Tweet
There is new video by Trumad -- it's a Team Fortress video -- you can watch it here (http://www.skynet.ie/~leanaht/ctfdtf2.zip).
I haven't been on a Team Fortress server in about 2 years (it was fun, it was running some FFA setup and every had rocket launchers) but prior to that it had been maybe 6 years.
So my memories of Team Fortress weren't recent.
When I was watching the video, I was a little taken aback by how bad everything looks. My old memories of Team Fortress were of how "cool" it was and although it wasn't Half Life style, things looked pretty good from a 1999 point of view.
But I hadn't seen it in a while --- and I guess since Team Fortress maps are mostly flat and blocky, things like new textures don't really disguise their blockyness as well.
So ...
The first question that comes to mind ...
#1 - Does Quake with new textures actually look good to anyone (outside the community) or is our imagination because historically Quake was even uglier?
And ... something else that disturbs me ...
In 2006, the only new single player maps that I can remember coming out in 2006 -- other than the Quake Expo -- were Hangover Devastation, Sewage Devastation, Event Horizon, DMRMX and 2 great maps by Trinca.
Travail Quake isn't out yet -- but it will be eventually. And a few other map authors have 1/2 completed maps and I figure some of those will get finished.
But in 2005, a *LOT* of single player maps came out. Marcher Fortress, Lunsp1, Antedileuvean and some other ones. It wasn't just a few.
And in 2005, there were a *LOT* of speed maps. This wasn't true in 2006.
The single player community's rate of creation combined with engine development has always made Quake seem alive, but I think the single player creations give it more dimension because it involves a lot of creativity.
What if that is about to become a thing of the past?
#2 - I guess the question is ... did the 10th Year Anniversary of Quake perhaps make Quake seem a lot more alive and vibrant during the first half of 2006 than will be representative of the future?
I just raise these questions as conversation, Quake -- of course -- has been dead in the traditional sense for 7 or 8 years -- at least since 1999.
But I guess what made me think of this is that something is only truely dead once content for the game is no longer being made and no one is investing creative energy in it.
3. We haven't seen that yet, but if we do then does that change something?
And
#4 Are these questions more likely to be pondered at the beginning of a new year?
I haven't been on a Team Fortress server in about 2 years (it was fun, it was running some FFA setup and every had rocket launchers) but prior to that it had been maybe 6 years.
So my memories of Team Fortress weren't recent.
When I was watching the video, I was a little taken aback by how bad everything looks. My old memories of Team Fortress were of how "cool" it was and although it wasn't Half Life style, things looked pretty good from a 1999 point of view.
But I hadn't seen it in a while --- and I guess since Team Fortress maps are mostly flat and blocky, things like new textures don't really disguise their blockyness as well.
So ...
The first question that comes to mind ...
#1 - Does Quake with new textures actually look good to anyone (outside the community) or is our imagination because historically Quake was even uglier?
And ... something else that disturbs me ...
In 2006, the only new single player maps that I can remember coming out in 2006 -- other than the Quake Expo -- were Hangover Devastation, Sewage Devastation, Event Horizon, DMRMX and 2 great maps by Trinca.
Travail Quake isn't out yet -- but it will be eventually. And a few other map authors have 1/2 completed maps and I figure some of those will get finished.
But in 2005, a *LOT* of single player maps came out. Marcher Fortress, Lunsp1, Antedileuvean and some other ones. It wasn't just a few.
And in 2005, there were a *LOT* of speed maps. This wasn't true in 2006.
The single player community's rate of creation combined with engine development has always made Quake seem alive, but I think the single player creations give it more dimension because it involves a lot of creativity.
What if that is about to become a thing of the past?
#2 - I guess the question is ... did the 10th Year Anniversary of Quake perhaps make Quake seem a lot more alive and vibrant during the first half of 2006 than will be representative of the future?
I just raise these questions as conversation, Quake -- of course -- has been dead in the traditional sense for 7 or 8 years -- at least since 1999.
But I guess what made me think of this is that something is only truely dead once content for the game is no longer being made and no one is investing creative energy in it.
3. We haven't seen that yet, but if we do then does that change something?
And
#4 Are these questions more likely to be pondered at the beginning of a new year?
I have broadband now, it opens up the doors for all kinds of things.
uake
ne.com
Comment