From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action


Remember "Heretic 2"? Maybe not. This sequel to Raven's fantasy FPS
branched off from the main games and, thanks to licensing snafus, is a
'lost game' that hasn't been on the market for decades. Released in
1998, it took the series in an entirely new direction --it became a third-person shooter/brawler with more focus on platforming-- but it's
highly regarded by the few who've actually played it.

As mentioned, "Heretic 2" is no longer available for sale and its
source-code is locked behind the usual corporate firewalls, so its
audience is fairly small. It was also designed in an era when
Windows95 was the dominant OS and 3DFX was the preferred video-card,
so even if you get your hands on it, actually getting it to run can be
a challenge.

Fortunately, one of the game's more dedicated fans has worked to
resolve the latter issue with a sourceport of the game that adds
widescreen support, various cosmetic improvements, HUD scaling,
speedier loads and a bunch of other stuff. "Heretic 2;' utilized the
Quake 2 engine, which doubtlessly helped, but it's still a monumental
and impressive task.

The mod, available at GitHub, still requires you to own an original
version of the game (good luck with that!) but otherwise is fairly
easy to install; it's just a matter of dropping the new files into the
folder and away you go.


I've fond memories of "Heretic 2". Its colorful lighting effects (and
so much lens flare; it was a very 90s game!) were gorgeous, and its
gameplay loop was solid. The world-design was well done, and there was
a lot of polish put into the product (I may also be a bit biased since
I knew one of the level designers). It was a game I played repeatedly
over the years, before the difficulties of getting it to run made it
more chore than joy. So I'm thrilled to see it getting another chance
to shine.


Get the mod here:
https://github.com/m-x-d/Heretic2R


Did you play the original? Do you have as fond memories of it as I do?
Are you going to give the mod a shot?

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

Remember "Heretic 2"? Maybe not.

I can only dimly recall playing the demo for either Hexen or Heretic (looking at gameplay now I have no idea which it was, they're very similar looking, but probably heretic) and the maze-like looking for keys gameplay
was just like doom and did not interest me, and that's as far as I got with either :( Wonder what the hangup is on making them available again.

rms

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 18:42:50 -0600, "rms" <rmsmoo@moomoo.net> said
this thing:

Remember "Heretic 2"? Maybe not.

I can only dimly recall playing the demo for either Hexen or Heretic
(looking at gameplay now I have no idea which it was, they're very similar >looking, but probably heretic) and the maze-like looking for keys gameplay >was just like doom and did not interest me, and that's as far as I got with >either :( Wonder what the hangup is on making them available again.

Hexen (and Hexen 2) were more traditional first-person shooters. You
saw everything through the eyes of your chosen avatar and, really, the
only thing you saw of your character was his or her hands. "Heretic 2"
was a third-person game, more akin to "Tomb Raider".

While both games suffered somewhat from maze-like design (it was the
90s, after all), the "Hexen" games were far worse in this regard. Both
"Hexen" games suffered from 'push button here, random door opens
elsewhere' syndrome, while "Heretic 2" was a bit more transparent
about what you needed to do.

On the other hand, "Heretic 2" was much more about platforming. Which
--being a third-person game-- was far more bearable than when "Doom"
or "Heretic" or "Hexen" tried the same thing... but it still felt a
little klutzy compared to some of its contemporaries.

From what I understand, the reason "Heretic 2" never got a re-release
was that for a long time the licensing was hung-up between different publishers. The "Heretic" license was owned by Id games, it was
developed by Raven, and published by Activision. It also never really
captured an audience either, largely because people expected a
first-person shooter based on the license and --especially back in the
90s-- were more stubbon about broadening their gaming horizons. So it
was a game that never sold that well caught between multiple owners,
and thus there was little effort to get it back onto digital
storefronts.

Of course, nowadays there's more interest in retro-gaming, and Id,
Raven and Activision are all owned by Microsoft so it's possible the
game might see an 'official' revival. In the meantime, there's
Heretic2R.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 3/30/2026 7:23 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 18:42:50 -0600, "rms" <rmsmoo@moomoo.net> said
this thing:

Remember "Heretic 2"? Maybe not.

I can only dimly recall playing the demo for either Hexen or Heretic
(looking at gameplay now I have no idea which it was, they're very similar >> looking, but probably heretic) and the maze-like looking for keys gameplay >> was just like doom and did not interest me, and that's as far as I got with >> either :( Wonder what the hangup is on making them available again.

Hexen (and Hexen 2) were more traditional first-person shooters. You
saw everything through the eyes of your chosen avatar and, really, the
only thing you saw of your character was his or her hands. "Heretic 2"
was a third-person game, more akin to "Tomb Raider".

While both games suffered somewhat from maze-like design (it was the
90s, after all), the "Hexen" games were far worse in this regard. Both "Hexen" games suffered from 'push button here, random door opens
elsewhere' syndrome, while "Heretic 2" was a bit more transparent
about what you needed to do.

On the other hand, "Heretic 2" was much more about platforming. Which
--being a third-person game-- was far more bearable than when "Doom"
or "Heretic" or "Hexen" tried the same thing... but it still felt a
little klutzy compared to some of its contemporaries.

From what I understand, the reason "Heretic 2" never got a re-release
was that for a long time the licensing was hung-up between different publishers. The "Heretic" license was owned by Id games, it was
developed by Raven, and published by Activision. It also never really captured an audience either, largely because people expected a
first-person shooter based on the license and --especially back in the
90s-- were more stubbon about broadening their gaming horizons. So it
was a game that never sold that well caught between multiple owners,
and thus there was little effort to get it back onto digital
storefronts.

Of course, nowadays there's more interest in retro-gaming, and Id,
Raven and Activision are all owned by Microsoft so it's possible the
game might see an 'official' revival. In the meantime, there's
Heretic2R.

Hexen is a sequel to heretic, so should really be Heretic 2, and of
course Hexen 2 a sequel to Hexen, so should really be Heretic 3. But
Heretic 2 is a sequel to Heretic too, but really a sequel to Hexen 2
since it came out after, so should really be Heretic 4. Confused yet? I am.

Pretty sure I only ever played Heretic and Hexen, not #2 of either.
Oddly the screenshots of Heretic 2 look like the graphics is worse than
either Hexen game.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Mon, 30 Mar 2026 18:51:08 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
said this thing:

Hexen is a sequel to heretic, so should really be Heretic 2, and of
course Hexen 2 a sequel to Hexen, so should really be Heretic 3. But >Heretic 2 is a sequel to Heretic too, but really a sequel to Hexen 2
since it came out after, so should really be Heretic 4. Confused yet? I am.

They both are the sequel.

The original "Heretic" told the story of Corvus fighting the first
Serpent Rider, one of three extra-dimensional wizards who had
conquered multiple worlds.

"Hexen" and "Hexen 2" then followed the fight against the Serpent
Riders with different protagonists (Baratus the Fighter / Parias the
Cleric / Daedalon the mage in "Hexen", and the unnamed Paladin /
Necromancer / Crusader / Assassin in "Hexen 2". So it is the sequel in
that it follows up the _plot_ to the first game.

"Heretic 2", on the other hand, continues the story of Corvus who,
after being lost in the otherworld following his battles in the first
game, returns home to discover that an undead(ish) plague has struck
down his homeland, and his quest is to figure out the cause. The
Serpent Riders don't appear in the game. So "Heretic 2" is the sequel
because it follows up the _character and setting_ of the first game.

It's all quite clear ;-)

Pretty sure I only ever played Heretic and Hexen, not #2 of either.
Oddly the screenshots of Heretic 2 look like the graphics is worse than >either Hexen game.

Obviously it is all subjective, but between the two I'd rather play
this game: https://www.oldgamehermit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/heretic2_5.jpg
over this one: https://cdn.mobygames.com/screenshots/16927545-hexen-ii-macintosh-crossbow-and-pillars.png

And as much as I adore the first Hexen (and think its one of the
best-looking Doom-clones of its era), there's a significant difference
between its flat sprites of that game and the 3D-models of the later
titles. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%2Fid%2FOIP._Pi7S6u0acOaiq8fFrLzcAHaEo%3Fpid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=d00eed9fbc1f509c94cf1a1c5992d3896d14855655f60870a78e80182c760f86&ipo=images

But maybe I'm just a sucker for colored lighting effects, and "Heretic
2" had that in bucketfuls ;-)


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 3/30/2026 6:51 PM, Justisaur wrote:

Hexen is a sequel to heretic, so should really be Heretic 2, and of
course Hexen 2 a sequel to Hexen, so should really be Heretic 3.  But Heretic 2 is a sequel to Heretic too, but really a sequel to Hexen 2
since it came out after, so should really be Heretic 4. Confused yet?  I am.

You put too much effort into that. ;)
--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 3/31/2026 8:26 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Mon, 30 Mar 2026 18:51:08 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
said this thing:

Hexen is a sequel to heretic, so should really be Heretic 2, and of
course Hexen 2 a sequel to Hexen, so should really be Heretic 3. But
Heretic 2 is a sequel to Heretic too, but really a sequel to Hexen 2
since it came out after, so should really be Heretic 4. Confused yet? I am.

They both are the sequel.

The original "Heretic" told the story of Corvus fighting the first
Serpent Rider, one of three extra-dimensional wizards who had
conquered multiple worlds.

"Hexen" and "Hexen 2" then followed the fight against the Serpent
Riders with different protagonists (Baratus the Fighter / Parias the
Cleric / Daedalon the mage in "Hexen", and the unnamed Paladin /
Necromancer / Crusader / Assassin in "Hexen 2". So it is the sequel in
that it follows up the _plot_ to the first game.

"Heretic 2", on the other hand, continues the story of Corvus who,
after being lost in the otherworld following his battles in the first
game, returns home to discover that an undead(ish) plague has struck
down his homeland, and his quest is to figure out the cause. The
Serpent Riders don't appear in the game. So "Heretic 2" is the sequel
because it follows up the _character and setting_ of the first game.

It's all quite clear ;-)

Pretty sure I only ever played Heretic and Hexen, not #2 of either.
Oddly the screenshots of Heretic 2 look like the graphics is worse than
either Hexen game.

Obviously it is all subjective, but between the two I'd rather play
this game: https://www.oldgamehermit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/heretic2_5.jpg
over this one: https://cdn.mobygames.com/screenshots/16927545-hexen-ii-macintosh-crossbow-and-pillars.png

I don't know what it is, saturation, or maybe I can see the awful
character model, but Heretic 2 looks more cartoony to me, I don't like
it. There's no enemies or effects going on in that Hexen 2 picture to
really compare.

It took me a lot of time to find anything in Hexen 2 that wasn't
punching or swinging a sword. Necromancer summoning stuff and using
what looked to still be a crossbow, though it shot exploding trios a
fire. Didn't look anywhere near good as the cherry picked pictures I
saw. I looked up some Hexen 2 combat as well and it's a lot more
glowing magic slow bullets. *shrug* they both look so dated now, it
doesn't really matter to me.

And as much as I adore the first Hexen (and think its one of the
best-looking Doom-clones of its era), there's a significant difference between its flat sprites of that game and the 3D-models of the later
titles. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%2Fid%2FOIP._Pi7S6u0acOaiq8fFrLzcAHaEo%3Fpid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=d00eed9fbc1f509c94cf1a1c5992d3896d14855655f60870a78e80182c760f86&ipo=images

O.k. yeah, that's pretty bad, but it's good for a Doom clone.

But maybe I'm just a sucker for colored lighting effects, and "Heretic
2" had that in bucketfuls ;-)

Possibly.
--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2