit, especially for this player base.
From Bethesda. So updates would be DLC and support would be "mods will fix it".

Eh. That still forces you to have a weapon equipped and you're still bound to abilities that are projectiles or stuff you can fire out of your gun.
Unreal's translocator would be a lot neater if you could press a key to toss a disc instead of having to swap to it, for instance.

Stop. It's an arena shooter, it's just a bad one. Arena shooter doesn't mean "good game", it's just a genre and games can be good or bad designed arena shooters.

UT2K4 had a "species statistics" that essentially made each race a class with passive abilities and modified values for armor. No special abilities but it's still the same principle.

roles and classes were pretty much the same thing. usually when talking about weapons we're talking about loadouts. I haven't played quake champions, have you?

The attention spans of gamers have become so short that devs can't even create a game in time to ride a current trend. Every single last Overwatch clone has flopped miserably and the game itself is falling in popularity sharply aside from the porn. Ideally this would cause devs to make more creative games since the copycat approach is no longer viable, but in reality they will just find tons of ways to cut even more corners than usual to shovel out a game much quicker, which will result in even buggier, poorly balanced, shittier games in general.

unreal games having bad or awkward controls in general is the main obstacle for them to ever maintain relevance imo. the controls are just shit for a shooter.

It's nothing like Overwatch for the simple fact that the only objective here is to kill each other. You may call it class based shooter, but it's nothing like OW or TF2. People are stupid.

They look more or less the same to me. They just haven't introduced the more grotesque looking characters yet, I don't know if they will.

They aren't that bad or different from other shooters though.
And the recent one (shame it's mostly dead) actually improved a lot on it with a dodge button (so you don't rely on double tapping) and a weapon wheel.

It is in no way an arena shooter. You can't have a class based an arena shooter.

youtube.com/watch?v=7ESipcQunHc
here, watch.

you can and it wasn't a problem until qc did it for you. rethink how you determine genre.

double tap to dodge is awful. keys have too long a travel time for it to be a legitimate input option, modifiers work but not making it the default will dissuade people from using it. I heard that UT4 changed things but well, if you are just gonna leave developing the game to the community and not put any effort in yourself, it's gonna die. Epic probably wanted a community driven success but you have to pump some money into it, it's a bad idea to hope something goes viral so it succeeds.

Why not? What part of "class based" invalidates respawning arenas where people repeatedly kill each other?
Admitelly, some roles like Tank or Healing are not gonna make any sense in Deathmatch but could work decently for Team Deathmatch, and even then it doesn't need strict roles like that, loadouts alone are enough.

Regardless, if a game features people dropping in an arena to shoot the shit and get stronger by pickups they get along the way, it's not starting with 2 weapons already or having a passive\active ability that's gonna remove the previous bits from the game. It's just an extra element added into it, which might be good for depth if it's balanced well enough.

No other quake was class based outside of mods and bonus modes. Stop shilling

did you watch the video yet?

If the only thing an arena shooter needs is an arena than most fps are arena shooters.

that isn't what he said.

What sets arena shooters apart from nearly all other fps is that all items and weapons are acquired in the arena and all characters share equal footing outside what they pick up. Classes and abilities ruin this.

you could have both with classes with unique abilities no problem.

But then it is a team/class shooter and not an arena shooter

depends on the focus of the level design. level design is the most important part of a first person shooter.

Do you have selective reading or is it just an habit of yours to read the bits that you can use in your deconstructions?

Certainly CoD isn't an arena shooter but it's not because it has loadouts. Meanwhile there's some freak examples like Republic Commando multiplayer or Metroid Echoes multiplayer that would indeed count as arena shooters, the first one actually having you pick a gun to start with if I'm not mistaken.

Red Eclipse is another one where you can start with any 2 weapons from the entire arsenal and pick the rest as you as well as grenades and mines. Does it stop being an arena shooter just because it doesn't force you to start with the katana and assault rifle first?

Simiarly, UT2K4 gave us the "species statistics" that made each race have different stats. GenMoKai for instance had less armor so they'd die in 2 shock rifle shots for instance, but they'd have a boost to their speed that could stack with Speed and the Necro units also took more damage but they also healed from dealing damage up until 100 points.
Those choices were actually well balanced and that mutator made for some interesting matches due to the options it brought to the game and it did not stopped being an arena shooter just because of that.

UT has many none arena style maps but is still an arena shooter.

You can have unique abilities per character without having to play in team, it's just going to be less about combining them with other people and more about using them yourself in clever ways.

The importance that skills have ingame can also vary from small bonus to entire gimmicks
A character that can press a key and fire a rocket from his shoulder every 10 seconds as if he had a rocket launcher doesn't deviate that much from the shooting part of the game, it just gives him some extra damage and some help with movement.
However a character that could double his shields at the press of a button every 10 seconds would indeed shift the focus away from the shooting unto the abilities.
It's really not that black and white.

And even then, you can still have a class-based arena shooter. Just because it has classes, it doesn't stop happening in an arena, having pickups\powerups or people shooting at each other.

Mutators are outside of the base game. Loadouts and classes prevent it from being an arena shooter and you still haven't shown otherwise.

yes it is, or its an objective based shooter depending on what map you play on. different game modes. I'd consider TF2's arena maps to be arena shooter levels. They would be in any other arena shooter and they encourage a similar game play style just fine.

quake is also a capture the flag game, which deliberately has lengthier maps which could be separated into a series of connected arenas built around encouraging different game play styles, making it play less like an arena shooter and more like an objective one.

On the contrary, you're the one making the claim that if a game features classes\loadouts, it can't be an arena shooter.
You're the one that has to prove that since you're the one trying to define in very specific terms what an arena shooter can and cannot be.

And even then, I already mentioned Red Eclipse. It's an arena shooter but you have a starting loadout.

And tf2 isn't an arena shooter despite having arena style maps.

it can be a class based arena shooter, a class based objective shooter, a class based horde shooter too.

Blizzardfags are notorious for being the type of people who refuse to play anything not made by Blizzard.

Yeah no, tf2 is never an arena shooter. Again, it has classes therefore not an arena shooter. You are retarded if you think tf2 on a smaller map is an arena shooter and UT on a bigger map isn't one.

I've noticed this too dealing with some in person. I don't know why it is, the few blizzard games I have played were pretty mediocre and hardly struck me with any sort of interest in anything else the studio has put out.

Why? Whats the definition of Arena Shooter, at least for you, that specifically says "if it has classes, it's not an arena shooter"?

level design determines a lot in shooters. you might want to do some reading up on it and the level design theories explored in first person games in particular. It's a field with a lot of research, Valve used to be at the forefront of it, mark brown has a few videos that cover it. Doom is a classic case study example. Level design practically designs the quality and the genre of a first person shooter more than anything else.

It's because their games are locked behind a proprietary client and once you've been suckered into it, you don't want to bother with another one. It tricks you into thinking you're part of a "family".

Because in Arena shooters all players start equal. This is true for every arena shooter ever.

Level design only works in conjunction with the player. The fact that the player gets everything from the level is apart of its design. Other genres don't have this.

level design in a shooter determines what kind of game you're playing for the most part. It's not an exclusive factor, but a major one. Past that, mechanics and the system come in to play, but the majority of this is decided by the levels design.

of course they do. It's how nier automata can go from being a top down twin-stick shooter to a 3D character action game to a platformer in the space of 3 minutes, all without changing your controls or the mechanics. Pure level design at work.

Other genres of shooter don't have players start with equel stats in an arena. This is clearly separates arena from non arena shooters and the fact that you have to include tf2 in your definition of an arena shooter proves you are wrong. Tf2 doesn't even have weapon drops.

Has there been a single IP Bethesda hasn't managed to fuck up? How do you have so many talented developers and popular IPs under your banner and still manage to drop the ball at every opportunity?

Let's not get too crazy here.

Arkane and id could churn out competent enough games, Prey 2 was looking like a great game, yet as soon as Bethesda touched them it all goes to shit. Same with Fallout. It took a company of talentless coders under an extreme time limit to make a vastly superior game using the same tech.

that's really arbitrary. TF2 doesn't have that mechanic because its designed to be a class based shooter first. Since you like to introduce arbitrary elements that determine what does and does not make an arena shooter, go ahead and define it fully. Let me know exactly what you think makes an arena shooter an arena shooter.

I sincerely doubt anyone from those studios who were worth a shit are still there.

the problem with assuming meddling which I do think happens, is there's not enough solid information to point to. It mostly seems like incompetence and poor management which mostly happens internally.

You are underage

so where's that definition?

Holy shit this is the same retard who onlyba few days ago said Lawbreakers was an arena shooter

IIRC a lot of id talent jumped ship after Bethesda acquired the studio.

We know Bethesda is far more intrusive and scummy than EA or Activision ever were, we know they are perfectly fine with deliberately sabotaging a studio just so they could buy them for pennies. They are run by a kike that was so kikish even the rest of the Jews stay away from him.

They're the same publisher that looked at Wolfenstein 2 and Dishonored 2 and gave their stamp of approval.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I'm well aware of all the examples, I'm saying I don't know to which extent, no one seems to know either, and I'm saying a lot of signs point to pure incompetence from the developers a lot of the time.

Here you go
This definition includes all Arena shooters and excludes all the obviously not arena shooters like TF2 and lol breakers. I know you have never played one so maybe this definition will help.

Prey was worth a pirate if you like System Shock 2

He clearly hasn't played one.
Collecting items is "arbitrary" to him despite the fact that it is the key to winning any game. Halo is more of an Arena shooter (though too slow to really be one) than any of the stupid games he listed. Quake Champions definitely isn't one.

When you consider that with a hero roster each hero still has their own boons and drawbacks to balance them out in the grand scale of things and that victory is still largely determined by performance and item control, wouldn't this still fit the bill?

where does that put halo?
where does that put unreal tournament?
what about the randomized spawns which affect your options and the advantages you can get?
you sure like to assume a lot instead of making actual argument. Answer the questions mentioned before.

But that isn't equal. Even if it was perfectly balanced (it's not so no one is equal), players have to have the same start for it to count.

see
As an Arena shooter since players start equal outside of specific modifiers.
Each player is just as likely to get the random spawn as the next so it's equal and many play with random spawn off.
You claimed the most important part of the genre is "arbitrary".

Each player would start with the same weapon. The starting health and armor counts would be different, but less-resilient heroes have a higher base speed to make up for that. What's not so equal about that?

quake 1 singleplayer is simplistic but good nonetheless with a compelling artstyle and atmosphere, would take a new quake 1 sequel any day over pretty much anything else in the industry

73cca9 is the same retard who goes into multiple threads and claims that games like Lawbreakers are Arena shooters so he can say "arena shooters are dead". He is a known console cuck and will do anything to pretend his system of choice is best. It's why he doesn't even know what an Arena shooter is.

The fact that they start with different stats.

so a slow paced arena shooter, gotcha. check off fast paced.
UT by your definition is not an arena shooter unless you aren't playing the base game.
each random spawn has different value and will determine the players tactics. If you've ever played or watched any pro duel in q0/q3 you might be familiar with the commentary they make immediately as the game starts.

pick ups are part of the formula for area control which is a mechanic for the genre that ties closely into level design, which is the most important part of the genre. Your argument and definition are weak, full of contradictions and it seems like you're the only one peddling it because some games you don't like are being called that thing you do like.

here's an actual, functional definition for you which doesn't bloat up with a list of exceptions and miscommunications:
an arena shooter is defined by enclosed levels which have a sense of looping flow to each area, interconnecting them. The areas are defined by specific advantages from pick ups to geometry and control over the areas to achieve an advantage of the goal of the game.

this sounds really weird but did I walk in on something?

Multiple reasons.
1. One character will be the most powerful and played the most
2. It isn't equal even if it is balanced.

UT is an arena shooter. All stats are the same in most of the games.
Random spawns are not the same as different stats.
Everyone agrees UT and quake are arena shooters. Your retarded definition made to make tf2 and QC arena shooters won't trick anyone. Go fuck off consolefag

Don't forget the soundtrack. Fits the game perfectly.

Forgot to add
And which TF2, Lawbreakers and QC don't have because you can get your weapons from a loadout or ability.

While the character customization in that game looks alright, I honestly don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole because of reasoning alone.
This is why ability based FPS games are dead to me, when abilities in a FPS isn't a get out of jail free card like the Armor Abilities from Halo Reach I can't believe i'm using that fucking game as an example. then it's usually fine.
What I mean when I say "get out of jail free card" is FPS arena games that will usually have an ability to get you out of a death for no reason and only because you hit a certain button faster than the enemy (or he just simply didn't have a good ability to begin with).
Say two players are entered in a gun fight, they are in open ground and are shooting doing similar respectable damage to each other until out of nowhere one of the players misses, because of this fatal mistake, the player should be dead at this point.
However that's not going to happen as the player who missed will simply press a button and just finish off the player with a ultimate ability.
Where exactly is the skill in this? There's no need to aim because it's a large AOE that's meant to hit anything in certain radius, and it's even more awkward when your trying to advertise your game as "skill-based competition".

I sure think they are, but race based stats make them somewhat like a class shooter, meaning by your definition there is a lack of equal footing (which isn't a good idea to include in the definition btw.) You have a broken definition, fix it or realize it's bad and makes you look bad.

carmack said after rage was released he wanted the next quake game to be more like the first one, but he wasn't in charge of that project and obviously left id before that happened. It's such an under-appreciated style of game and despite it being a mess of themes it really came across as a much more interesting game than any strogg quakes were.

pick ups aren't necessarily weapons. I sure wouldn't call the mega or red armor a weapon. Make a real point. In the arena TF2 game modes, even the standard game modes you can have elements of area control over things like ammo and health pick ups.

Difference in stats doesn't say much about equal opportunity for each players. In fighting games each character will have some statistical differences, but you'd be hard pressed to find a good fighting game where picking one character puts you at a general starting disadvantage (unless it's the kind which gets stronger over time). Skill is still the largest factor in determining who wins and blaming your loss on the character you picked is usually the sign of a shitter.

In Quake Champions, picking a different character would also facilitate a different playstyle. Heavy characters benefit more from keeping up their stacks but have a harder time doing so because they would be slower in comparison to lighter characters who benefit less from a higher stack given their smaller maximum HP/armor. While each player wouldn't start off equally (not that they did to begin with since starting spawning positions are random and so would the weapons be you could get to first), the opportunity to win would still be equal for both sides.

If that's really true, then both players would end up picking the same character and end up cancelling whatever unbalance there is out

Introduced in one part of one game out of 4.
They aren't something in TF2.
You are retarded. In an Arena shooter, EVERYTHING YOU GET is from the arena.
Kek.
No one would agree that Tf2 is an arena shooter. Do you know why? Because it's clearly not.

Yep, really adds to the game a lot

Of course, that's what makes it so compelling. Basically the only time a shitty development cycle led to something basically objectively good.

Which is why classes are retarded but even then having shitty abilities means not an arena shooter since it's not something you get from the map.
We are talking about starting out equal.
This is why it's not an Arena shooter.

3 out of 6. Unless you're going to start making up that "those games aren't unreal tournament now, cuz I said so" like everything else you've brought to the table so far.

they are, there's even different varieties.

so megas and armors and quads are no longer things you get from the arena.

and I'm not saying it is, I even described what it is earlier in the thread. I'm saying it has an arena shooter game mode. Do you have trouble reading or do you usually just get this riled up over nothing?

the thing is you can even fit the sci-fi and fantasy styles into a cohesive whole. slip gates are the teleporter to the alternate dimension which is why every episode starts with the sci-fi levels. It's not a perfectly tied together explanation but it does the trick just fine. Not like you need story in a shooter. I'm mostly getting exhausted of these "self aware" shooters like strafe and dusk, it comes across as so cheap and lacking in confidence. Quake is silly but that's not the point. It doesn't stop for a second outside of an easter egg here or there to move on from its heavy dark atmosphere.

They are mutators and aren't on by default except in Unreal Championship which isn't Unreal Tournament and isn't considered an Arena shooter.
There are weapon pick ups and boosts in TF2? When?
In this game mode do you get weapons and armors and boosts from the map? No.
So let's see

yep, small ammo, medium ammo and full ammo. small health, medium health and max health. You really try too hard to shift the definitions and goalposts. It's OK to be wrong. Your definition only works if you decide what are and aren't arena shooters. So far there's too many exceptions, and I don't think you've proven reliable enough to have the final say on what is and isn't an arena shooter.

Are the pictured pick ups no longer pick ups? It legitimately sounds like you've never played the games if you have to jump through this many hoops to stick by your poorly informed opinion. It's OK to be wrong, you just move on, reflect a little, and change your ways a bit.

lol.
In Arena shooters you get everything from the map, not just health. That is what makes it an Arena shooter. That is the core to the gameplay of an Arena shooter.
Kek. Again, in an Arena shooter the game is around collecting items from the map, this isn't true for TF2 since you get your stats and weapons handed to you.

There'd have to be a massive lack of balance for such a thing to even happen in the first place, and even then the abilities aren't massively impactful to create such a massive lack of balance. Moreover, your wins aren't entirely decided by your character pick and given abilities, it's again about how you use them.
Newsflash, they never did. What's equal about starting off in random positions in the map which you don't have any control over, putting you at an initial disadvantage when you start off farther away from guns you prefer or really need? Your definition is already flawed to begin with, unless you can make a case for why spawning in random sides of the map with an uneven weapon placement does count as equal opportunity but characters starting off with balanced statistical differences doesn't.
Even then you still end up with a game where two players are pit in eachother in an arena, item control is still very much a thing as is the usual Quake weapon arsenal and balance, and each player has fine control over their movement which plays into item control and map awareness again. The only difference being is that characters have some statistical differences and their own abilities, yet not to the extent of Overwatch and other hero shooters where there's still very much a counter-pick meta since those kind of games are team-based shooters. Just because it's tradition doesn't mean it's core to the formula, because it can work out just fine as QC shows.

once again, I said TF2 has an arena shooter mode. The prefix for the maps is arena_. If you have to make up your opponents position and misrepresent them to act like you have a point, you've already lost.

No no no no no no no.

Arena shooter is when you're on arena with other players and you're shooting at them. That's it.

Welcome to Quake Champions and it is extremely unbalanced.
Yes they did. You are an idiot for comparing the location of spawn to your starting stats. There is a clear difference.
False. They took out a bunch of movement control and gave it to specific classes.
Yes it is because it is at the core of every Arena shooter ever made.

But it's not because you don't pick up weapons and boosts and instead get them from a load out. That is why it isn't an Arena shooter "mode".
Every single Arena shooter ever created agrees with this.

Fuck I forgot. And a Moba is any multiplayer game with a battle arena. Holy shit Quake is a Moba!

Guess why we don't call assfaggot game a moba. Because the whole meme was born from retarded definition.

nah. You should try playing the games some time, you'll notice a lot of differences as you experience more than well. What have you actually played again?

Great argument. Name an arena shooter that doesn't agree.

fuck, you are right. COD is an Arena shooter now and so is Overwatch!

It looks like you're the only person who brought up lawbreakers in this thread. What a weird hang up to have.

COD is arena shooter with tactical elements
Overwatch is arena shooter with assfaggots elements.
Its that simple.

Also let me break your wet fantasies, arena shooters have health and ammo pickups because doom deathmatch had singleplayer pickups still left on map when playing mp. Nobody created this idea of pickups from balancing issues, they were just in doom as a given.

Yeah, totally not the same retard from last thread who tried to pretend Lawbreakers was an Arena shooter and used the same retarded tactics. Either way you have lost the argument so many times it's amazing. You can't name one (1) Arena shooter where equal starting and collecting from the map aren't the core of the gameplay.

you can't imply that games can share elements, that's preposterous.

q3, ever play it?

Kek.
So?

Quake 3 has stat differences between characters? Where?

the model you choose can change how your character is presented, providing an advantage or disadvantage. This can be overridden of course with common cfgs, but that would fall under the same category as ut mutators (not modifiers, as you called them.) Also your spawn position on the map determines your advantage or your disadvantage.

determining the argument before it's even made, a pretty weak tactic but shows your position has no ground.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Man, you're so kewl.
Can you teach me to be that kewl?

this is good proof you've never played quake except maybe 0 where you subsequently got stomped on q3dm6.

...

...

Then who's the top-tier character everyone's playing as?
A difference so clear you do not care to tell me to put me properly in my place, or is it uninmportant enough that it doesn't bear repeating? Really, what would this difference be? Because if my opponent would have instant access to RL/LG/RG simultaneously before I reasonably could because he spawned on the lucky side of the map, I wouldn't call that equal. Thankfully maps are somewhat balanced around that fact, however it'd be a lie to say it's truly equal because my opponent can have faster access to weapons in a way I have no control over. It's like chess where white has the opportunity to dictate the flow of the match by starting first, but again that's entirely balanced out through the skill and mindgames of both players involved. However, you do not truly start out equal in chess, nor did you ever in Quake. The color you have in chess and the side you spawn in the map of Quake all come with their own advantages and disadvantages, but they never come off as unbalanced because skill still plays a major factor.

Considering the inequal advantage/disadvantage of randomized map spawns, it's hard to argue that both players truly start off equally. So if players would start with less health but have a higher speed or the other would start with more health but with a lesser speed, that merely plays in the universal fact of randomly-picked spawning positions in the genre. And as it turns out, item control and skill plays a larger factor into victory than picking the right character. Really though, the only game where players truly start equally would be rock-paper-scissors.
Each character has their own movement passive with their own boons and drawbacks, but the base movement system of strafejumping/bhopping/rocketjumping and speed gain is universal.
It can be hardly called core if changing something so core doesn't even break the game or turn it into something completely else, yet all the key elements of an arena shooter are still present in QC and people play it as you would expect.

tribes ascend isn't an arena shooter, but halo games just aren't one because uh….I said so :^) yeah they're slow, that's it!

where did lawbreakers touch you? Did the game being dead break your heart cliffy?

Holy shit user. Come on now. I know you must be underage but have you really never heard of FPS-Z?

You are the pathetic sap trying to Shill Lawbreakers as an Arena shooter. You can't even think of an argument at this point.

Not every arena is… a Team Arena!

moba/arts tier genre manufacturing

I don't need to as you've disproven none I've offered. So why do pro players all force the same visual settings?

The term was invented years ago by fans. It is in no way an Arena shooter.

Except showing that no Arena shooter has stat differences and you saying skins are the same as stat differences just makes you desperate and retarded.

The fuck is that texture pack? The Shambler looks like ass.

unreal tournament c/03/04 has them, but you refused to accept this because it can be disabled/enabled with mutators. Your viewable model is a meaningful game play difference that can be forced or not through cfg edits. You pick and choose what applies to you and supports your point, and your rejection of them is angry, autistic lashing out with an entirely emotional foundation. When someone provides a fully presented argument instead of my truncated ones because I assumed you played these games (you clearly haven't), you fall back on strawmanning and respond to none of their arguments.

You're not very smart. Why do pro players all force the same visual settings? Could it be that some models would represent an imbalance such as a walking half-height eyeball compared to a fat, full height biker? Really, play these games or stop talking about them. You're too stupid to discuss them.

Shit is so fucked, i rather play Hunter's Moon to pretend its a Q3 single player and Q1 + Q2 + Expansions, while this shit burns to the ground.
Off-topic:There's no hope for Dusk, too.

looks like dark places defaults. I don't recommend using the engine because it changes things like how the physics function and its not a particularly well optimized engine. I also find the stencil shadows garish and the approximated forced bump mapping is ugly looking. I think a faithful, chunky unfiltered look fits quake beautifully and there's a few sourceports like direct quake or quakespasm which scratches the faithful and expanded limits options the game greatly benefits from.

No one man should have all this stupid.

dusk is too cynical, it's so unappealing.

you've consistently embarrassed yourself, acted like a chimp, and provided stupid definitions that exclude arbitrarily and contradicted themselves.

No i'm not. Optional mutators don't mean shit and neither do visuals. You could argue that for top level play visual skins matter but that doesn't change the fact that skins aren't stat differences.

Also
I didn't know it was Arbitrary to call actual Arena shooters like Quake and UT Arena Shooters and games no one would consider Arena shooters not arena shooters.
How? Where?

there, right in front of your face. make an argument already you idiot.

I have a 5GB Quake folder full of community maps, up to speed on ports and stuff, Quakespasm is the tits.

Someone is mad. Visual differences are in no way the same as stats. In some games you have a slight advantage by turning the graphics settings up or down based on what they show. That doesn't change shit. You are going to define a videogame genre now by visuals which already shows how poor your argument is.

the past few years have been a godsend with all the map jams that have been happening. It's like since the horde of zendar there's been a new greatest map of all time every year.

nope. Just showing your stupidity off to everyone in the thread at this point.

On top of this. You are right that in tournaments people disable different skins, but you can't disable classes in those shitty non Arena shooters you mentioned which prove my point even further.

...

No, so what would that difference be? What's obvious to you isn't readily obvious to everyone, nor do I see why it would be. Is there (ironically) a reason why you won't explain your reasoning?

When you consider that randomly picked spawning positions gives you different advantages/disadvantages to work with and that the fairness thereof is simply a matter of implementation, what's there to prevent statistical differences in characters to allow for more of the same? It's not as if it's impossible to keep things fair between two different characters with different base stats and movesets, see fighting games.

Besides, it's not purely about having more health or armor as you imply, but a trade-off between tanking damage and speed. Tankier characters benefit more from having a full stack because of their higher max HP/AP, but have a harder time maintaining it compared to lighter characters who can move around the map faster and nab items faster. In combat, this is balanced out by lighter characters being harder to hit but tankier characters being able to withstand more damage.

user, a genre is defined by what they have in common and what excludes them from other genres.
You could argue that visuals cause balance differences but that doesn't matter for this because what defines all Arena shooters is above. No arena shooter has an exception to this. Starting out equal and finding weapons through the map is the core of the genre. It's the core of the way you play the game. Quake and UT have visual differences between characters but that doesn't matter because everyone agrees that visual difference don't make those games not Arena shooters.
QC isn't an arena shooter because it has abilities which you don't get from the map and class differences in stats. TF2 and Lawbreakers aren't for the same reason. I have said this to death and you can't find an single exception.

Commander Keen

They haven't touched it yet, have they? I hope they never will.

The only good thing that could possibly come from this game and it never happened.

Except you don't start out equal, because your spawning position is randomly picked, which forces your hand in what weapons you should go for, what weapons you probably can't go for, what mega item you spawn closest to, and so on. Starting in such a game couldn't possibly be considered equal if the weapons closest to you are determined entirely by chance, making it absurd that full 100% equality is a cornerstone of the genre if it never was. But it doesn't matter, because that inequality is smoothed over by the skill involved, as it would when you introduce hero characters. When you take a look at QC gameplay, you see that the hero you picked doesn't play a major role in whether you win or not (to the point where you have to wonder what the point of the entire idea is, which is its own can of worms).

Everyone in Quake starts off equally inequal by being spawned in a position they have no say over, and then proceed to find weapons and build their stack. Those equal inequalities do not go away with the introduction of hero characters, and skill is still the major factor. All players having the same stats was never a rule set in stone, nor does that mean a game which does have statistical differences but still plays conspicuously similarly to arena shooters wouldn't be considered one, and to rest your argument on a cornerstone which never held true to begin with is just being completely pedantic. The core is still very much there, with the same weapons et al.

Except most let you choose your spawn point and said before that doesn't mean anything. Again, that is clearly different from statistical differences.
The player is equal in the game. The two players who play are the same, the only differences are what they do and where they are. This is again core to the genre and every AFPS has it
Except with retarded abilities which lower skill as a factor.
Again.
Every AFPS has the player character start out the same. This is something true for all AFPS.
Except with abilities and stat differences changing movement, hitboxes, ect and making it so map awareness isn't as important since you get abilities for free.
Quake Champions is clearly different from every AFPS and goes against the core of AFPS.

Why do you post like a bot? Only the resident python bots post one after the other replying to everybody like you do when it's not a spelling correction.

What the fuck?
Is this a new meme or are you straight up retarded?

No he posts exactly like the python bots, he doesn't even sage when making a post immediately after his own posts.

And so on.

Maybe he is a UT not finally gained sentience and is pissed with the faggotry he sees with people comparing his game to Overwatch

Meant for

No, just like Doom had no mod support

Not as far as I know, care to name examples? And that would leave you with the issue of both players trying to pick the same spawn point, which would have to be resolved in some way which prevents one player from picking the point they want, wouldn't it?
Again, you never actually explained why this is, you're merely trying to make it out as the obvious so you don't actually have to explain your own reasoning on why they are different. Care to say why they are different?
When Ranger throws his Dire Orb, you have the following to consider. His Orb travels in a straight line and lets him teleport to the position of the orb when Ranger deems it fit. So when he throws his Orb, he might try to tele to a higher position you can't immediately get to, which is something you need to consider. Alternatively, this is also something you should keep in mind when thinking about how Ranger can move around the map, as he can use his teleport to close in faster towards you in ways you may not expect, or he can use it to escape in ways you may not expect. To top it all of, he could throw his orb simply to grab your attention and pretend like he's going to teleport, but not really do it, and then get a hit on you once you turn towards the orb as a precaution. But he might also fool you into thinking he's going to fake out by throwing the Orb in a very long path and then teleport the moment you think the orb must have despawned, which you have a tough time figuring out if Ranger is in front of you and the Orb is behind you. Mindgames, son. What are you going to do?

Now, Ranger's Dire Orb is the only good ability in all of Quake Champions because it isn't a simple advantage for whoever uses it (all it does is let Ranger reposition himself, and you can easily tell his exit destination by the
position of the orb which is visually very distinct), it does not deal any damage itself (it CAN, but you'd have to be a total sucker to get actually hit by the orb), and always gives you more to consider during a duel on how he might use his ability. The point being that abilities are a matter of implementation, there's nothing to suggest that abilities inherently diminish the skill required for these kind of games.
Maybe in FFA/TDM, but the two aren't really linked. Abilities won't save your ass from someone who knows all the item placements with the cooldowns for them ticking in his head, and is raining down rockets on you or sniping you with near-perfect RG accuracy while maintaining a ridiculously high LG accuracy on your ass. Though most abilities in QC can in some ways and are shit because of it, I can only say that it's a matter of implementation.
But then you're left with the question: what is Quake Champions?
It doesn't play like games like Overwatch or Paladins at all because of its 1v1 focus, it's got all these arena shooter tropes, it advertises itself as an arena shooter, and it plays rather similarly to Quake. So is Quake Champions a 'arena shooter but with heroes' kind of game? Or did QC just invent a new genre? From a broader point of view the differences are quite frankly superficial, because of how similar QC ends up playing to Quake. This is just being unnecessarily rigid with definitions when QC clearly fits under the same umbrella, though this doesn't come as a surprise given how the whole arena shooter genre is just one massive incest-fest of Q3A clones with UT cheering on the sidelines. Personally I think arena shooters are just game modes with a whole game built around them, else every old FPS with a multiplayer mode would be an arena shooter, and the definition would lose its value.

the only shooters I've seen that let you choose your spawn location are the battlefield games and things like ut2k4's onslaught mode which is definitely not arena shooter.

UT off the top of my head
Multiple reasons.
1. This is something all Arena shooters have in common
2. Spawning at different spawns is clearly and easily very different from having multiple classes and loadouts to the point you have to be pretending to be retarded for not seeing the difference.
Yeah and this Orb takes out the need for many nice jumps and other movement options. Why go through all the trouble of learning fancy tricks when he can just use his Orb shit? On top of that it makes it harder for players to be able to figure out what the other player is doing. Quake 1v1 is about predicting a players health, items and position. Giving players shitty abilities that alter movement/heal or wallhax ruins this.
A shitty hero shooter. It basically says so in the name with "champions".

what kind of cuck uses mutators?

Instagib faggots.

MFW I got this pos for free and it's not worth playing.

Hold on, hold on. So your spawn position being determined by RNG does count as as starting off equally because it's something "all Arena shooters have in common"? Pardon me, but I don't see the logic or relevance in that reply to my original question of what the difference in starting off equally is between random spawn positions and statistical differences between player characters. At all.
Yes, it's so clearly and easily very different that you can simply point that fact out and instantly win the argument. Are you touched in the head, man? I ask you several times to explain what's so obvious that it doesn't need explanation, and you keep telling me: "It's obvious! It's clear as daylight! Everybody already knows! It's the current year!"
What the fuck kind of argument is that? How is that supposed to convince anyone? Have you considered that if you actually explained your point of view that we could resolve any potential misunderstandings?

Because I can already see why you felt justified implying I'm retarded and hoping everyone else would laugh at me as well.
> easily very different from having multiple classes and loadouts
I've been hammering on "statistical differences" for several posts now, but you somehow inferred multiple classes and loadouts from that? No, with statistical differences (in terms of HP/AP) I'm not referring to different starting loadouts or heavy class distinctions á la TF2, but rather the stat-incremental character balance of QC. Just your usual Q3A stats but with speed and HP/AP shuffled around a bit with a passive and active on top, as an example.

Now that's out of the way, you can hopefully explain why a genre supposedly about starting equally as one of its core tenets also has your initial spawn position be determined by RNG, and what's so equal about having your spawn position be determined randomly.

Because it's on cooldown for 20 sec. after activation and it'd be a better idea to save it for later when you need it the most?
Yes, just as you can predict what he's trying to do with his Orb based on information like health and items. Perhaps he'll tele away and escape when he's low on health, perhaps he'll use it to stay on the offensive when he's got a stack going.

But hero shooters are always team-based, have maps designed around chokepoints, have metas based around counter-picks, have Ultimates be slowly built up rather than have it available from the start, and are designed to be playable on consoles. QC doesn't quite fit any of that.

Read, it said "UT2K4 onslaught mode.

oh I didn't know there were other arena shooters with vehicles and capture points.

Are you serious? No Arena shooter has statistical differences between characters or classes.
Then you are an idiot. You still have collect everything from the map. That is what makes it an arena shooter. You are dropped into an arena and have to get all of your items from the map.
You are the one saying Class based shooters like QC are Arena shooters despite it going completely against what Arena shooters are about.
You need it the most when getting items.
And the Cherry on top
Amazing.

Yeah, it's called UT.

Samefagging like last thread I see

Oops, meant here. Its funny how those post times are all so close together after long pauses. But its to be expected.

onslaught isn't an arena mode you idiot. it's distinctively not arena in every way. I don't even know where to begin with this level of stupidity but it's plain as day you've never played the game, and I'm convinced you've never played any games in the genre and just exist to derail discussion.

I love how you say the dumbest things but try to call anyone else dumb. Maybe Quake Champions would be an Arena shooter if it had a none hero shooter mode but it doesn't.

I figured it was the case a while ago but it's not like it's harder to fight 2 retards compared to 1, especially when they make the same shit argument.

you can't read either and don't even know that level design determines the game play more than anything in a shooter. How can you not know these basic details?

I can read just fine. You are a retard for thinking an Arena shooter stops being an Arena shooter because you are playing a different mode. Onslaught is still an Arena shooter because you sitll get items from the environment and that is the key to winning.

It's amazing how you started this whole argument so you can say that Arena shooters are dead like last thread but this time it's clear you don't even know what an arena shooter is.
Again, I made a definition of Arena shooters that include all Arena shooters and you hate it because it doesn't include your shitty moba class shooters.

There's always room for change and innovation.
And as I pointed out before, weapon placements in maps are never even. So you'd have no choice over your spawn position, with some weapons closer to your spawn position than others. And then you end up spawning farther away from a weapon you want, or near a weapon you aren't comfortable using, all because of RNG. How can you call that starting equally?
Not necessarily. If you know that your opponent is far away, there's no particular need to hurry if you're keeping track of the item timers. If you use it for some pointless jump you won't be able to use it to bamboozle your opponent in time.
I'm pretty sure that post just talked about the mode specifically not being anything like an arena shooter, not the whole game not being one itself.

nothing says arena shooter like battlefield sized maps.

it also arbitrarily excludes arena shooters like halo, excludes and excepts unreal tournament to be included. it's a bad definition and you're a mighty retard.

whatever happened there, I'm glad there's more than one person to call you out on being such a retard who knows nothing about video games. Keep posting.

Kek. Now you are just shilling this shitty bethesda game.
Doesn't change the point at all. Arena shooters are about getting dropped in a map and finding all of your shit in the map while having the same stats. This is true for every Arena shooter.
Except the whole part where characters have the same stats and get all items from the map. That is what makes it an arena shooter.

See
Halo isn't an Arena shooter and it isn't arbitrarily excluded.
No it doesn't in any way.
kek.
So let's get this straight.
Here are the games listed as an Arena shooter
And this was all started as a pathetic attempt to say Arena shooters are dead so you can suck console cock.

...

it is, despite it being slow. It has the level design for it in many of its maps, pick up placement, and you can't even justify why the speed of the game determines whether or not it fits.
it does whether you refuse to accept it or not.
the epitome of mental gymnastics.

are you hopping IDs? You're making the same points as the other guy and it's looking pretty suspect.

No one has ever called it one before and no one treats it like one.
Yes I can. It's too slow to be an Arena shooter. Arena shooters are fast and require fast movement.
How about actually giving an argument instead of just repeating the same shit over and over?
So you forgot which ID you were on I see.

Not a single person on Holla Forums besides you would agree that lawbreakers is an Arena shooter.

Negative publicity is still publicity.
I bet half of the thread didn't know this shit was out.
Stop posting about shit games please.

Yeah, I'm 73cca9 and I am the most obvious samefag on this board.

You say that but No Takers still has only 20 people online despite being shit on all day.

I only mentioned lawbreakers after you kept bringing it up. I never called it an arena shooter and other than it being dead, I don't know anything about it.
appeal to popularity, not an argument
not necessarily.
waiting on you to start. (44) keep digging.
well aware of my jokes, thanks. I'll make sure to make them clearer because pointing out a lot of arena shooters being DOA is something that hurts you.

ah, so you are hopping. Just making sure. Doesn't make your points any better, and its really obvious when you say the exact same thing.

If not for shilling it wold be 0 people.

Ask and you shall receive.

You know quake 3 has forcemodels right? Nobody actually sees you as the character you choose unless they want too. I have only heard of one person who didn't use forcemodels so that all the enemies were either keel or tankjr.

yes I'm aware, and have been aware well before you posted.

Except people decide what is an isn't a genre based on what the community that make the word and what the genre all has in common.
Yes necessarily. Again. All Arena shooters are fast. Give me a slow Arena shooter.
You lost this argument so many times it's just sad.
My definition of Arena shooter includes all Arena shooters. Your shitty definition of Arena shooters includes literally thousands of none arena shooters just because they have an Arena.

Kek. Halo and QC aren't Arena shooters retard.

you don't seem to be able to separate elements from the overarching design of games. You can't seem to comprehend that UT2K4 stops being an arena shooter when you're playing onslaught mode, and tf2 has arena shooter elements when playing on arena maps. This is an odd thing to fail to understand, but it's been a point I've been consistently laying on you. Something tells me you've never played these games, never made a map, and are just hopping along to defend the games for…why are you defending these games you've obviously never played.

illiterate.

It's nice to know Overquake is barely keeping pace with QL. It seems the rest of the AFPS fans didn't fall for it either.

But it still fits the definition of an Arena shooter so it is still an Arena shooter.
So the maps have weapon pick ups and you get all of your weapons from the map? Oh wait again you don't, you are a retard.
kek.
You are the retard defending Quake Champions. Not me.

At this point you can't even make an argument. Don't even reply unless you can give an example of an Arena shooter that doesn't follow the definition.

Your tendency to repeat your own definition like a mantra as an argument to anything is becoming rather tedious. Also what, now it's no longer about characters starting off equally (>>14165713) but about having the same stats now? How am I supposed to interpret that as anything but moving the goalposts? But here's a simple question in response: Why do arena shooters need the same stats for player characters? To keep things equal, perhaps?

Moreover that's ridiculously specific for any kind of genre definition and at the same time too broad. Now Marathon is an arena shooter, and so is Doom, Duke Nukem, Blood, Deus Ex MP, Gunbuster, Descent, No One Lives Forever, FEAR, Turok, basically any singleplayer FPS with a tacked-on multiplayer mode can be considered an arena shooter. Now the term has lost its meaning. But when people say arena shooters, they mean games like UT and Quake. So what makes those two game franchises stand out from the aforementioned games where they both coined a new genre?

And why is Halo a magical exception?
Then you might as well exclude UT (UT99 at the very least) too. But speed has nothing to do with your definition of arena shooters.

Wow wow wow, so arena shooters do not have to be actually set in tight small arenas, and do not need a 1v1 focus with item control, one of the very unique defining traits of arena shooters which barely any other genre has and can only be fully mastered and exploited in a 1v1 situation? So arena shooter can imply huge teamfight maps with vehicles now? Is thar what people want when they search for arena shooters? There's no need to stick to a point to the very end no matter how retarded, this is just ridiculous.

only a retard would consider calling a game part of a genre as a defense. So you do consider arena shooter as some sort of mark of quality.

Oh look, a definition online

You got your IDs mixed up there. Why even pretend at this point?

That is because you haven't disproven the definition. The definition fits all Arena shooters that exist and doesn't include any non Arena shooters. Until you can prove this wrong or find an exception you lose.
Nope, it's far faster than most FPS. It definitely requires fast reflexes too.
Exactly or else UT and Quake wouldn't be arena shooters because most people play those in matches of 4 to 8.
Like UT2004? Yep, that is an Arena shooter.
Cliffy B and the faggots making OverQuake sure think it is.

oh, so quake champions is an arena shooter now. well that was easy.

Nope. It has abilities and classes that you don't get from the map so it isn't one.
If getting abilities were part of the map then it would be.

oh, I forgot the part where this said "no classes and abilities allowed"
why are you posting again? to be a walking contradiction who has demonstrated zero experience with the genre he's defending actively for…what's the reason again?

Not in a loadout retard.
So

doesn't actually. My definition also means that when you're playing defrag you're not playing an arena shooter. Sorry, I'm using words you wouldn't understand, since you never played quake. It's a platformer mode that uses the games physics and you compare your run through times to other players. Just so you don't get lost now. Mine relates more to the actual design of games as opposed to what you, an autistic child determines fit into your genre of "games I think are arena shooters" and "games which aren't." Mine gives room for games to experiment with the design concepts of one game and provides more flexibility for the mechanics and systems the design is pitted against.

You are illiterate, however, so I don't expect you to understand any of this. Your followup will be as incomprehensible and poorly thought out as your last 50.

No, you are just being a retard. "This game is an arena shooter some of the time but isn't when I change game modes which somehow makes it a different game."
Someone is mad he lost.
Kek.

My definition includes all Arena shooters, your does not and includes games that are clearly not Arena shooters. I win and you can't and haven't proven me wrong.
But no, Halo and Lawbreakers are now Arena shooters hurr durr and UT is an Arena shooter sometimes and sometimes not hurr durr just like how Mario isn't a Platformer any more when I go into the water.

But why are you bringing it up if it's a non issue? It's not the same as a UT mutator since it's literally part of your video settings.

Also unrelated, I think that the "Arena Shooter" name is pretty misleading, the first time I heard it, it was just used to describe Quake-Like games, as well as UT, but of course it's just vauge and ambiguous definition that just leads to endless debates.

If we reduce the definition to starting with weak weapons and having to find weapons on the map, then a lot of games can be called an Arena Shooter.

Does Halo have a deathmatch mode where you start off with weak items and have to find better gear on the map that I am unaware of? Because if it does then it would fit that loose definition. Goldeneye on the n64 could also be called an Arena Shooter, just because it follows that same idea on deathmatch mode. It even has skill based movement in the most basic sense of the word.

But, when we want to talk about Arena Shooters, we usually want to talk about Quake, UT, Painkiller, HLDM… not console games like Halo, since the term was made up to talk about that class of games. So, maybe it's better to expand the definition of this to:

Games that derive their complexity from skill based movement, and the concept of "Item control" in which a player has a significant advantage from picking up items on the map to deny other players, in such a way that it changes how people play and view the game.

I don't think that QC is no longer an Arena Shooter since it can still meet that definition, but it is definitely not a pure example of the genre. Now, i'm sure that there are some issues with this definition but that is the problem with making up a poorly defined buzzword to talk about a class of games. Goldeneye and Perfect Dark also probably meet the definition, since it has deathmatch that satisfies all of the requirements, and I don't really have an issue talking about those games in those gamemodes as Arena Shooters either. TF2 obviously wouldn't be an Arena Shooter, but looking at some footage Halo seems to have elements of an Arena Shooter, since, you can pick up more powerful items, and technically denying them can count as a form of Item control, so guess I will have to say that it's an Arena Shooter.

To add it's amazing how much you want Quake Champions to be an Arena shooter. You truly wanted to try to pretend "Arena shooters are dead just look QC isn't doing well, and look, Lawbreakers flopped!".
Too bad it's not and has been proven by definition not to be.

so how does my definition exclude UT? UT has its arena shooter levels, making it fit in perfectly fine.

yes, this is the main game mode of the first halo. Weapons scattered across the map, power ups on timers, (semi) random spawns. Everyone starts with AR+pistol.

Which is retarded just like saying mario isn't a Platformer when you go in the water and again your shitty definition means obviously not Arena shooters should count as Arena shooters.

thief is a stealth game until you play the kart project.
you're incredibly stupid.

Yeah so that sounds like an Arena Shooter.

I also know that Halo has maps that, while following the ruleset, eliminate Arena Shooter elements, like the one with the big grassy area and two bases, where you play CTF, so I wouldn't call that mode an Arena Shooter just because item control isn't really a factor, because of how the map is designed.

Well you aren't doing any platforming in the water, are you? Games don't fit into one little box, they can represent more types of gameplay than just a platformer, or just an Arena Shooter, in different parts.

It's funny how it's obvious that you are getting more and more mad that you can't think of why my definition doesn't perfectly fit Arena shooters while yours is still shit.
Don't even bother replying if you can't explain why my definition doesn't work.

It has elements of an Arena shooter but is too slow to count as one. It's why no one refers to it as an Arena shooter. You also have regenerating Armor/health which also prevents it from being one since you don't get health from around the map.

it excludes UT

echoing my previous definition for first person shooters: The genre and game play style is mostly decided on by the level design. If you were to make a Halo map where you race in warthogs from one end to the other with other players, it'd be hard to call it a first person shooter and not a racing map. The design ultimately determines the genre. Like how defrag could be considered a platformer despite it being in quake 3. Halo has its CTF maps, its vehicle-free CTF maps, its on-foot only deathmatch maps too. Design determines genre, this is the ultimate point.

How? You keep saying this but can't explain why.

By your shitty definition COD is an Arena shooter.

stop talking, I'm done talking in circles with you. You are too stupid to discuss anything.

What list? Unless you count indies no one has fucking finished an Arena shooter in the last 8 or so years.

30 to 40 is a lot to list, you can name one after I do. Lets start with UT4. C'mon, it'll be fun.

The only one arguing in circles is you, I provided an argument and you just try to wriggle out.

UT4 isn't finished. It's not even in what the devs would consider Alpha yet faggot.

I can't discount it for being too slow, and there are health pickups in Halo's deathmatch from this gameplay I watched.

Now, it isn't the kind of game I would talk about as a good example of the genre, or a good game, since it plays like Quake but with a lot of the gameplay and gameplay skill removed.

I agree, that's why I wanted to say, a game could be an Arena Shooter on one level and a Racing game on another, so we can talk about games as different genres in the context of the level.

Only in the first game and even then it only healed a bit where most of it came from Regening shields.
Not at all. There is no twitch or fast speeds. It has some elements but again there is a reason no one calls it one.

Don't bother. He is a known consolefag who shits up many threads. He probably didn't know UT4 was no where near done. This is the 5th thread I can recall that he tried to go start the "dead genre lol no one wants to play Arena shooters any more" argument only to get BTFO.

Says nothing about equal player character statistics.
It's an inane one to begin with. The definition you linked earlier calls it a subgenre yet it would include most first-person shooters with multiplayer modes released before 2005. Nothing "sub" about that, in that case it'd be a common feature of all multiplayer shooters.

When you look at what distinguishes arena shooters from the rest, you have to look at how it operates on the competitive level. There you will mostly see 1v1 matches because that's where the gameplay of arena shooters shines the most, as modes like FFA and TDM are better suited for casual play given their chaotic nature. In 1v1 duels, item control is a must because both players will eventually reach a skill plateau for accuracy and speed, so you can have a higher chance of survival if you have more HP/AP, more weapons than your opponent, and a better stack.

This emphasizes informational and psychological warfare, map knowledge, situational awareness, paying attention to sound, predicting your opponents' movements, being able to maintain control over two or more points in the map by yourself, all of which are essential to victory and what makes arena shooters different from team-based games and other first-person shooters. When you look at new arena shooters, they all emphasize duel modes in some way, and most of the community is built around said duel modes.

While team-based modes may exist alongside like in games such as UT, they do not allow the same flexibility a Duel mode can. To make item control a thing, both players must start with default loadouts so they both will move around the map in order to grab new weapons and not camp. To put it simply, if there's no item spawns to contest, it's not something most people would yearn for in an arena shooter. And the mindgame-meta of arena shooters cannot persist outside 1v1, and maybe 2v2.

Player characters in such games were identical statistically as a balancing act, not because otherwise it would break the game, but because it was the simplest way of keeping things as equal as possible. With hero-ish characters, each character would come with their own pros and cons, however there's nothing preventing them from being decently balanced. After all, the game still has weapon and map balance to contend with. And the champions do not diminish the core of what sets arena shooters apart from the rest, that is item control and the mindgames involved. Nor are the champions as rigidly defined and distinct as classes in class-based shooters, so they're versatile enough and do not really have counters.

So we can assume that arena shooters are about picking up items in the field, which implies there's a reason to go do so (your default weapon sucks/you need health). Having different classes would not eliminate the need for item control at all as long as there remains a compelling reason to go pick up items. You could start off with unique abilities, but as they are in QC you still want weapons and megas because of the ability cooldown involved. Considering this, statistically equal player characters are not essential to allow an item control meta, which begs the question why they need to be included in a definition. Only 1v1s and default loadouts are, with suitably small maps.

Yeah, like a watered down quake with almost all the skill removed. I know that is the reason, I just won't argue that it's not since it fits the general definition. Also, I agree that the later Halo games are not Arena Shooters if they don't have the same kind of item control.

Please, don't disregard TDM in Arena Shooters. The reason that it's lesser known is because it's so much more difficult to learn how to play compared to 1v1, but it's still there. I would say that it actually requires more teamwork and coordination than "team based" games like TF2 and Overwatch.

Basically, since arena shooters revolve around their item control meta which is best reinforced in 1v1 situations, all that's necessary is a reason to move around the map, and often that reason is to find better weapons, which preset loadouts would ruin. But as QC evidently still has a functioning Duel mode with the item control meta intact, it's hard to say that statistically equal player characters are necessary for arena shooters to exhibit their genre-specific traits.

oh you couldn't name one. I'll do another then, Warsow. I'll do two actually, Nexuiz. Here, now you go.

ultimately the malleability of genres allows for exploration of them in interesting ways, resulting in fresher games with newer ideas coming in. Splatoon comes to mind as a game which does a good job refreshing the twitch shooter genre by encouraging faster play styles combined with a very interesting primary objective which allows a sort of indirect competition holding together the meta behind fire fights.

please stop talking about games you've never played. You haven't demonstrated you know a single thing about Quake at any point.

Oh, you are back. Mind answering ?

You made all these arguments before. Hero shooters aren't balanced and neither is QC so no matter what you wont be on equal footing unless you both pick the same character which takes away the point. Abilities that you get for free clash with the main point of Arena shooters which is about getting things from the map and starting out equal.
Again. My definition fits all arena shooters that exist. No Arena shooter has ever been class based and not having classes or loadouts is one of the major things that set it apart.

It's 1v1 mode is shit user, it's not intact. Classes ruined it because of retarded wall hacks and some being better than others/countering heroes.
Again, my definition accounts for all Arena shooters that have ever existed.

I don't even give a fuck about multiplayer, just give me a single player Quake with that wonderful mix of industrial scifi and gothic horror that could only come out of the 90s.

Seriously, I miss gritty industrial settings.

I forgot what that second map was called. Was it by spirit? I loved the look it went for.

Shouldn't you be naming all of those Arena shooters that failed and explain how UT isn't an Arena shooter or do you just give up on that since it was a losing battle?

never said at any point ut wasn't an arena shooter, but your definition determines that some of the games are not by having different stats. now is the point where you evade and talk about some grand conspiracy plotting to disenfranchise arena shooters because consoles or something.

Cataractnacon / Zeangala

No, none of the games aren't Arena shooters. Mutators don't count faggot and Unreal Championship isn't an Arena shooter. It's an xbox series game mostly played in 3rd person.
But what would you know, you didn't even know UT4 wasn't finished.

have you played nyarlathotep? It's a brutally challenging set of maps. the first one of fantastic with this misty blood in the atmosphere and enemies attacking you in a low grav shaft you must platform yourself up through. The second is pretty but I found that low grav was explored fantastically in the first map. plus the atmosphere felt far more brooding.

have you played unreal championship? Or like every other game are you just talking out of your ass and you have 0 experience with it.

Kek. user, you don't even know your point any more.
So no, my definition does not exclude UT.
At my cousins house growing up who owned an Xbox. I didn't play it a lot but it was very different from UT, especially UC2.

its not.
the third person one you were thinking of.
so, now that we established you don't know what you're talking about, lets move on. Now is the time you lurk, you should post later.

what

But you never started out equally to begin with. Your spawning position is picked at random, which places you closer to certain weapons which you might not want and farther away from weapons you might want but is closer to your opponent's spawn, given the asymmetrical weapon placement in most maps, possibly putting you at an unpredictable (dis)advantage. How could that be considered starting out equally?

QL has loadouts.
As QC does have classes, but it's still an arena shooter. You still go picking stuff up in the map. The devs say it, pro players say it, most people do. What's to say it's not an evolution of the arena shooter genre by breaking these conventions? It's not like first-person shooters were largely defined by having colored key gates either.
from what?

I haven't but I've had it recommended in multiple threads (or maybe you're the same person) so I will try it. I assume you've already played it but if not, try out Arcane Dimensions. Especially the Forgotten Sepulcher map.

he doesn't know this and he thinks you pick them. Which is why whenever commentators say about live matches they point out "oh Cypher got a bad spawn giving rapha a heads up on the red armor." He would know this if he ever played or watched anything relevant to the games he defends in a genre he's never played, but that's asking too much for this fanboy faggot.

haven't played AD in a while and I know there's some new stuff I've missed out on. I'm due for another swing around, Sock's probably one of my favorite developers. Did you know he made the best stage in Crysis warhead as well?

also, if and when you play Nyarlathotep, remember that explosive jumping will make ascent difficult but incredibly fun.

Kek. So you admit you lost since my definition does include UT.
Not only that but the mutator in UC 1 is optional unlike 2 which is clearly not an Arena shooter.

I do. I literally said that UT allows you to change spawn position and it does. So you give up on arguing with me and or the other user and just want to go "N-No you are dumb".

we're talking about quake you retard.

We already had this argument Jesus Christ. It doesn't matter since that is something Arena shooters share. Stats differences and classes are different than starting position and is something no Arena shooter has had.
Yeah and it was only put in recently and pissed off a lot of older fans. They were casualized it for QC.
Other shooters

And I never said quake let you choose your spawn. It's amazing how butthurt you are that you lost and are now making strawmen.

...

yeah, you did:

which was the entire basis of the argument that saying these games must be fair is retarded for a definition, you illiterate retard.

I might be wrong with it being most but I never said Quake. Either way you are just changing the subject since my definition does include UT and you have yet again failed to explain how it doesn't count.
On top of this you also fail at your "30 to 40 big budget arena shooters have failed!" argument.

that entire conversation was about quake you dunce. the UT one was an entirely different subject about character stats.

I was making progress but the other guy pussied out.

Your excuse for inequal spawning positions is that it's okay because 'everyone else does it'? That's completely irrelevant and illogical, your definition was that arena shooters for one part about starting equally, yet when you look at how the spawning works in arena shooters that's not the truth at all. Stats and classes do not have to do with anything with this, your base definition for arena shooters simply doesn't hold up because players do not truly start equally, because their starting position in the map will be random, as will their proximity to mega items and weapons.
Quake Live has different preset loadouts and is still an arena shooter? How does that work?

How? You failed on your first step because you didn't realize UT 4 wasn't even half finished.
No, it was about why QC isn't an Arena shooter and so we are talking about Arena shooter.
Again, you have yet to prove my definition wrong or show any of these supposed failed arena shooters.

Literally yes. It's ok because Arena shooters do it and therefore having it doesn't make something not an Arena shooter. On top of that it's ok because random spawn still means each character is equal in ability. You equating Classes to spawn location is idiotic.
Now it does because Bethesda doesn't want to Quake to be an Arena shooter any more, they want to appeal to Overwatch and TF2 fags. The fact that you are using a game that fucked it self over as an form of defense for QC only proves my point. QC isn't an Arena shooter and QL shitty updates to casualize it has definitely made it less of one.

oh I forgot, we aren't allowed to make judgements on games that are out but not "out" ;) this is a weak cop out. If you think UT4 will explode once Epic announces it's hit a "final" version, you're a retard.

you did it for me, actually. quake isn't an arena shooter because spawns are not equal.

do you wanna play the game next? I named a few already, pick up where the other guy left off. We'll make it to 30 before you know it. 40 to follow perhaps.

Nigger, user asks for finished Arena shooters that died. You can't use one that was 33% finished at best and go "Look that counts"!
No but each player character is equal. You love your strawmen though.
Like?

what's going to get ut4 popular from now to 77% later?
screen cap it. It's dead now, and it'll be dead in a year. It'll be dead in 2, 3, 4, and 5 years.
scroll up a bit

You said that arena shooters were in part about starting off equally, yet the random spawn positions are anything but. And now you say that it's ok because they are arena shooters so they can get away with inequal spawning? Do you realize how little sense you are making?

You cannot say that arena shooters are about starting off equally and then say that inequal spawning is part of the genre. That definition of yours doesn't make sense in the slightest.
Uh, when some guy spawns closer to the red armor or mega health than me, I'm going to be put at a big disadvantage regardless of skill because he can tank more hits now, all because of a bad spawn. Equal character ability doesn't supersede the odds being stacked against you.
So QL is still an arena shooter… but a bad one?

Yeah user, a game that isn't being updated will continue to be dead. You sure showed him, oh wait you didn't.

Starting off equally refers to characters. You all have the same charater with the same stats. Everything you get in the game comes from the map.
I wonder if you are purposely being retarded.
Nope. You usually don't see people rush for the red armor as soon as the game starts, they normally go for other shit. Besides if you are rushing for the red armor than another player can rush for health/weapons. Unless you think it's a good strategy to start the game and baby sit the red armor before getting anything.
Quake Live has loadouts so it's pretty much not one. Loadouts go against what it means to be an arena shooter.

so, nothing is going to happen. So UT4 is dead, and will stay dead, and I'm right and your pussy footing between "I-it's not even out yet! don't judge it!" was pointless over protection. Why are you so defensive about it?

the fact you're still talking about this and not seeing the conversation has moved way past it shows you have no capability to discuss this subject and really are too dumb to talk about these things.

Nigger, I went through your posts and you haven't named another. UT4 wasn't finished before it was killed because Epic wants to make a PUBG clone instead just like how Cliffy Blazinga ran to make an OW clone.

I said finished faggot. What is the point of your posts? To laugh at people who would rather play a UT game over the million PUBG or OW clones? UT is literally the first decently budgeted Arena shooter to be worked on in years and it didn't even make it out of Pre-Alpha but you think this proves something other than Kikes being kikes.

retard

I can't blame em for following the money

Faggot.

pick 1

And? You are still wrong.
You just keep making the same shitty circular arguments and move to the next failed one.
You are wrong on UT4, you lost the definition of an Arena shooter argument.

well I can just press the 0 key 40 times but that wouldn't solve anything because there's been no big budget arena shooters and even the older ones wouldn't even be considered big budget.

nope, 100% right. It's gonna be dead forever. Does it make you mad? You couldn't even tell me what will happen once it gets 77% more developed. You just said it's not going to get more developed, essentially conceding.

nope, mine is still more valid. Yours falls apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny by people who have actually played these games. You only seem to have played UT4, and not very much or it might actually be alive right now.

UT 4 had a over a dozen people working on it and actually had Epic funding. That made it bigger budget than any other.
See
user specifically doesn't count indies.

So you like losing arguments I see.

And for the millionth time
No it's not. Yours includes non arena shooters. You haven't shown how mine doesn't include arena shooters.
Are all console cucks this stupid?

nobody has made an arena shooter that wasn't indie, it's a pointless exclusion.

see file

you literally don't understand that level design determines how first person shooters play. Until you get this and do basic research on the genre, you never will understand how it functions and you will continue to run into people talking way the fuck past you who know what they're talking about while you have spergy hang ups on things that are way past your comprehension. You are actively too stupid to talk about this.

Nice goalpost moving user.
Kek.
It's funny how instead of even trying to argue you are just getting mad and showing everyone your butthurt.

There's nothing to suggest in the grammar or context that it refers to characters only, this is purely moving goalposts at display. And again when spawning at a random position this does not account the uncontrollable and uneven distance between you and other items compared to your opponent. Your opponent is bound to spawn closer to certain weapons which you don't have immediate access to, which does not start you off with equal footing.

Of course not everyone rushes for the red armor, there's still the mega health to deal with. Even so he'll have a more accurate timer of said item, which could fuck me over.

What, they patched it to be a different genre? Are you for real?

oh no, I was asked to name big budget arena shooters and I named small ones because that's all that's existed in the past 10 years. And they're all dead too so uh…yeah you got me? I lost that one pretty hard, a genre where I only play the really old games has no new ones that are alive. Dang.

I have a certain expectation of all anons to at least know a tiny bit about the games they talk about instead of basing all their knowledge of a genre on hearsay and them playing a game night once and a dead game once. If getting talked down to hurts you this badly, I'm going to do it more often.

Maybe people play the old ones because no one has made a newer one outside of indies.

Like how you didn't know UT4 wasn't finished?
So you still can't explain why my definition isn't right.

Yes there is. I specifically talk about classes and loadouts and how that ruins it and how the other games don't have this.
Yeah, that's how much they fucked up the game. But thankfully you have a mode where you can turn all that bullshit off, which isn't true for QC so because of that it is still an Arena shooter.

maybe nobody is making new games because everyone they make dies and the community that makes those games has realized it's better off to just cater to the existing dedicated community instead of trying to bring it somewhere unnecessarily. Like do you not know how these things work?

I know it's not finished. It being finished or not has no bearing on whether or not it's dead or alive. It's dead by the way.

You didn't know mutators were called mutators and called them modifiers however, sad display tbh.

I have, and now someone else is. Spawn placement answers that, having "equal" be a part of your definition defaults it to the trash. Having a definition which relies on the intended design of the levels to encourage a type of expression from the players as level design is what defines shooters primarily is a superior position to take. You haven't looked up mark brown yet, have you? How about Simon O'Callaghan, Daz, or anyone who has done any work on writing about level design?

How would they know if no one is making them outside of indies?
Then why use it as an example?
Where?
No it doesn't. Equal refers to character stats. We already went over this.

Why do you keep making circular arguments that I have had to destroy over and over?
My definition includes all Arena shooters, yours does not and includes non Arena shoters.

This is yesterday's thread all over again and this is where you claimed Lol Cakers to be an Arena shooter.

because when epic made ut3 it died, and when epic made ut4, it also died.

arbitrary and meaningless. Why would character stats matter when everyone has the same base stats in something like quake? Stats are not a factor and what is a factor is spawn location, which are inherently unequal. You don't seem to play these games so consider not talking about them to save yourself from looking like an idiot for misspeaking about them.

I don't even follow. Try to stick to one ID or make your own argument instead of repeating what the lolcow of the thread is saying.

UT3 died because it was shit and was console focused.

Now stop spouting bullshit. Every Arena shooter has equal stats, no Arena shooter has classes. Hero shooters aren't Arena shooters.
They do when we are talking about the definition of an Arena shooter which comes from Arena shooters.

You samefag this and multiple threads and ruin them with your faggotry. I just want you gone from any PC or arena shooter thread.

tell me what was wrong with it.

several UT games do, as already described.
you justified that stats are balanced because it creates equality. Something else contradicts the equality that is directly pertinent to the genre (you'd know if you ever played these games, you haven't. we all know.) and the argument that stats being equal is important is therefore dismissed. You don't seem to understand this and are evading it like crazy as you have been for several hours now. You do not have a leg to stand on. Keep posting.

you replied to yourself

Many people have pointed that out. You are just trying to change the subject to wriggle out of your shit again.

Every Arena shooter has equal stats. You lost this argument. Name me one Arena shooter without Equal stats. You can't. Spawn points mean nothing.

I want you to tell me with your own words. c'mon, be a big boy, daddy's listening and wants to hear what's on your mind. Now's your chance to use your voice.

You have powerful autism user. I wish I had the free time you did to be a laughing stock multiple times a week.

I'm gonna deliberately make all PC game threads revolve around me now, you've invited it, hope you're happy.

Sure, we can talk about UT3 after you stop failing to argue.
Again, spawn points don't matter in what defines an Arena shooter because that is something Arena shooters have unlike classes.

You can download it here if you want:
mega.nz/#!JIAnSazT!mTQYQyd3idowmsFHsN...sjeFxm0XcM

Oh, sorry the link is broken, this is a link with the key:

mega.nz/#!JIAnSazT!mTQYQyd3idowmsFHsNByjM3Uc2Fav5i9UsjeFxm0XcM

you said having equal stats is important because it creates a fair playing ground. Is this correct? If not, tell me in the reply.

Randomized spawn points in the game, at the start of the round, give players advantages and disadvantages. These are not inherently equal. You can spawn 2 seconds from the RL, be on the opposite side of the map from the LG and red armor, and the enemy can have both in the time it takes you to get the RL and control that area. Equality is the worst ground to argue in favor of being a genre defining trait, it is up to you to justify why you would use that as a meaningful metric. Do it now.

Equalized stats are important because it's the core of an Arena shooter. Having the same characters battle it out in an Arena picking up items is at the core of an Arena shooter. This includes all Arena shooters.

why would equalized stats matter? Answer why equality in this area is a meaningful metric. Do it now and stop evading it.

Because it's the core of an Arena shooter. It's what all Arena shooters have.
I'm not dumb shit. I'm telling you what defines arena shooters.

QC ruins this with their shitty heroes and abilities that make it so it's about "counter picking" and getting the most OP guy which makes it more like a shitty MOBA like the rest of the OW clones.

why does it matter though, give me an actual reason not this "just because it does!" nonsense. Go on. Tell me what it does. It provides a ____ playing field. Go ahead.

I think you are and are proving it with every post.

don't care

It matters in defining what is an isn't a an Arena shooter so when faggots look at Lawbreakers and QC failing and go "See, no one wants to play an Arena shooter", they can be laughed at for the underage faggots they are. The rest of your post is asshurt that you can't think of a counter argument.
But no, i'm the dumb one despite you losing every argument this thread. Though the fact that I am still arguing with a retard might be a bad sign.

ahahahahahahaha go ahead, answer it you pussy

I'm not evading anything. You asked why it's important and I told you. It's amazing how you say these terms that you don't understand. You are the only one avoiding shit. I literally just told you why it matters.

answer the question you little pussy, it's right in this post here:

what does it do?

Your question was "why does it matter though". I answered it. I'm sorry you are this asshurt you didn't get the answer you wanted.
Hero shooters aren't Arena shooters.

Just fill in the blank, go ahead

It makes it more balanced, takes away counter picking bullshit, raises the skill ceiling and prevents everyone from picking only the OP characters meaning most of the time spent developing these characters was useless.
And it's also the core of any Arena shooter because it means that the player has to get everything from the map.
You wanting me to say that it provides a more even playing field is also true but that is besides the point.

there we go, knew you could do it. So now that your justification is stated, that it provides an even playing field, here is why that is the completely wrong perspective to take and is evidence you do not know what you are talking about with this entire genre.

The spawns are randomized between a set of them. Inherently creating an uneven playing field. These games are not meant to be fair and equal, and using that as justification is demonstration that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the genre functions. Equality was never the goal, and it is now how these games are designed, period.

Yeah so? You can say this adds luck to the game or makes it less "even". But it is not even a 10th as much as Class bullshit. That is why I prefer UT's Select spawn location function to random spawns. Either way you didn't make a single valid point your entire post.

As much as i like reading this shitfling contest, quake champions isn't an arena shooter the same way any class-based mobage like Overwatch isn't an arena shooter. If you spawn in the map with different weapons/health/hidden stats than someone else, it's not arena, and is likewise the reason Quake Live died once they introduced starting weapon loadouts for the default duel and deathmatch gamemodes.

I don't know if cb32e8 and 73cca9 are shills playing for both sides, but the thread's already dead at 320+ posts and i'm glad it's over so soon. Another 12 or so hours until it gets to page 10 before restarting this fucking stupid argument again for the sake of marketting a shitty game. Kill yourselves, both of you.

Devs put in random spawn because it was the best they could think of to make it fair. Can you think of a better spawning system? Adding in classes only worsens the problem by 10 fold and you can see that in Quake champions where players have Literal Wall hacks on 30 second timers and because of that is almost always picked in any 1v1 match because it's too broken.

See
8ch.net/v/res/14126565.html
Its the same user who goes into every Arena thread saying games like LB and QC are arena shooters so he can say PC gaming is dead and how great his ps4 is. He has done this half a dozen fucking times and people still respond.

Nah, it's just done by people with a bad sense humor.

It isn't quake, it isn't an id software game.
Every game that comes out nowadays looks the same.
Bethesda puts out flavourless, cloned walking simulators with absolutely no feeling behind or in them at all.
Their games play like the silent render of a map editor. Floating through them, a mock-up of a game.
They aren't fun, they aren't thrilling, they aren't scary or enjoyable.
Quake 1 wasn't perfect at the time, it was dark, brown, simplistic looking because of the engine being 3d, and single player didn't make any sense because they had changed concept four times during the making. It was however fun to play, you were afraid of the monsters, you did feel satisfaction when you killed them. The guns felt good to use, the mechanics were fast, tight and solid. Multiplayer was fun and took skill.
It was like driving around in a stripped down rally car, fast and violent.
Modern shooters now are more like being on a Disney land ride, wait8ng for the carriage to slowly turn the next corner so you can shoot the thing you are told to.

You could say the same about pretty much any modern game these days sadly.

Get fucked you goddamned nigger. I mostly play QW and I've been a huge critic of the community's inability to change for a long ass time (especially in regards to the whole idea of "Kenya maps") QC is irredeemable fucking dogshit.