Amateur Psychology For Teh WIN!
Something else I've wanted to do for a while- an opportunity to simultaneously show a few crazy Scrag ideas, contemporary video game commentary, and to try my own amateur psychological personality test (I'm a Psychology student in case anyone was wondering):
SO- the goal of this game is this:
Imagine id Software is going to remake the original Quake: You must pick which Scrag you think is more appropriate, and then read the following personality description. Let me know if they accurately describe you!
Don't be afraid- there are no wrong answers (except two of the choices- cough) and any feature you *think* was on the Scrag is honestly, as good a guess as mine really...
So, without further delay, the results of each choice:
1- Freakish gaping lamprey face.
You imagine quake as a horror game, and you find this the most horrifying and disturbing to look at- likely because you are afraid of many real-life elements of the animal kingdom.
You may suffer some form of phobia of:
"blood-drinking animals with serrated circular cookie-cutter mouths that don't apply anesthetic to your wounds but plenty of anti-coagulant that keeps the wound bleeding for a very long time".
Nonetheless, you are likely inclined to do a google search on horrifying real-life creatures, like the Lamprey- with great eagerness (PS- if you don't know what a Lamprey is- keep it that way, for your own peace of mind). You are, or would be, a big fan of the horror design of "The Thing" and H.R. Geiger, while enjoying themes of H.P. Lovecraft.
You may also prefer this version because you believe the original scrag spat projectiles, and therefore requires some kind of mouth for this to make any kind of sense- despite a love of lovecraft, sometimes things have to make sense.
2- Wraith-like with hood made from own flesh.
You like the gothic element of Quake, and you like themes of death and are drawn to the undead, and are likely to be a goth. If asked "what kind of sinister demo-god or evil entity outranks all the others?" you would probably suggest some kind death-god, such as the Grim Reaper. You are also likely to have played every id game since DOOM (including Quake 3 Arena), and actually like the art style of the most recent ones more.
You are the kind of person who adapts with the times, and is reasonably up-to-date in at least one area of the contemporary world- this is apparent because you are actually choosing a completely new design for an old monster. You either enjoy zombie films, or you are disappointed that the 'zombies' aren't convincingly "dead" enough for your taste. It is also possible that you picked this one because you think lovecraftian designs look silly (in which case you may feel shame deep down inside).
You may also prefer this version because you believe the original scrag spat projectiles, and therefore requires some kind of mouth for this to make any kind of sense.
Alternatively, you picked this simply because you interpreted the original to have no mouth (and to be fair, it's impossible to tell); and feel this is an important feature to retain.
You are obsessed with H.P Lovecraft. You know that Lovecraftian themes were a large inspiration for Quake, and have likely cross-referenced every Quake monster to a lovercraftian one. The particular monster you think the Scrag is wasn't described in enough detail for you, and the original low-poly model left too much to interpret; so your imagination met with cepholopod-mania filled in the gaps similar to this design.
You are either an oceanographer/marine biologist, or dissatisfied with your life and can't quite figure out why:
(ANSWER: it's because you're (a) not an oceanographer/marine biologist when you probably should be, or simply (b) the last official release of the original Quake universe was almost 20 years ago)
Alternatively, you may have also selected this because you believed the Scrag shot projectiles from its eyes (magic rather than biology- explaining why it can also fly)- and thus being a supernatural creature, does not need a mouth. That, or you never really thought about it and don't really care how 90s gameplay mechanics operate when it comes to an enemy looking awesome.
4- Authentic Low Poly
You like this design because it most resembles the collection of rectangular blocks and blurry vague texture that the 1995 engine was capable of, and you don't like change.
For some reason, you interpreted the original, ambiguous entity as a featureless snake-thing with knob-arms and a frowny-face, and believe anything else would be completely unfaithful to "the original material" (or lack thereof due to technology limitations).
You want a reskin to the point your eyes aren't aching from seeing pixels 4-inches wide (if converted to real-life scale), but that aside you'd actually be fine if every monster in a remake was as faithful to every pixel and every crude blocky silhouette as possible. It is likely you also want the humanoids to retain this, and don't realize that no human could possibly fit these physiques.
You want a new Quake game because you've hardly touched an old-school game in 20 years, and for some reason refuse to acknowledge obvious old-style games like Serious Sam are exactly the same thing, because it is more obviously upbeat and casual (and doesn't dilute its colour scheme enough).
5- A humanoid cyborg.
This is a STROGG. You chose this option because you are really waiting for a remake for QUAKE 2- and the two Strogg games released since then don't count.
It is possible that you may have played this so-called "sequel" first, and then attempted to play the "original quake"- assuming two games that have the same name AND same logo, augmented by a sequential number would somehow indicate a SEQUEL (rather than a lazy attempt to get 90s gamers to notice a popular brand name). Instead you found yourself falling into a similar traumatic experience that haunts every fan of the CNC and Unreal franchises:
Upon playing the game you were slightly puzzled by the opening room and magic themes, but quickly relaxed when you entered a base full of cybernetic PEOPLE, and presumed they might be STROGGS. After playing further it quickly became clear that you were wrong and this game had nothing to do with the STROGG WAR. Your subconscience began to apply self-defense mechanisms such as somehow trying to rationalize a subvertive prequel connection to the later games, so as to shield you from the painful reality that you purchased a game that had nothing that you expected.
Either that, or you hate castles and fantasy because it's for "wimps", and wanted to pick an outrageously cybernetic character to make a protest to id not to make a game that is literally 93% castles with exactly 4 hitech levels solely to initiate an episode; which has filled you with pure rage that a game about guns sees you mostly shooting men with swords.
(PS ignore the goofy cartoon look- ran out of time- I actually think Quake 2 is awesome)
WHICH PERSONALITY TYPE ARE YOUUUUUUU?????
(Ahem- yes, basically 2 serious-ish ideas, one pseudo-lazy but plausible that I personally think is awesome, and two complete jokes)
Something I've noticed in really,really old games is how fans react to companies trying to recreate them; some love the new approach, some resent anything out of the original being applied.
As a fan the entire Quake series (well, the three games made by id) since they came out (as a kid), I feel I put myself in the first group, and like to see franchises evolve.
The tricky part for Quake however is that it came out over two ERAS ago. When a game where the player kills enemies by circle-strafing could still be considered dark and serious. Since then, games have moved in two major directions:
1- continuing to follow the old style, but accepting that audiences probably aren't going to see it as a 'serious' game, and instead embrace a light-hearted and silly theme and allowing creativity to flourish around these freedoms (Serious Sam franchise- though the most recent game managed to pull off both)
2- Going modern- every attempt of making a scarier or more serious game has typically been through a more modern FPS interface (Far Cry 3, Modern Warfare, etc). These games tend to reward either lazy itchy-triggerfingers or methodological and meticulous planning and technique, ironsights and reloading. They do NOT reward hitting the "A" and "D" keys while pointing the mouse in the direction of your enemy. These games DO often cut corners in making level layouts and player-controlled gameplay in favor of hand-holding, out-of-bounds scenery and cutscenes; along with a lot of tutorials (to be fair, they kinda need them).
As it is, any remake of Quake would be faced with a choice of 3 options:
1- be a reskin of Quake 1; and hope nostalgia will override everyone who feels circle-strafing has gotten boring over the decades.
2- embrace the modern perception of "old school" games and be like Serious Sam- and acknowledge that "old school" games are going to be considered a more light-hearted experience (at the same time somehow avoiding being completely flamboyantly silly; something Serious Sam 3, strangely, does quite well).
3- Stay true to being dark and gloomy- and somehow transferring Quake to "New School" FPS interface- and carefully scrutinizing which 'modern' features would actually work, vs those that didn't.