Is it the same but better? Sequels live and die based on how well they accommodate this paradox. In the case of id Software's Quake II, living and dying are so thoroughly intertwined that there's no easy answer. According to distributor Activision, "Quake II marks a revolutionary step in 3-D action gaming." Is it a step or a revolution? It's a higher dose to be sure, crack to classic Quake's cocaine. It offers more complex missions, in a more changeable environment, with smarter enemies. The sounds are bigger, and the Internet deathmatches put up to 32 twitching maniacs in the same kill-or-be-killed nirvana - until bedtime.
I'm running down a corridor in an alien military complex, indiscriminately killing the Strogg. In a world of binary pleasures, killing is 1 and dying is 0, a symbol expressed by the mouth of the gun barrel - the last thing I see. Intense.
Despite the rush, there's something missing. Maybe it's just my expectations keeping pace with my racing heart. I'm imagining future bruises from a force-feedback suit and the disorientation of a VR helmet. I'd settle for cooperative play.
Quake II has been banned in Germany because the ratings board found its murderous foes too human. This begs the question as to whether the narrowing gap between simulation and the space we inhabit might encourage crossover behavior. Violence long preceded computer games, so the link is tenuous at best. Still, turning soldiers into shambling sieves of flesh gave me pause. I hope the road to revulsion continues to separate rendering and rending. As long as we remain as smart as our bombs, that shouldn't be a problem.
STREET CRED
Smooth in the Crud Speedpass Gas
Fragtime
