Talk:Quake 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the id Software task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Xbox task force.
 
WikiProject Apple Inc. / Macintosh  (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Macintosh task force (marked as Low-importance).
 

Content Deletion?[edit]

What happened to the weapons section? It's been deleted without apparent reason. Vandalism or? Also, the article was a lot more thorough, it seems to have been thinned out. Is there a reason for this or does it need to be reverted? -PedroFromHell

I also think that the weapons section should be retrieved, and possibly a Trivia section. -counselwolf

That was me who deleted the Weapons section a while ago. I've deleted it again. My reason has not changed, although this time you'll know why. WP:NOT#INFO, WP:NOT#GUIDE, and WP:CVG/GL#Scope_of_information should pretty much sum it up. Wikipedia, in its goal as an encyclopaedia, avoids information that is more relevant to a guide, because it isn't supposed to be one. That information on weapons should be in a Gaming Wiki, not the main Wiki. Ong elvin 04:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I should also add that just because something is true does not mean that it is automatic grounds for inclusion in an article. For example, if you go to an encyclopaedia on George Bush, you should not expect a section explaining why he's a dumbf***, even if 100% of the world agrees on it. This example would also break WP:NPOV, which is also what the weapons description did; and neutrality is extremely important to any serious encyclopaedia. Ong elvin 04:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Your WP:NOT arguments are reasonable, though I think it's borderline whether describing the weapons that exist in the game constitutes game guide material. (Describing how to use them and/or how to defeat certain enemies or bosses certainly would.) However, I think you've gone off the rails with the WP:NPOV argument. How does describing the weapons present in the game in a factual, dispassionate way come anywhere near espousing a non-neutral point of view? Xihr 04:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking mainly of the Nailgun's description, so citing WP:NPOV was indeed not really relevant. It says "this gun does not come into its own until later in the game" which certainly breaks NPOV, wouldn't you agree? Anyway, if there's a weapons section, it should just be a list with a single short sentence describing it. Such as: Nailgun - Fires highly damaging rounds, like a more powerful machine gun. Describing upgrades is in the scope of a game guide, not an encyclopaedic article. Ong elvin 04:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Sure, but that's a valid WP:NPOV reason to rephrase that one sentence, not to delete the whole section. Xihr 04:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Yup, I know, and I didn't use WP:NPOV to delete the whole section. (Remember how I referenced those other guidelines.) But hey, even WP:NPOV applies more than once. Just look through [1]. (Dangit, not sure how to make it appear as text rather than footnote number.) Anyway, here's some examples.
  • Blaster - nice utility gun
  • Machinegun - this is the first 'real' gun the player comes across.
  • Shotgun - are impressive, but anything beyond medium range is negligible. (Maybe this example doesn't quite fit WP:NPOV, but the word impressive probably isn't appropriate.)
  • Nailgun - initially unimpressive; come into its own until later in the game. (I wouldn't consider identifying it as the signature to violate the all-important WP:NPOV, but I realise that it's probably borderline.)

So yes, WP:NPOV is not a rationale for cropping that section, but it did kill a few sentences. Ong elvin 05:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

{{sofixit}}. Xihr 06:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd also l ike to add that I think the Story could use some trimming. WP:WIAFA(4) tells us that an article should give enough detail without boring the reader with minutiae. (Also mentioned in the other guidelines I've already linked.) Ong elvin 05:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Name[edit]

I've started to see more and more that people referring to this game as "Quake 4" with the number instead of "Quake IV" with the roman numeral. Should the page be moved or should we wait until the official title and logo come out? Thunderbrand 16:16, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

I say the latter, myself. We dunno what's official, yet, now do we? --Shadow Hog 19:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Okay, see GameSpot: it's 4, not IV. --Shadow Hog 02:15, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I've noticed most web sites use the number now. But we should wait until E3 I guess when its confirmed. Thunderbrand 05:26, May 14, 2005 (UTC)
Okay, the E3 trailer has "Quake 4" at the end. http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/740/740717/vids_1.html Thunderbrand 04:28, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
Speaking of which, I find it highly unfair that sites say that one must be 17 or older (which makes sense, since standard ESRB ratings say quite clearly that an "M" rating means 17+) to view these videos, yet when I put my birthdate in, they claim I'm underage (when I'm certainly not)... Meh. --Shadow Hog 05:00, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Requested move Quake IVQuake 4[edit]

  • The official name of this game is Quake 4, not "Quake IV" anymore. "Quake 4" is currently a redirect
Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~

Discussion[edit]

Good job with adding everything guys -omikron

Release date[edit]

The only official date for Quake 4 is "When it's Done", according to Id chairman Todd Hollenshead. This is common for id's games, as it's their company policy when it comes to release dates, dating all the way back to the first Quake.

The game has been officially released and is available for purchase. Xnolanx 22:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like Duke Nukem Forever. Alexis Rose 21:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Being re-released on June 19th, 2012 for the 360. http://www.bethblog.com/2012/04/11/quake-4-returns-to-xbox-360/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.106.61.238 (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Quake 1/2[edit]

It is not known at this time whether this game will bridge the continuity gap [...]

Actually, I believe Quake 2 was named just that because all the other names (or similar enough ones) they wanted to use were already taken/copyrighted/whatever, and since Quake was already a known title and so on, that's what they used. Therefore, I'd like to think that it is known whether it will bridge the gap or not (and it won't, because technically there is no gap). Confirm/deny. --213.66.39.247 23:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Along these lines, the following sentences are contradictory: "The story of the series continues from Quake II, because Quake III Arena has an unrelated plot to the former, focusing on online multiplayer and a very limited single player mode that is essentially the multiplayer played against computer controlled bots. Quake 4, like its immediate prequel Quake II, is not related to the first Quake in any respect other than the name and the logo." Quake 4 continues the story from Quake II, to which it is not related in any way? --Clconway 03:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I mis-read that. So Quake 4 is a proper sequel to Quake II, but neither game has any relationship to Quake or Quake III Arena? (Or Quake III Arena is related, but it didn't have any meaningful plot?) This paragraph could be improved. I would also question the relevance of plot to the Quake games. --Clconway 03:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Minimum specs[edit]

Can someone add the minimum specs required to play the game to the article please? Thanks! --Rebroad 18:46, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

"OpenGL compatible 2 GB video card" Jesus, I must be REALLY behind on tech, cos mines barely a quarter of that... Kerdajan (talk) 23:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Matthew Kane not the first named protaganist of Quake[edit]

Wasn't the hero of quake2 named Bitterman? As such, that would not make Matthew Kane the first named hero.

No, the hero from Quake 2 was Grunt. Bitterman appears in Quake 3. Morris Munroe 16:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right about the marine in QII being named, but (at least in the PS1 version) the intro and outro movies refer to the character as "Stepchild". Can anyone else confirm this? - Raven_1959 20:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The guy in Quake 1 was Ranger and Quake 2 Bitterman. If you start a new game of Quake 2, and look at your pod, it says Bitterman. ZuljinRaynor

You could put in some guff about how he's the first officially named character, or his names incorperated into the storyline, something like that. In the other games, the lead role has merely been someone to hold the guns. JaffaCakeLover 15:41, 30 August 2006 (GMT)

Per the Quake II FAQ, Brian Hook, a programmer of Q2, stated: "The player you play is not a character we create. We prefer it when the character takes on the player's own state of mind and personality, so we're not going to try and insert an artificial personality into the character."[2]--PCPP 08:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You're a year late :-). It's true that the protagonist (you) in Quake II isn't given a personality, but it is true that if you look at your drop pod once you land on Stroggos, it says Bitterman. It's never spoken or otherwise referenced during the game, however. Bitterman also makes an appearance as one of the arena combatants in Quake III Arena. Xihr 08:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I take back the part about this not being spoken or otherwise referenced. You're identified by name (Bitterman) numerous times during the opening sequence of Quake II. Xihr 04:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Strange, Q3A's biography of Bitterman mentioned experiments being performed on him by the Strogg, which I didn't recall on my Q2 playthrough. I always thought Grunt is the main character of Q2.--PCPP 16:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the manual calls Bitterman a hero of the Strogg War, but Grunt just a veteran. As I said, your drop pod is clearly identified as being Bitterman's, so you're him. It's true that the Strogg experiments described in the manual aren't seen in Quake II, but then again, we also know that Quake II was just the beginning of the invasion, not the end. A new Makron popped up in the place of the one Bitterman had just defeated, and who knows what happened to him. Note that Bitterman's accomplishments are mentioned in Quake 4, but he isn't named. Xihr 21:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Also note that Quake II ends with the protagonist (i.e., Bitterman, you) crashlanding back on Stroggos after defeating the (first) Makron. Considering the main assault is yet to come (as detailed in Quake 4), it's certainly plausible that you're captured and (partially?) Stroggified to be consistent with the character description in Quake III Arena. That said, as the article already acknowledges, Quake III Arena is really not in the same logical storyline continuity as Quake II or Quake 4, so the seeming inconsistency -- or, rather, missing storyline of what happened to Bitterman before Quake III Arena -- isn't all that relevant. Xihr 04:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Minimum specs are out of place[edit]

The specs given at the top of the article are out of place and look terrible. Move it into a subsection.

-- Some guy before me...

It also makes them annoying to edit. The GeForce 3 was missing from the list, so I have added it, and I removed the Ti from the end of GeForce 4 since it runs on all GeForce 4 hardware. (You can check this on the box)

Interestingly GeForce 256+ class cards will run the game, but I didn't add them because they are old and give quite poor performance. There is an nv10 render path (r_renderer nv10 at console) which uses a lot less of the fancy effects and replaces them with some simpler hacks. Coupling this with turning off the shadow and lighting options, and reducing the res below 640x480, makes the game run acceptably well on a lot of machines. I have heard of it running bareably on a 733mhz Pentium III with a Radeon 9200 for instance.

-- Jheriko, 12:54, 11 January 2006

This game can also run with a Radeon 9600, but I get the feeling it's my CPU bearing the brunt of it - Some sections drop to 5FPS at 1024x768, so it's not recommended. JaffaCakeLover, 15:36, 30 August 2006 (GMT)

Weapon Bug?[edit]

I have observed that the Dark Matter Gun is NOT as powerful as BFG10K,in fact,it doesn't even destroy enemies except the lowliest grunts.It just paralyzes them.And no enemy was even vaporized by its shot.Trust me,and go try one.Please anyone reply soon.--85.102.76.88 10:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

This gun rarely seemed to live up to its potential in my game too, making me question several times if there was something wrong with it... it didn't seem to pull in enemies half the time! JaffaCakeLover 15:38, 30 August 2006 (GMT)


Weasel words[edit]

and some fans have reacted negatively to it

"Some" fans? Really, who? Unless someone can produce a citation, perhaps from a professional review, this will still be seen as an attempt to insert POV. --OneTopJob6 22:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


Enemies[edit]

Apologies to the guy who was going to write a list of enemies out, but we've already got one! However, that page is still a bit rubbish, so feel free to improve it and in particular add pictures. Makron1n 18:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the list here since it was unnecessary. We already have a (far more comprehensive) page detailing the Strogg in Quake 4, albeit one that is due to be merged anyway. However writing an entirely new section is not merging it. The pictures were very good, so I've transferred them over, but for the moment an Enemies/Bosses section here is not needed (see also the Quake II article). Oh, and I've put the Makron picture in the Makron article. Makron1n 10:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Just discovered the pictures didn't have any copyright information, which is a shame. Be sure to upload them with copyright information next time, as they were excellent. Makron1n 18:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The List of Strogg in Quake 4 article redirects to the Quake 4 page since April 17, 2007. However, it was agreed to merge the Strogg and the Quake 4 pages together. Lavenderbunny 16:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Quake 4 versions[edit]

What is so different between the normal version of Quake 4 and the special version? Morris Munroe 16:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Revise Please[edit]

Please improve on the story info. For example there is not 2 Network Guardians. Guest

There are indeed two network guardians. Right before Kane is attacked by "the huge lifeform" (as Strauss puts it) you have to defeat two spider like guardians.FrederikHertzum 19:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Mods?[edit]

Perhaps a new section called "Modifications" should be added.LoopyDood 15:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Strike-through textunnamed user replying to the above-- Yeah they took out a bunch of stuff added today and I guess it was a bit much. But, I didn't think it was since it was all directly quake 4 related and made things easy, the Modifications category and having all the popular mods listed just makes sense. If they take out Q4SupremacyMod link I will definitely cop a resentment :P Deltactf and gtr and xbattle I dont even think are 1.4.2 compatible yet--Q4supremacymod has had more than 60,000 players (statistics from website urls from gameservers-yes there are repeat players so the number is not exact--but the downloads are--actually more than 93,000pk4 downloads to be eact.) play in the past year--so yeah i will be pissed if yahoo whoever it is takes the link out :P But no complaints really on the mod description--but why can't it be there? Those mods are the most popular. Just a lil reply to the idea that the mod is not a valid mod lol--when it comes to ctf being played when you look at gamebrowser you see q4supremacymod being played hahahahah. Was ignorant of the fact this is wikipedia and probably not a good place to advertise a mod even if it is Quake 4 and popular.


Agree with LoopyDood that a mods section is warranted - for comparison, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quake_III_Arena#Modifications - you could write an almost identical paragraph except listing RA4, Q4Max, and QII Lost Marine (with a caveat that most TC's for Q4 were abandoned before final release due to amount of work required).

Note that there previously was a mods section, which was removed because at the time it was just a set of links to all of the significant mods, rather than a paragraph describing them. That list was pretty complete, and genuinely useful, IMO. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quake_4&diff=201110567&oldid=201003764

I also think this section should probably cover the "mod war" between X-Battle and Q4Max, and then later GTR - this is certainly part of the history of Quake 4, although you may struggle to find citations on this (other than thousands of forum posts and perhaps some news articles). There is also a petition at petitiononline on the topic though. The use of Quake 4 for competitive play using q4max by CPL, WSVG, ESWC, and QuakeCon at least warrants them being referenced, and probably deserves a section of its own like in the Q3A page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.124.185 (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Linux version and Mac/Windows/Xbox data files[edit]

The article claims that you need a MS Windows original to install the Linux client -- can someone confirm that it infact is not possible to use a Mac (or even XBox) version of the game and just rip the data file from those.FrederikHertzum 19:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, the X360 version can't even be read by a normal DVD drive due to the whole "deliberately bad TOC" thing, and I'm pretty sure the installer won't work right on the Mac version either. 66.24.104.37 17:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


I haven't seen the Mac DVD, but I think its quite likely that it would work with the mac build, unless Aspyr did something funky with the install CD. The linux installer for Q4 installs all of the binaries and data files required, except for the *.pk4 files on the CD/DVDs, which you manually copy from the disk yourself. In the Windows version of the install media, these are simply on the disk as raw files, and I see no reason for the Mac version to do this differently (pk4 files are already compressed zip files, so there is little benefit to trying to compress them into a single archive). The xbox 360 version has very different media, and would not work.

On a related topic, somewhere in the article it should probably mention that the German edition of Q4 has different data files, with blood / gore removed, which makes them incompatible for multiplayer with other editions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.124.185 (talk) 21:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Gamespot review[edit]

Hey I just watched the video review of Gamespot and they gave it an 8.0. 02:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)99.244.169.161 (talk)

If they assign score in the typical modern way, that presumably means they absolutely hated it. Looking back, the game seems to have been a flop that killed off a series that was once the dominant PC action game, one that grossed hundreds of millions of dollars. It would be interesting if the article could elaborate on this. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
What you type above makes no sense. The 8.0 number is out of 10, which Gamespot qualifies as "great." The rest of your comment is original research, and highly dubious OR at that.  Xihr  20:58, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Games magazines give scores of 8-10/10. They start at 8/10 and go up. They never give scores of less than 8/10, unless the game is complete crap. You're not much of a games expert and now you've retired from Wikipedia! What a waste of time you were. 87.115.23.31 (talk) 10:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Phrase about keyboards[edit]

Nicknames can be colorized with most keyboards by pressing shift-6 to produce a caret character. This isn't generally true, if one is not using an English keymap. Couldn't this be changed? --pred 23:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. What's important is the character that needs to be typed, not how to type it. And it's just the ^ character. Xihr 21:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

External Link: PlanetPhillip[edit]

This link has been removed twice. Each time it was described as Linkspam. It is a valid resource for Quake 4 players. It contains possibly the most complete list of Quake 4 single player maps and mods with screenshots and reviews. How can this be linkspam?

mulitplayer[edit]

the 360 verstion's mulityplayer community has what can be charitably called unlively and restained and uncharitably as empty and void of players. I'm not shore how this should be included but even a few weeks after release the mulitplayer was empty. just thought this should be in the article but i am unshoure how. this isnt bashing just to clarafiy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.236.187.71 (talk) 01:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Marines of Quake II & IV[edit]

Shouldn't the Marines of Quake II and IV be listed in a more detailed way or have their own article? There is a article devoted to the Strogg, but not the Marines of the Quake universe (as far in context as Quake II and IV go). Just wondering what you guys think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.220.211 (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to see what more could be said about them, other than a game guide list. Furthermore, it's worth pointing out that the Strogg article withstood an AfD process, however silly that was. Xihr (talk) 06:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Plot oriented bias[edit]

This article needs more on gameplay; what you can do in the game and what mechanics and elements the player interacts with or makes use of. How you interact with the environment, what the designers used to enhance it or try to make it work, what happens if you do this or that in respect to NPCs, what gimmicks or action triggers the game uses, how difficult it is, whether it's linear or gives you many choices to make, &c. You can't just lay out a plot and pretend you're giving proper information about a game. Think about it, how can an article on a game that's primarily for single player talk only about multiplayer and bots in the gameplay section? Who is like God? (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Some of that is good, but beware of WP:GAMEGUIDE. Particularly the bits you mention about NPCs, designers, triggers - they would have to be kept brief, if used at all, to avoid falling foul of that policy. —Vanderdeckenξφ 15:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I think almost of all of it violates WP:NOT#GUIDE. This is an encyclopedia, not a game guide.  Xihr  07:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
The technical aspects can be used in a way that characterizes the game's gameplay so readers would notice the key elements and differences between games as such (some information could be comparative for reference or context, especially in regard to games that are related or influence each other), much like you may present the feeding habits, reproductive characteristics, and anatomical traits of a zebra or a lion in their articles, (and may relate the zebra to the horse in some ways). Merely mentioning some aspects are present and how they were used by the designers is often enough. The NPCs, for example, wouldn't all be listed and described. Instead, one would write a bit about what role they play in the mechanics of the game. Otherwise readers are left only with the general definition of NPC, which might not be enough to explain what they mean in Quake 4.
But I agree with keeping this stuff brief, as it must be solid and pretty evident to stand in the Wikipedia, as more detail could only be possible in a game-specific wiki and these aspects don't usually have much notable reference (some reviews on well-known game news sites and networks may actually analyze some important gameplay aspects, though, which might be useful). Who is like God? (talk) 18:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)