(This is the 120th game in my challenge to go through many known games in chronological order starting in 1990. The spreadsheet is in my bio.)

I've officially gotten into the Big Three of id Software IPs. First there was Wolfenstein 3D, which built on lesser known Catacomb 3D to be the introduction to the FPS genre for some. Then came Doom, which was the introduction to the FPS genre for many. After that came Quake on June 22nd, 1996, which brings the genre to a whole new level.

I enjoyed them all over the past 12 months or so, none more though than Quake. For what on the surface might look like another Doom sequel, Quake does so many new things that spice up the entire experience. It introduces more puzzles, platforming and way more creative level design to the genre. As someone who mainly plays id Software FPS games through this challenge, it also lets you view up and down with the mouse for the first time in their history, which puts the icing on the cake.

STORYTELLING/CHARACTERS | 2/10

As per usual, the story is an afterthought for an id Software game. I mean, John Carmack famously said: "Story in a game is like story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not important". So it's actually a positive surprise that you get as much as you do I suppose.

Earth is invaded by an enemy code-named Quake (Shub-Niggurath). You need to find 4 runes to eventually find your way to Shub-Niggurath and kill it. The difference to Doom is its Lovecraftian theme and that these alien beings can jump through portals I guess, but you're not gonna be playing the game for the lore, or be disappointed if you do.

GAMEPLAY | 17/20

90's id Software FPS gameplay at its finest? I'm sure Doom vs Quake has been debated endlessly online, though I'd say both are very fine games in their own right. What makes Quake better for me is that it simply improves upon nearly everything over Doom from an objective standpoint. More enemy variety? Check. 3D objects over sprites? Check. Much more interesting and clever level design? Check.

The weapons are slightly different in Quake, and the weapons that both games share are balanced somewhat differently (like the shotgun, which I felt is weaker in Quake). Types of enemies are a bit different, music and theme are not the same either. So taste will play a role in these cases. But just based on what id Software was able to do with Quake in 96 versus with Doom in 93 from a technical standpoint just makes Quake a smoother, more modern experience that obviously resonated with me more in 2024.

Similarly to Doom, you enter a stage and need to kill enemies on your way to the exit. You gotta find keys hidden throughout the level to open locked doors in the meantime as well. The difference here is that id could do so much more that they couldn't with Doom 3 years earlier.

You can jump, you can platform, rooms can now be placed below rooms (exploring a river under a bridge in the first level as an example), secrets are not just moaning at every wall texture anymore but rather placed more intuitively, enemies are not just ranged threats anymore but also in melee thanks to enemy types like dogs, fiends and those horrible spawns, as well as others that have both ranged AND melee attacks combined.

Simultaneously, the most powerful weapon in the game, at least that's how I perceived it, are the rocket and grenade launchers (at least in terms of weapons that you regularly get ammo for). The trick with them is that they do significant damage, but when you're (not even all that) close to the enemy when they detonate, you take a lot of damage yourself. This means it's a high risk / high reward situation against all these enemies that rush you in the close quarter environments that Quake has, adding a strategic element to battles. Do I go quick and easy with these launchers but risk my own health, or do I go back to the shotgun and take them down slowly while opening myself up to more punishment from the enemy?

Vertical camera movement being possible also adds a lot here, though from what I understand it wasn't as smooth on MS-DOS back in the day as it is now. From a today standpoint, it's a fantastic addition of course.

On the face of it, it looks like a full 3D Doom with a visual upgrade, but all these additions make the gameplay experience much more smooth. Personally, I prefer this over Doom for sure, though Doom is still worth playing today as well.

MUSIC/SOUND/VOICE | 9/10

Sound effects sound solid, and the soundtrack is very good. Quake goes for ambient music mainly, which I found interesting, but it adds a lot to the atmosphere. It's not music you can listen to outside of playing the game, but I can already hear you say "the music has to fit the game, not your Spotify playlist you nerd" and you're very correct about that indeed. In that regard, Quake's OST is very good as I mentioned.

GRAPHICS/ART DESIGN | 9/10

The jump to full 3D suits the game very well. Enemies look much scarier, environments much prettier and overall, levels and episodes are way more varied visually and thematically.

ATMOSPHERE/IMMERSION | 10/10

The visuals and ambient music make for a great, dark atmosphere. The lighting effects for 96 are also pretty impressive and add to each level, especially whenever you see a dark room with a small, well-lit corner and a strong enemy standing right in there, staring at you menacingly. I'm still not sure whether to be disappointed by the reveal of Shub-Niggurath or impressed by what it means, but I think I'm going for the latter.

CONTENT | 10/10

Lots of content to indulge in here. A 7-8 hour main single player campaign over 4 episodes, multiple equally long expansion stories, plenty of weapons, power ups and enemy types to have fun with and I've read many times that Quake's multiplayer is supposedly fantastic, if you're interested in that. I'm sure it has an active mod community as well.

LEVEL/MISSION DESIGN | 9/10

Outside of very few individual levels, including the final one, the level design is just superb here. So many different environmental challenges, so much variety, so many secrets that can be found through simple exploration instead of wall spamming to unlock some random door and getting rewarded so many times for it makes for a grand time. Thematic differences in episodes adds to all this, really impressed.

CONCEPT/INNOVATION | 9/10

Sure, it's yet another FPS by id Software, but it more than sufficiently brings the genre forward in great ways. Vertical camera movement, jumping, platforming, more clever puzzles, more exploration, more differently acting enemies etc. If I played this when it came out, I'd feel like I'm playing something familiar like I would have wanted, as well as feeling like I'm playing the next gen version of it, which is all, if not more than I would ask for.

REPLAYABILITY | 3/5

In the sense of replaying the main story, there is some incentive to do so in terms of finding more secrets, going through levels quicker and going for higher difficulties. In an overall sense, more campaigns and multiplayer obviously make this game endlessly replayable for the right player.

PLAYABILITY | 5/5

Works well at all times.

OVERALL | 83/100

1996 continues in strong fashion with Quake. My expectations for this game were definitely met and then some, and it's probably my favorite old school FPS after Half-Life now. It's a shame to read up on all the issues during the development of this, as well as the fallout, but all the more impressive that this was the end product of all that anyway. Going back to the starting days of the FPS genre and experiencing the growth has definitely been very enjoyable and if you're a fan of the genre I would definitely recommend you to do the same to gain a new appreciation for it all.

(This is the 119th game in my challenge to go through many known games in chronological order starting in 1990. The spreadsheet/blog is in my bio.)

RESIDENT BACKTRACKERRRR. I loved playing Resident Evil, both because it was about time I finally played some more of this series and also because it just simply has a timeless survival horror gameplay loop. In what is obviously a subjective taste however, I can't say I was the biggest fan of the constant (!) backtracking required in this game. The classic door animations that play every time you enter a room, while they do add to the atmosphere (and kudos for designing all (?) of them individually), they also add on many minutes to your playthrough, possibly up to an hour or more. This makes backtracking even more of a hassle. It helps that everything you do in between that is fantastic, but I should mention it to anyone who is potentially reading this before thinking of playing the game.

I believe there is a mod though that removes the door animations, so if I ever do replay the game (which I'm confident I will), I would have to do it with the mod. Considering the game oozes with atmosphere even without the door animations, I would be OK with this decision, and maybe you too.

But I want to share more thoughts about the game (spoiler-free), so if you're interested, keep on reading. TLDR of it is above. Great game, backtracking makes it a bit of a chore depending on your stance towards it.

I also played the 2014 Resident Evil HD Remaster version, not the original 1996 version. I did that because I don't think all the backtracking plus tank controls would have been doable for someone with my patience. Having seen gameplay of the original, I do feel like it has its own vibe enough (in a good way) that I want to try that some time as well, but since the games are otherwise pretty much the same in all that matters, I chose the convenience of the most modern version of the game.

The original came out on March 22nd, 1996 for PlayStation, and later for Windows, Sega Saturn and Nintendo DS. It was especially fun to play this game because I had played Clock Tower and Alone in the Dark previously. It is well noted that the game's primary inspiration came from 1989's Sweet Home, but from personal experience, this game just felt like a well-refined and much more grand type of game that Alone in the Dark and Clock Tower were. All three of these games just feel like Escape Rooms that you slowly solve as you make your escape. And I just realized that all three play in a mansion. Were developers not allowed to go outside of mansions at this point in time? Or were mansions just seen as this creepy in pop culture in the 90s? I guess they still are perceived that way.

STORYTELLING/CHARACTERS | 5/10

You can choose to play as either Chris or Jill. Interesting: All three survival horror games I mentioned (AitD, Clock Tower and this) have a female main character.

The setting is like this: You are part of S.T.A.R.S. (Special Tactics And Rescue Service). It's 1998. A series of murders on the outskirts of Raccoon City (murdered people even getting eaten) got your departments Bravo Team sent to investigate. Contact to that team was lost, so your Alpha Team is sent in. You discover the site of their crashed helicopter, at which point you are attacked by a group of murderous dogs and run to safety. Safety at this moment is the creepy mansion in the distance.

I played as Jill (the easier of both choices), so Jill, Barry and Wesker made it to the mansion. Chris is missing. You go with Barry and Wesker heads off somewhere on his own. When you return to the rendezvous point, Wesker is missing and Barry (after stating how massive this mansion is), suggests splitting up. Amazing.

From here, you head off on your own and there are only sporadic appearances of Barry, Wesker, Chris and a bunch of side characters. The cool part is that you can get certain cutscenes depending on where you go at which point in time, and your actions and how quick you do things can impact whether some of them survive.

Other than this though, character development in the game is practically nonexistent and the story doesn't go anywhere outside of what nearly every gamer in the world knows anyway. There is a virus turning people into zombies.

Cutscenes are kept very short and most of the backstory is told through logs you find here and there. Whenever there are cutscenes, such as you finding Barry a bunch of times, you just listen to some of the WORST dialogue in video game history for 30 seconds, get given a nice gift and move on. Plot twists are not done very well, character motivations are questionable and it's all just hilariously bad. My favorites.

"What the hell is this thing?" "I found Kenneth killed by this thing." or

"Who would do this to him?" "I don't know, but I'm gonna find out what did this to him"

It's just the stiffest dialogue you could ever imagine. I didn't get tears from laughing, but the voice acting and dialogue might singlehandedly bring me to play the original, because I watched the opening of that and oh my god, that's just art right there.

GAMEPLAY | 16/20

Again, outside of the issues of backtracking, I pretty much got no complaints. Well, outside of one. The issue is that these complaints go hand in hand and can be a pretty big deal depending on what kind of player you are.

That other point is Inventory Management. If you play as Jill, you have eight spots. Every item takes up one spot, outside of daggers and the stun gun. This means key items, literal keys and every weapon and ammo type uses up a space. The lighter and kerosene needed to light zombies on fire use up two spaces too. They are very useful but I never used them because I couldn't really afford to.

If you choose Chris, it's even worse: You only have six slots. Six! Include your handgun, ammo and a healing item and one key that you always have one you for 80% of the game and you only have two slots remaining. Find a healing item on your way? Great, now you can only pick up one key item and on you go to the storage room.

I think the inventory management part of the game has its merits, but I think this is a bit too excessive here. I don't know how Resi 2 and 3 handled it, but I imagine they came to the same conclusion and gave the player more space.

Outside of this, the game is pure survival horror fun. You are in this gigantic mansion, trapped and alone, and need to use your wits and your survival instincts to get out in one piece. There are many zombies to fight (or avoid, if you're smart), dozens and dozens of rooms to check, hundreds of key and resource items to find and many puzzles to solve. As you get more comfortable, thinking ahead and creating routes to destinations becomes important to avoid as many fights as possible and preserve that precious ammo. The loop is fantastic, and it works great.

As there are so many rooms, another big difficulty becomes figuring out where you saw certain things that you know you need to go to to put this key item in that you just found. Making notes will surely help, or really paying attention to where important looking things are. Playing this for an hour or two once a week might make progression even more difficult for this reason.

You can either use the new controls which lets you move around with only one restriction: When you aim, you can't move. Outside of that, you can turn on the spot and have lots of freedom, while the classic tank controls mean you gotta tuuuuuuurn to move the opposite way, which I'm sure is not all that fun.

Shooting is restrictive because when you aim, you can only point straight, up or down. Since headshots are very useful (you don't need to put zombies on fire if you incapacitate them), it's frustrating to not just be able to aim at their head. You need to let them get real close for upwards aim to do the trick, or be lucky and have a body shot trigger a headshot.

Puzzles are actually very straigthforward for almost the entire game and only very slightly cryptic, which is nice. You do think a little bit here and there but I never had any trouble.

Enemy types are on the lower end. Normal zombies are commonplace, but they turn into steroid-versions of themselves (don't remember the canon name) and get massive claws, if you don't incapacitate them in their normal zombie form or burn them after killing them normally. These stronger versions also take more damage to kill, making passing through their area a danger to both health and resources.

Then there are crows and wasps which you can mostly avoid, as well as dogs which are a pain in the butt (as per usual for enemy dogs in games). The game introduces some other enemies later on, but these are your primary opponents.

Overall, there is a great game here. The remake did clearly not change much about the gameplay loop here, which allows me to say that for 1996's standards, the loop feels really good and creative. For their first try at this, Capcom obviously therefore didn't perfectly balance everything out (in my opinion), and so I'm looking forward to see how that improves in the sequels, if Capcom felt the same way about this as me.

MUSIC/SOUND/VOICE | 10/10

There is mainly ambient music here, and it fits really well. There is different music playing for different rooms, and then there are many areas with no music and just you, the environmental sounds and your character's footsteps, which is an eerie silence that I always enjoy in games like these. Resident Evil does not have a soundtrack that a normal human being will listen to outside of this game, but within the game it is perfect.

GRAPHICS/ART DESIGN | 9/10

I played the 2014 version, which has great background and environmental design to add a lot to all the locations you visit in the game. That's the most striking difference compared to the original (after the increased resolution of course) and while I prefer it, the simplicity of the original (which mainly has interactable objects as part of the background) has me very intrigued as well. Enemy design is very good and visuals overall look very good to this day. I can't say it couldn't profit from the modern Resi Remake treatment, but it will age very well in its current state too.

ATMOSPHERE/IMMERSION | 10/10

Horror games rarely ever scare me. If they accomplish this, it will be due to a jump scare or, like in this game's case, through great game design. This is truly survival horror, where you live on the edge of survival at all times. Limited resources, limited saves and lots (but not too many) of dangers. Each decision can be fatal, which is why I was on the edge of my seat throughout (and I played on EASY). Usually, I have enough ammo or have an auto save close enough to put me at ease, and while those games can accomplish dread just as well, Resident Evil is one of the earliest games to ever do it for me.

CONTENT | 9/10

The sheer volume of content in this game is impressive. You have your 15 hour normal playthrough. Then you have your second 15 hour playthrough with a different character and some different cutscenes, as well as a change in items. Jill has the lockpick, Chris has the lighter. Chris can take more hits but Jill gets a grenade launcher and improved shotgun. There is a clear easier route, but both worth playing. Then there are the different outcomes and endings based on who you manage to save.

The only issue with the content is that 15 hour playthroughs include about 5 hours of backtracking and door opening, which can drag down the experience depending on your preferences. That said, your second playthrough should be a few hours shorter since you know where to find everything at that point.

LEVEL/MISSION DESIGN | 8/10

They have done a great job at the survival horror gameplay loop, but I can't say I felt like the level design was perfect in this. I'd argue there are a few too many doors and a little too much backtracking with not enough interconnectivity in my opinion. Otherwise, great.

CONCEPT/INNOVATION | 9/10

Resident Evil made survival horror mainstream and even helped bring zombies back to pop culture. This type of game was done before in a much simpler form, which keeps me from giving it a full 10, but the impact of Resident Evil cannot be understated.

REPLAYABILITY | 5/5

Two characters, lots of different cutscenes and outcomes, and a number of challenge runs you are asked to do for 100% completion makes this a very replayable game. I mean look at this. Beat it in 5 hours, beat it in 3 hours, beat it with no saves, beat it with no saves ... I've got no chance, but for people who dare, this is great.

PLAYABILITY | 5/5

Works well at all times.

OVERALL | 86/100

Resident Evil is one of the best games I've played as part of this challenge and has rightfully started a major franchise that spread to a bunch of different media over the years. Not all done with the name ended up being good, but the original sure was. It made me realize that I truly do love survival horror, though I'm also not the biggest survival horror nut considering my thoughts about all the backtracking. A game that is a mix of this and Resident Evil 4's focus on action feels like it could be insane. Perhaps Resident Evil 2 Remake is that game, I will see soon enough.

(This is the 118th game in my challenge to go through many known games in chronological order starting in 1990. The spreadsheet/blog is in my bio.)

I've spent the past two months or so playing Super Mario RPG whenever I got the time since I'm currently spending a semester abroad. Finding the time to sit down and play this has always been a treat because Super Mario RPG is such an easy going, chill and funny video game. It should probably be in every Top 10, if not Top 5 SNES RPG list out there, and is definitely one of the best starting points to RPGs for newcomers, if the Mario setting sounds interesting to you.

The story is that there is something called the Star Road, where wishes are fulfilled. One day, when Mario once again goes to Bowsers Castle to rescue Princess Toadstool, a massive sword falls down from the sky and onto Bowser's Castle. The sword tears through the Star Road and scatters seven star pieces throughout the land, and it is Mario's job to collect them to repair the Star Road. You get the help of companions like Bowser and Princess Toadstool, but also two characters that I think are new to the Mario universe in Mallow and Geno.

The story is rather simple and character development, while there for Mallow and Geno, happens pretty quickly when they get their moments and isn't at all fleshed out, which makes sense considering the game is aimed primarily towards young gamers. Still, you got a wholesome party to support you on your journey, and that makes for a chill time almost throughout.

I say almost because like all RPGs of its time, Super Mario RPG requires you to grind for levels at certain points. At least that has to be the case, as I literally couldn't get past a certain fight against the Axem Rangers very far into the game. For a game like this where progression is otherwise very easy, this was a shame. Because the thing with Super Mario RPG is that it is not just a simple RPG in terms of knowing where to go, the low number of items and skills to keep track of or the battle difficulty for 90% of fights. It's also lacking in combat depth, so it would have just been tedious for me to go back and grind for an hour or two to get past the Axem Rangers, only to probably be in a similar position with even later bosses. Additionally, while the game has a parry-timing feature, in that you need to press the A button right when you are attacked to reduce or null damage, a lot of attacks by tougher bosses are unblockable, and I feel like focusing more on the timing would have resulted in a better flow. That said, whenever the parry-timing was usable, I had fun with it and as someone who loved that in the South Park RPGs, I was happy to see the feature appear here.

The soundtrack includes great tunes and remixes and the map design overall is solid. My favorite part about the game has to be the constant mini games and challenges the game throws at you to keep things varied. They added a lot to the humor often times too.

Overall, I'm definitely keen on playing the remake of this some day and I enjoyed my time with it. It's just a shame that I didn't see the necessity to grind coming. As someone who falls victim to this many times when playing (old-school) RPGs, I didn't expect the original Super Mario RPG to have any grinding included as well, but whether you see this as a bad thing will obviously be a subjective opinion. I'm thinking the remake is more lax in that regard, and considering that it seems very faithful to the original, I don't think there is much reason to track down the original anymore. Unless you'd like to emulate over paying for the full remake, in which case the original certainly holds up well.