Half Life 2 or Quake 4?
- Thread starter Y-S
- Start date
Well both of them are many times better than both CS and CS:S, and will develop your FPS skills while counterstrike negates them. (trust me Im a long time CS fan, been playing since 1998 when beta 3 came out.. i was so deep into it... but Im being realistic here in regards to FPS skill).
And its a hard question to answer. For me, Quake has been my main thing in the FPS world since Quake 2.. i was big, big into quake 2 and won a lot of cash from that game. And although Quake 3 and Quake 4 arent as quality as 2 was when it came out, it still sort of probably makes me slightly biased towards the Quake world.
Halflife 2 is the best single player FPS game ever, hands down. And Multiplayer DM is fucking outrageous too. Thats the only game that has made me sweat so bad while playing that i had to take a break because i thought i was gonna have a stroke. Its so intense and fast paced, and requires a LOT of "twitch" based skill, meaning you need to be quick with the mouse.
Quake 4 on the other hand is more focused on weapon tactics and 1v1 strategy, and the real pro's are found in that game. It doesnt have nearly as many players at one time though for some reason, so its harder to find a good server.
Overall I would say Halflife 2 is probably "Barely" a better game. The single player definitely is.... but Multiplayer its REALLY close. Quake 4 is more professional and tournament style, but Halflife 2 is just as intense.. its just more "twitch" and less "thinking".
And its a hard question to answer. For me, Quake has been my main thing in the FPS world since Quake 2.. i was big, big into quake 2 and won a lot of cash from that game. And although Quake 3 and Quake 4 arent as quality as 2 was when it came out, it still sort of probably makes me slightly biased towards the Quake world.
Halflife 2 is the best single player FPS game ever, hands down. And Multiplayer DM is fucking outrageous too. Thats the only game that has made me sweat so bad while playing that i had to take a break because i thought i was gonna have a stroke. Its so intense and fast paced, and requires a LOT of "twitch" based skill, meaning you need to be quick with the mouse.
Quake 4 on the other hand is more focused on weapon tactics and 1v1 strategy, and the real pro's are found in that game. It doesnt have nearly as many players at one time though for some reason, so its harder to find a good server.
Overall I would say Halflife 2 is probably "Barely" a better game. The single player definitely is.... but Multiplayer its REALLY close. Quake 4 is more professional and tournament style, but Halflife 2 is just as intense.. its just more "twitch" and less "thinking".
haha, i was waiting for someone to question that comment. I've written about it before on other boards back when i played more games, but its been a while. That comment has started a lot of arguments in the past, but usually in the end the favor comes out that "in most cases" (not all), the statement is fairly accurate. This is a paste from a couple months ago, thank god i dont have to write it again:
****
It has to do with the entire forced-style of gameplay and mechanics between traditional FPS games (from id software, raven, and non-cs valve, etc.) and Counterstrike or CS:S. There could be an entire topic on what i mean by "forced", but basically it just means how the games move and how limiting they are in how you can manipulate your movements.
in this case, Counterstrike is the "limiting" one. All player's movement speed is set to a constant and you cant really become a "faster" player, movement wise, than anyone else. This is the total opposite of Quake-type FPS's where movement itself is always a strategy and a learned/difficult technique. Quake trains players to time the angle of their jumps, their path through the routes to the strategically placed guns, and basically forces you to become aware of every single landmark around you.
In CS, this is *all* cut out. You dont have to worry about your speed around the map as long as you stay on par with the enemy. And you dont have guns to find.. and even if you did, you only have 2 options (+knife) at any given time.
The other factor here is the quickness of death. Counterstrike caters to "lucky" single shots.. headshots... really split-second battles. There is very little time to do anything besides strafe left or right and basically fire your gun at [hopefully] their heads. Some players have become really good and have maxed out the highest combat speed that can be attained with the CS engine. And that matters when comparing, because in Quake/HL2DM/etc., there is "no" maxing out. The combinations of speed and fire are endless, and players each take the same amount of damage to kill, rather than getting a lucky headshot with a long-range gun.
Playing CS enough will make you accustomed to all of these limiting points of the game, and it will lessen your skill when attempting to switch back to a full speed FPS.
Anyway, im probably just rambling, and ive probably played way too many FPS games than what is good for me in the past. And like I said, I love CS..always have.. and I like CS:S as well, and play it sometimes. But i also play the tournament style FPS games and I make sure i look at games like CS realistically, and that is that they are "more fun/arcade style", "less skill-based", even though skill is still involved.
****
It has to do with the entire forced-style of gameplay and mechanics between traditional FPS games (from id software, raven, and non-cs valve, etc.) and Counterstrike or CS:S. There could be an entire topic on what i mean by "forced", but basically it just means how the games move and how limiting they are in how you can manipulate your movements.
in this case, Counterstrike is the "limiting" one. All player's movement speed is set to a constant and you cant really become a "faster" player, movement wise, than anyone else. This is the total opposite of Quake-type FPS's where movement itself is always a strategy and a learned/difficult technique. Quake trains players to time the angle of their jumps, their path through the routes to the strategically placed guns, and basically forces you to become aware of every single landmark around you.
In CS, this is *all* cut out. You dont have to worry about your speed around the map as long as you stay on par with the enemy. And you dont have guns to find.. and even if you did, you only have 2 options (+knife) at any given time.
The other factor here is the quickness of death. Counterstrike caters to "lucky" single shots.. headshots... really split-second battles. There is very little time to do anything besides strafe left or right and basically fire your gun at [hopefully] their heads. Some players have become really good and have maxed out the highest combat speed that can be attained with the CS engine. And that matters when comparing, because in Quake/HL2DM/etc., there is "no" maxing out. The combinations of speed and fire are endless, and players each take the same amount of damage to kill, rather than getting a lucky headshot with a long-range gun.
Playing CS enough will make you accustomed to all of these limiting points of the game, and it will lessen your skill when attempting to switch back to a full speed FPS.
Anyway, im probably just rambling, and ive probably played way too many FPS games than what is good for me in the past. And like I said, I love CS..always have.. and I like CS:S as well, and play it sometimes. But i also play the tournament style FPS games and I make sure i look at games like CS realistically, and that is that they are "more fun/arcade style", "less skill-based", even though skill is still involved.
^^^totally know what your saying,i could jus never put it in words.thats why i have a love/hate relationship with halo,cause the way it plays is jus so god damn smooth,once you know the levels it turns into a jumping fiasco,but to me it jus seems like the best speed and fluidity for fps,even though playin the game live sometimes drives me insane.
yo psilo you ever play the recent rainbow 6's on live?def a different type of fps,no idiot can pick that game up and get easy kills.im jus startin to get into G.R.A.W. cause the level designs are fuckin filthy
yo psilo you ever play the recent rainbow 6's on live?def a different type of fps,no idiot can pick that game up and get easy kills.im jus startin to get into G.R.A.W. cause the level designs are fuckin filthy
HALF LIFE 2 HAD THE SAME "FEEL" THROUGH ALL THE GAME, LIKE YOU WERE PLAYING THE SAME LEVEL OVER AND OVER. I DIDNT THINK THE GAME HAD ONE GOOD WEAPON WHERE YOU GET THE SATISFACTION OF BLOWIN FUCKERz AWAY. QUAKE 4 WAS AND IS GREAT, YOU HAVE A GOOD SENCE OF PANIC AND FEAR OF SHIT GETTING YOU AND THE GAME PUTz YOU IN DIFFRENT PLACEz SO YOU DONT HAVE THE FEELING LIKE, WHEN IS THIS SHIT GOING TO END!?, LIKE HL2 DOES. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. BY THE WAY, I PLAYED HL2 ON PC AND I AM PLAYING QUAKE 4 ON 360, A 60IN HDTV MIGHT BE A FACTOR TOO.
