🚀 go-pugleaf

Mark R. Nielsen (mnie...@prairienet.org) writes:
> 	Hmm... and how many science fiction and modern games have we got?  More than midieval.  Guess we got lots of whiners.  I personally prefer to have a
> little variety.  Lots of sci-fi and modern out there.  When a new setting enters the scene look at how many people whine about it.  Oh no, I won't be able to
> use a gun. Oh no, I have to live with frying the flesh off enormous dragons and
> impaling knights with spears, not to mention waving a crossbow around and 
> possibly being able to use a catapult.  Give me a break! Sci-fi's cool for a
> while, but I've been Doomed to death.  Bring on the bloody halberds and horrificspells!  Bring on the viscious midieval monsters and beasts.  Bring on another
> midieval game and then let me see another sci fi game.  I need some variety.
> You guys might see there as being too many midieval games, but you obviously
> haven't been looking around enough...  there's lots more sci fi.  I do like both, but I don't sit and whine if someone makes a certain kind of game.  Pretty
> annoying to look at almost every single message here and see that its a gripe
> about midieval settings.

This is a bit exagerated, but I'll add my two (bloodstained) cents. While
modern style games use "better" weapons, you're just to far away from the
killing. That's the idea of quake: you're closer to the killing. I don't
see how it would be possible for hammers to be used as weapons in a modern
battle. Even the chainsaw is only good for cacos and pain elementals. 

I'm not sure if quake will be the kind of setting some people are
expecting. Just because it isn't modern doesn't mean it will be a D&D
rip-off. After all, D&D uses sharp weapons, and id likes them dull.
Already we know of one innovation id will add. Also, how many D&D games
star a viking dude? (This question isn't retorical, I really don't know
much about D&D myself.)