ESR - (Archive) Quake 4: Players Respond To CPL Quake 3

<< Comment #1 @ 04:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Corpsegrinder

Slasher is king !!!
Someone major this,biotch !

Edited by Larvi at 04:42 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #2 @ 04:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Fortress

next person asking 100 people?

<< Comment #7 @ 05:15 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nellie - Reply to #2

=)

Props to Slasher, gotfrag pay him to paste these irc logs.

<< Comment #206 @ 15:49 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Fortress - Reply to #7

OH WAIT 26 IS THE LIMIT HAHAAHA
SHATTERING NEWS FOR THE REMAIMING..

<< Comment #3 @ 04:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

umayr

yeah GTV is it :) without GTV duelling would've died off anyway...

<< Comment #4 @ 04:59 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

meat man

GotSlasher?

<< Comment #208 @ 15:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Fortress - Reply to #4

no [+] this time Mojo =)

<< Comment #5 @ 05:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Amp

If a CPL Quake 3 stop interferes with a WSVG or another event's Quake 4 stop, which would you choose, and why?

Anton 'mouz.Cooller' Singov: It's not an important factor for me. I'll go to all the tournaments.

[+]

....Oh wait it's GotFrag...

Edited by Amp at 05:03 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #9 @ 05:25 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #5

haha best cooller reply ever...

although I think he misunderstood the question :>

<< Comment #34 @ 06:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sock - Reply to #9

No, you misunderstand his reply.

Traversing time and space is no problem for cooller.

61%

<< Comment #35 @ 06:44 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #34

:)))))))

<< Comment #54 @ 07:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

wch - Reply to #34

ahahaha [+]

<< Comment #61 @ 07:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cholie - Reply to #34

^_^ lol

<< Comment #88 @ 09:47 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #34

cooller is the chuck norris of the computer age!

Edited by BlindGuardian at 09:47 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #109 @ 10:44 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

OrangeChef - Reply to #88

coollers' awsom

<< Comment #143 @ 11:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sudstah - Reply to #88

and the peter crouch

<< Comment #233 @ 17:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #143

nope, because cooller is not ugly :>

Edited by BlindGuardian at 17:13 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #235 @ 17:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sudstah - Reply to #233

where u looking

<< Comment #6 @ 05:08 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

r4nger

CPL came up with all those 85-90% figures but after reading this article and some other opinions it seems like the pro community (those who actually attend lans and not just forum surf) are pretty much split between Quake 4 and Quake 3.

Edited by r4nger at 05:08 UTC, 25 July 2006

2%

<< Comment #8 @ 05:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nellie - Reply to #6

You're making out "those that attend lans" opinion counts more - it doesn't. The players are looking after their best interest...

<< Comment #72 @ 08:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

therogue - Reply to #8

and those voting for Q3 aren't?

how many people voting for Q3 are those who aren't on top of Q4?

<< Comment #76 @ 08:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nellie - Reply to #72

When did I say that?

<< Comment #79 @ 09:01 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

therogue - Reply to #76

you didn't, sorry, kneejerk

<< Comment #11 @ 05:35 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #6

you need to keep in mind that most of the players asked here are current _Quake 4_ professionals. I know many of them have a past in Quake 3, but for Q4 pros it's easier to just continue playing Q4 than having to adapt yet againt to a different game. Also many of them have had more success in Q4 and hence feel their own chances are better in Q4 (= more $$$?).

Top Q3 players like zamuz or daler, for example weren't asked. Nor was less known Q3 players like unity or prox who can compete with the best today in Q3. If you asked on a more general basis, you would probably get answers more akin to the CPL stastistics. But when you go out and ask current Q4 professionals 50/50 is actually pretty good (or bad, depending on your perspective).

Then you have all the casual players who are also eager spectators and prefer Q3 because of GTV and MVD etc.

Anyway, I know plenty of Q3 players who have shown interest in competing in CPL who are not on that list. And some of them could do quite well in my opinion.

Edited by Zeicon at 05:43 UTC, 25 July 2006

39%

<< Comment #14 @ 05:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

r4nger - Reply to #11

"Also many of them have had more success in Q4 and hence feel their own chances are better in Q4 (= more $$$?)."

Doesnt that apply to the Quake 3 players who play Quake 4 with less success compared to their Q3 past? Those Quake 3 players want Q3 back because Q3=easier$$$ for them.

Edited by r4nger at 05:45 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #23 @ 06:04 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #14

yes, but there are certainly more of the former in this list...

Players who had more succes in Q3 than Q4 and want to play Q3.. uhm... fazz was perhaps more succesful in Q3 and he wants Q3, but he also says he doesn't plan to compete... hmm, impulse, was he more succesful in Q3? Don't think so actually. And socrates was about equally succesful in both, if not more succesful in Q4... so...

Edited by Zeicon at 06:19 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #24 @ 06:13 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #23

quake4 does not have the tactical depth of quake3

7%

<< Comment #25 @ 06:15 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #24

woah! where did that come from?

I mean, I don't see how it fits into this discussion? Was it just a sidenote or? :>

Edited by Zeicon at 19:51 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #29 @ 06:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #25

well quake4 is pretty much entirely an aim game, seeing as shafting isnt hard, same as railing, explains toxics larger success in quake4 which was what i was trying to say i guess,
its early leave me alone :P

<< Comment #32 @ 06:38 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #29

ah, yea I did write that I thought Q4 fits toxic's style better, I just edited it out again...

so ye, your reply was probably aimed at that...

Edited by Zeicon at 06:39 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #53 @ 07:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #32

precisely what it was aimed at...

<< Comment #156 @ 13:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #29

but somehow it doesn't explain why you and other aim-whiners aren't top players? Because if it was that easy... *rolleyes*

<< Comment #172 @ 14:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #156

this isnt about me being a top player or not, its about watching good games, and theres more to good games then aim. quake4 battles are boring to watch.

<< Comment #178 @ 14:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #172

no offense, but if your main argument is how easy it is to play Q4, I would expect you to be a top Q4 player. To be honest I don't even think Cooller considers Q4 easy to play. That you don't think Q4 is exciting to watch simply tells me you're a stubborn observator.

<< Comment #215 @ 16:05 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ix - Reply to #178

Checkers is a really easy game to play, are you the Checkers world champion? No? It must be so hard to play!

<< Comment #241 @ 17:58 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #178

i never said quake 4 was easier, but only that it is far less of a tactical game than q3, and is therefore a whole lot less interesting to watch imo.

<< Comment #254 @ 18:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #241

"but only that it is far less of a tactical game than q3"
If so, could that be maybe because Q3 is like 12 times older? The price you pay for Q3's advanced level, is that more things have already been tried and done.

<< Comment #261 @ 19:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #254

the awesome stuff was there from the beginning...it may have gotten even better with time, but quake 4 didnt have that sparkle from the start and i dont believe you can make something good out of something with such a bad core, in this case the engine

<< Comment #265 @ 19:10 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #261

I have played many games online, clan-level, and every single one has changed vastly over the years, to find a more central core towards the end. If you're saying Q3 was at the same level where it is now, 6 years ago, I would say you were lying. But the chances are you are just too blinded by nostalgia.

<< Comment #266 @ 19:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #265

"the awesome stuff was there from the beginning...it may have gotten even better with time"

i just said that the players were of a higher skill later on, but i also say that even the early on matches were really great to watch, not something that can be said of many Q4 matches

<< Comment #274 @ 19:36 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #266

I have been at ESWC with a whole room of CS/TrackMania/ProSoccer fans cheering excitedly for a Q4 game. I have made threads linking the ITG casts of the Covlan Q4 finals to RTS players, and they loved it. Q4 is a great spectator sport. - gg

<< Comment #284 @ 21:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #274

maybe they just enjoy the concept and would love quake3 deathmatch even more...

<< Comment #298 @ 09:54 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #284

Maybe. But imo it's got old graphics, it's too fast for "non-quakers", etc. You know how "stupid" an audience like that is? It was hard enough to get people to applaud simple details like good rails etc, they mostly responded to frags alone. Q3 would be very irrelevant to the general public in so many ways .

<< Comment #311 @ 15:44 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #298

im sure most people that are new to football only react to goals at first, but as they keep watching, they will spot good passes, nice dribbles etc, just because they are new to the genre doesnt mean they wont ever get it...

<< Comment #281 @ 20:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

AK - Reply to #29

my q3 shaft seemed better than my q4 shaft, my q4 rail is better than my q3 rail though

<< Comment #15 @ 05:45 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

wviperw - Reply to #11

"Top Q3 players like zamuz or daler, for example weren't asked."

I'm guessing they weren't asked because it'd be silly to ask Q3 or Q4 when they were never really Q4 players. Of course Q3-only players are going to say Q3. :)

But I still see your point.

<< Comment #21 @ 05:58 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #15

well you also have players on this list who never played Q3 seriously (mind you, both zamuz and daler have played Q4 casually) =)

Scooby, for example, was a Q2 player that never really switched to Q3. Pretty obvious why he wants Q4 and not Q3.

Edited by Zeicon at 06:43 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #219 @ 16:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #6

too bad is all about making the WT accesable to the whole GAMING community and not the whole PRO community

~edit: sorry my reply is irrelevant to your post, assumed too much, i missunderstood :E

Edited by sphinx at 16:14 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #10 @ 05:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cumrag

lol at the esr people who also have gotfrag accounts. (referring to the comments section)

<< Comment #207 @ 15:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Corpsegrinder - Reply to #10

Slasher forced me 8(

<< Comment #12 @ 05:35 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xfoo

(edit) clamp-ok - "the polls put up by the CPL were just a justification for them picking Quake 3."

Whoa, community votes as justification for what game to use? DEAR JESUS - WHY ARE THEY LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY?!?!

Edited by xfoo at 08:01 UTC, 25 July 2006

3%

<< Comment #119 @ 11:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zr0 - Reply to #12

I'm pretty sure hes right.. well possibly.

Edited by zr0 at 11:33 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #129 @ 11:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #119

well maybe we should stop being so cynical... it seems like whenever the CPL makes a decision that doesn't favor the community we whine like spanked pigs, and then when they do listen, we shout "PUBLICITY STUNT!"

it's like a fucking parody...

<< Comment #199 @ 15:20 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #129

It is a publicity stunt. Angel Munoz only listens to hard cash, so there must be some sponsors picking on him to go another way than Q4. As for the vote, it IS a justification of choosing it. Whether or not it is a bad decision I don't know, but this might mean that UT07 won't be ready (or won't be taken into consideration) before the 07-season has started.

And PLEASE, please, please don't give me a shitload of words about the fact that Munoz (who practically IS CPL) is listening to the community. Please! I've been following the CPL (CS mostly) through the last 4 years, and I have seen nothing that would indicate that.

<< Comment #263 @ 19:08 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #199

i think this is more about managing to fill their regional events, you know, the ones they signed all those partnerships in all those countries for. with quake 4, the turnout to these events would be VERY VERY low, 10 gamers isnt enough, to attract serious publicity, or to make it worthwhile running the tourney, especially if most of them are signed up as a joke. With quake 3 however, the amount of serious participation and also casual participation will be significantly larger, which is good for the spectators, the sponsors, and the tournament organisers. we will see by the end of the year i guess

Edited by thelawenforcer at 19:11 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #13 @ 05:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon

This chance fellow seems like he has been living in a box. MVD & multiarena = cpma.

<< Comment #16 @ 05:46 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

wviperw - Reply to #13

Hah, yeah that's what I was thinking.

<< Comment #17 @ 05:49 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

r4nger - Reply to #13

Well if the CPL were to follow another community vote, chances are that OSP would be the chosen mod. OSP does not have MVD support.

<< Comment #18 @ 05:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #17

I highly doubt they would do a community vote about the platform they want to see vq3 (I can't see them using cpm but I'd love to) played on. It would be stupid to ask the zealots if they want to use their obsolete platform instead of the new and shiny cpma.

/Pushpabon - the deliberately elitist, aggressive pro-cpma asshat, albeit friendly at times.

<< Comment #19 @ 05:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

r4nger - Reply to #18

The entire Quake community is a bunch of zealots. It's either pro-Q4 or pro-Q3, pro-OSP or pro-CPMA, pro-Q4MAX or pro-XBM, etc, etc.

<< Comment #22 @ 05:59 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #19

Well I don't want to hijack this topic to be another cpma vs. osp war, unless you insist, so I'll just recommend you to read hoony's & son's articles to see why it's only logical to choose cpma. =)

edit: of course I'm not implying you're a brainless zealot believing in something religiously, holding an unchangeable opinion or "fact".

Edited by Pushpabon at 06:04 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #31 @ 06:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #22

It will be CPMA VQ3, not CPMA CPM as advocated by hooney and son!.

<< Comment #39 @ 06:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dosman - Reply to #31

http://www.caleague.com/?division=q3ce

CAL currently uses Quake 3 v1.32c with CPMA 1.33.

CAL will be using a 5 map rotation. The available maps include:

cpm1a
cpm3a
cpm15
cpm22
cpm24

One could say that the information above might suggest that CPMA CPM will be used at the CPL.

edit: We need more acronyms, Q3A CPMA CPM 1V1 is not enough.

Edited by dosman at 06:57 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #42 @ 07:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #39

well, as a member of the CPL committee, one could argue that I know more than you do =)

<< Comment #43 @ 07:04 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #42

so then it's gonna be CPMA VQ3 for sure? ;)

<< Comment #44 @ 07:05 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #43

the official announcement should come today (tuesday)...

<< Comment #45 @ 07:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #44

great.

<< Comment #46 @ 07:08 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dosman - Reply to #44

So how come the CAL isn't using the same game as the CPL? Or are they both going to use VQ3?

<< Comment #47 @ 07:09 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #46

afaik VQ3 is also planned for CAL.

<< Comment #48 @ 07:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dosman - Reply to #47

Seems like a strange selection of maps to use since they are made for cpma gameplay(?) and not vq3(?).

<< Comment #49 @ 07:14 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #48

what makes you think we won't have a different map selection for VQ3?

<< Comment #57 @ 07:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cumrag - Reply to #49

he doesn't think. anyways, i look forward to that announcement \o/

<< Comment #86 @ 09:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Bob - Reply to #49

if the CPL is clever theyll pick real CPMA not this VQ3 stuff and not OSP. its fast paced, its exciting matches, its MVD, its new life in the Q3 pro scene, its more of an equal opportunity to those who havent played for 7 years

<< Comment #78 @ 09:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Cobs - Reply to #44

CPMA VQ3 would be a bad choice as the community will not switch to it.

Either CPMA CPM or OSP VQ3 and I hope the CPL was reading some parts of the "discussions" we had.

Edited by Cobs at 09:01 UTC, 25 July 2006

1%

<< Comment #117 @ 10:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dansen - Reply to #78

i would switch.
i honestly don't care, as long as there isn't this crazy movement, that tries to imitate qw, but just doesn't get it.

<< Comment #63 @ 08:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xfoo - Reply to #42

you mean "as a biased member of the committee who refuses to even consider cpma" :)

Edited by xfoo at 08:03 UTC, 25 July 2006

25%

<< Comment #74 @ 08:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #63

What the fuck do you mean I refuse to consider CPMA? Not only have I considered CPMA thoroughly, but If you look at our committee forums, you will see that I _VOTED_ for CPMA. Not CPMA CPM, but CPMA VQ3.

Here is the thread:

http://forums.thecpl.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?u...7;t=000032

and here is my quotation from that thread:

I also think CPMA VQ3 is the way to go.

Edited by Zeicon at 09:01 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #87 @ 09:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #74

I think he meant to write CPM.. I might be wrong though. By the way, the link gives error.. access denied or something and I have an account :-((((((

Edited by Pushpabon at 09:45 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #97 @ 10:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #87

You can't view the thread because it's on our closed committee forum.

<< Comment #104 @ 10:37 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #97

Why bother with the link if like 2 from the whole ESR userbase can see it? :-/

<< Comment #105 @ 10:38 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #104

I wasn't replying to you with the link, was I? I was replying to xfoo with the link. Maybe that means the link was for him? =)

<< Comment #107 @ 10:41 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #105

I CAN STILL SEE THE LINK! UNFAIR!!!!11

<< Comment #202 @ 15:29 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Cheese Thief - Reply to #97

Really? For some reason it let me in just fine

<< Comment #253 @ 18:33 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xfoo - Reply to #74

cpma the gametype, not the mod.

<< Comment #270 @ 19:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #253

If the CPM folks had some really good arguments as to why their gametype is the best, then I might change my mind. But I haven't seen any really good arguments; the arguments usually come down to personal preference anyway. When the good arguments for using CPMA (as a mod) over OSP were brought up (MVD, netcode etc.) I realized, as an OSP player through 5 years, that CPMA was the way to go (so much for bias huh?). I haven't seen any such convincing arguments as to why CPM is better than VQ3 and I have played both. Simple as that.

Edited by Zeicon at 20:19 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #310 @ 14:44 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

paLmen - Reply to #270

Trying to prove that CPM is a good game to you is like trying to make Osama bin laden pro USA, it will never happend no mather what arguments you use.

<< Comment #312 @ 20:54 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #310

I already ACKNOWLEDGE CPM as a good game. A great game in fact. BUT I STILL PREFER VQ3

Just like you prefer CPM.

Geddit?

<< Comment #151 @ 12:37 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Krz - Reply to #39

edit: We need more acronyms, Q3A CPMA CPM 1V1 is not enough.

Q3CC1 FTW!!!!!! =P

1%

<< Comment #56 @ 07:36 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #31

Well both hoony and son make also points why CPMA as a PLATFORM should be used instead of OSP and that's what I was pointing at. While I truly want to see all the CPM pros in action I don't think it's possible in CPL tournaments as they/you seem to care more about VQ3 as you imply.

Edited by Pushpabon at 07:36 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #157 @ 13:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

bsk - Reply to #18

"It would be stupid to ask the zealots if they want to use their obsolete platform instead of the new and shiny cpma."

It would be stupid to ask the zealots if they want to use their obsolete platform instead of the new and shiny Quake 4.

<< Comment #229 @ 16:58 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #157

This new and shiny q4 is broken and crippled.

<< Comment #238 @ 17:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

bsk - Reply to #229

The q3 zealot has spoken!@#!@#! :P

<< Comment #20 @ 05:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Veritas_

CPL took no notice of request id soft:

Jul. 14, 2006 - Quake 4 1.3 Point Release Information

"...We've noticed several LAN and competitive events considering what games to use for their future events,
and we would encourage players and organizers to give 1.3 a try..."

Gross injustice.

I'm sure id will fix Q4 completely. Quake 3 was (is) a very very nice game (I played it for years both CPM and Vanilla Q3) but it is too late to bring it back. It is out of date and boring in 2006.

13%

<< Comment #26 @ 06:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

[_0m3N_]S1C - Reply to #20

i dont think you can ever fix quake 4 completelybecause it all comes down to the engine eventually. and the engine blomens

Edited by [_0m3N_]S1C at 06:16 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #27 @ 06:17 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Veritas_ - Reply to #26

Yes, of course they have it's source code too...

<< Comment #36 @ 06:45 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xgo - Reply to #27

yes everything can be done, but u got no idea how much work would be requiered

<< Comment #51 @ 07:23 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Veritas_ - Reply to #36

You can be sure that id will not throw away their latest engine into the trash can because of Raven crapped Q4 up ; )

<< Comment #146 @ 12:11 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Krz - Reply to #51

have any of the games made with the Doom3 engine been any good? not knocking id but I've not been impressed at all by the engine :p

<< Comment #149 @ 12:26 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #51

Yeah you're right id clearly showed that they were totally concerned how their latest engine was total trash after releasing Doom3 that they fixed the sound for their game that was released two years later.

Thank you for renewing my faith in id's ability to fix Quake4 in 1.3.

<< Comment #28 @ 06:19 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #20

all these people saying 1.3 will make q4 better than q3. i find it kinda funny cos they all have blind faith in this miracle patch that emphasised on a new gamemode and weapon buying system before anything else....uhuh and charles manson was the messiah...

<< Comment #37 @ 06:46 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Veritas_ - Reply to #28

"all these people saying 1.3 will make q4 better than q3"

It's not a necessary condition. It's enough If it will be as good as (or near) Q3 is

<< Comment #66 @ 08:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Gibble - Reply to #37

It's not enough, it should be _way_ better than a game made 5 years ago at least in some areas.

<< Comment #114 @ 10:49 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

eri - Reply to #37

Why would you even want to play a new game you yourself say is ok when its slightly worse than q3. Its truly mindboggling what people will force upon themselves just to say they play the new thing

4%

<< Comment #30 @ 06:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Space Cowboy - Reply to #20

Bah, I plussed instead of replying. -_-

I'm sure that my country's national debt will be paid too, but a lot of people are tired of waiting.

"Too late" works both ways.

Edited by Space Cowboy at 06:23 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #33 @ 06:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

grimpants - Reply to #20

Gross injustice.

Hah! Charging $89.95 for Quake4 is a gross injustice!

42%

<< Comment #38 @ 06:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

mkeiy - Reply to #33

haha, <3 [+]

<< Comment #62 @ 08:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cholie - Reply to #33

Huh? $89.95? Explain...

<< Comment #67 @ 08:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

boganman - Reply to #62

aussie dollars

<< Comment #68 @ 08:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cholie - Reply to #67

Yowwwwwwwwwwwwww $67 USD...

<< Comment #73 @ 08:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

neb - Reply to #68

and what state do you live in?

<< Comment #77 @ 08:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cholie - Reply to #73

PA.

Does it matter?

<< Comment #90 @ 09:49 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

neb - Reply to #77

no

<< Comment #94 @ 10:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Akuma - Reply to #33

Yeah.

<< Comment #41 @ 06:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #20

hey, even if they do fix everything that's wrong with q4 (bugs), is it really gonna be that different from using q3 unless they totally change its gameplay? imo, if the gameplay isn't very different, it would be better to use the tried and tested q3. people have access to the source code. maybe this would let the community add or change stuff (more than what is possible with a mod) in the game without having to wait for id software. i think there still are people who are willing to work on quake 3 and for some reason this makes me believe that q3 will continue to evolve.

quake 3 is cheaper and is less demanding on resources compared to q4. in my experience, most people would prefer to pay 10 bucks for a game rather than 50 for something that isn't too different. in a country like mine, it's still impossible for many people to play quake 4 online as it totally sucks with an upload of 128k and less. i doubt this will be fixed as it's not too much of a problem for people living in the states or europe however, it is limiting the growth of the game in many places. i just feel that if we want quake to stay, we need to create another cs and for this, q3 seems to be a better choice.

Edited by ashr at 06:59 UTC, 25 July 2006

9%

<< Comment #111 @ 10:46 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

LilliZ - Reply to #20

>I'm sure id will fix Q4 completely. Quake 3 was (is) a very very nice game (I played it for years both CPM and Vanilla Q3) but it is too late to bring it back. It is out of date and boring in 2006.

are you sure Id will fix all things in quake 4 ? I mean they have had almost 10 months of development and they are not even close yet.

Also a notable fact, all the "nice" features that Quake 3 has, Mods, GTV, decent demo playback etc are not the product or developed by Id at all, seems to me that the "fixing" of Quake 4 is very dependant of a couple of things that still has yet to come, first Id fix the gameplay, second the community needs 6 to 12 months to adapt with mods and gtv, demoplayback etc so If the 1.3 patch is the saviour of Quake 4 we're not going to see anything better in at least 12 to 18 months and that implies that the 1.3 patch is released now.

/L

<< Comment #40 @ 06:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

mefajpE^

Blue answers rox :]

<< Comment #152 @ 12:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Calamity - Reply to #40

Very in depth

<< Comment #242 @ 18:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani - Reply to #40

He is just cool like that ;)

<< Comment #50 @ 07:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (host-216-226-197-93.hlm.ses-americom.net)

i can pretty much sum up everything clamp said - "im pissed as hell because i suck at quake 3"

40%

<< Comment #52 @ 07:27 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

thelawenforcer - Reply to #50

ROFL, exactly what i thought, hes such a gay its incredible

<< Comment #177 @ 14:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

fanfreluche - Reply to #50

He's also very overrated in q4 ;)

Good player no doubt, but pro , yes doubt

3%

<< Comment #55 @ 07:34 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (80.65.199.183)

q3 is actually fun to watch. It seems to me that those players who think its a bad idea doesnt understand how BORING it is to watch quake 4.

1%

<< Comment #98 @ 10:23 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Kami.Kaze - Reply to #55

I think the point is you CAN'T watch Q4 - GTV doesn't exist and the streams we are provided with are crap.

From the spectator / supporter point of view, forgetting everything else, this alone is enough to make Q3 the correct choice.

<< Comment #159 @ 13:14 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

LukKe - Reply to #98

well..i watched the games at eswc06 and some streams from ics that surprisingly worked and it really doesnt reach the quality of q3 anyway..

<< Comment #243 @ 18:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani - Reply to #55

I find it more entertaining to watch q4 duels than q3 duels.

<< Comment #288 @ 00:16 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

LilliZ - Reply to #243

Yeah but how exciting is it to watch it after the demos have been uploaded the day after or as you do in q3 now with 30 to 60 seconds delay approximatley the same time its played ?

Serioulsy did you get the tsncentral videostream from dreamhack and covlan to work as good as GTV ?

Choppy sound, choppy video, sometimes no sound, sometimes no video, sometimes nothing at all.

/L

Edited by LilliZ at 00:18 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #290 @ 02:12 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani - Reply to #288

They worked fine for me as I was at wsvg swe and the connection there was good enough to was the lanwar cast, they also showed the lanwar finals on one of their screens =P

But yeah, of course it'd be better with gtv, but then make fucking gtv. There must be people around who are good enough at that kind of stuff O:

<< Comment #58 @ 07:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Kage

Give Quake 3 the following things.

a) Crouch Sliding
b) Through Teleport Shooting
c) New Maps

And you'll get all the Quake 4 you will ever need with the best 1v1 fps game ever.

It'll be interesting to see how much the players will make use of the crouch key now .. you can bet that dm6 manuever will be fun to watch.

and btw, why wasn't fatal1ty interviewed? I demand his opinion!

Edited by KaGeMaN at 07:46 UTC, 25 July 2006

1%

<< Comment #299 @ 10:08 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #58

stfu newb.

<< Comment #301 @ 11:14 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

Kage - Reply to #299

kiss your cpm ass noob.

<< Comment #303 @ 11:22 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #301

stop posting from your office and get back home. lets play

<< Comment #59 @ 07:44 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (80.65.199.183)

Not too interesting IMO. Its obvious that everyone are biased towards whatever game they play. Toxic didnt reach the same stardom in q3 as he did in q4 (perhaps because q4 is more about aim?) of course he will say q4 is more fun because he wins more in it.

<< Comment #60 @ 07:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Sm@ck

It is amazing how not even the pro players know what the CPL is doing.

The upcoming series of CPL tournaments is not a WORLD TOUR! It is a series of worldwide qualifiers for a final (I think the final will be CPL winter), in other words more similiar to Kode5.

<< Comment #64 @ 08:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

snatcch

people are forgetting that quake 4 isn't even a year old, and q3 is what? 7 years old

of course it's going to be better in the short term, it's more patched, but in the long term quake 4 is the inevitable choice

<< Comment #65 @ 08:08 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dosman - Reply to #64

What is it that makes Quake 4 a better choice for the long term? Graphics?

<< Comment #70 @ 08:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

GreenBastard - Reply to #65

also the gameplay in q4 has the potential to be improved

unless we switch to cpma, vq3's gameplay is locked as id no longer develop the game

2%

<< Comment #92 @ 10:01 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

berth - Reply to #70

As soon as Q4 is ready, be it 2 or 5 years, I'll gladly support Q4 to be picked again..

<< Comment #108 @ 10:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

savucha - Reply to #92

Noooo! No more q4. Ever. :p I sure hope that we have a better multiplayer game by them, lol.

<< Comment #150 @ 12:29 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Krz - Reply to #70

did ID ever change vq3s gameplay anyway? no... so I'm not sure how you class that as a point... the fact that the ID are having to change the gameplay shows how utterly crap q4 was when it was released.

<< Comment #171 @ 13:59 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Syn- - Reply to #150

Actually, yeah they did change gameplay aspects in the past.

They removed floor damage, a "bug" according to them. Which completely changed how maps like dm7 played and completely removed q3tourney4 from tournament play since floor damage was a necessary thing for the map to play right.

<< Comment #210 @ 15:54 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #171

one question i always wondered: on osp q3 demos, players don't usually (i mean when they control their fall) loose life when they fall from a floor, whereas, whatever i do, i always loose 5/10hp. The question is: How NOT to loose?

(i just ask this because i know how to strafe, circle jump, rocket jump, and managed to end all defrag maps i've tested, so i'm not an entire noobie :-) )

<< Comment #220 @ 16:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

MrBozo - Reply to #210

Land on the side of a jumppad.

<< Comment #224 @ 16:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #220

hum... i manage to do this on dm6 for th jumppad throwing to the ya, but i always thought it was a bug of the map.
But pro do it everywhere on the map, away from jumppads...

<< Comment #225 @ 16:38 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #224

Then they aren't meant to take damage :)

<< Comment #234 @ 17:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

tifu - Reply to #210

play with com_maxfps (should be 125) or just instal cpma and fall like a pro

<< Comment #245 @ 18:06 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #234

tried. only became more laggy, and it didn't work. But thx anyway

<< Comment #264 @ 19:10 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

gurvan - Reply to #210

If I remember well it's a sv_fps 20 versus sv_fps 30 problem. Try sv_fps 30 on your local server.

<< Comment #278 @ 19:51 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #264

marche pas :// je laisse tomber (litteralement )

<< Comment #69 @ 08:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

savucha - Reply to #64

Q3 will always own Q4, why? Q3 was designed to be a multiplayer game from the start unlike buggy 'oh so sweet gfx' Q4.

1%

<< Comment #106 @ 10:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

LilliZ - Reply to #64

Judging by the current performance from it's release date It looks like quake 4 will be remembered as a flop in 6 years from now Kind of like doom3 to me, great Single player game but utter crap in online experience.

/L

2%

<< Comment #244 @ 18:06 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani - Reply to #106

Tbh, I think q4 1.0 is better than q3 1.0 =/

<< Comment #71 @ 08:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

G.I. Jonesy

One of Scooby's comments raises an interesting point. He says how he doesn't have time to watch GTV, so he doesn't even care about it. The fact is, not many people have the time and/or inclination to watch GTV games for 3 12-hour days in a row. Probably why you don't see other pro-sports using such a tournament system. They all use a system where there's like a game a night. Although, I don't know how you could feasibly use more of a spread-out season-type system with lans. You could do it, of course, but it would cost a ton in travel expenses. It's a non-issue with the internet though.

If spectating is going to be a major part of pro-gaming (as it should be), organizations should consider these things.

<< Comment #75 @ 08:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

savucha - Reply to #71

I bet that there is people in GTV for every game anyway. Maybe not so much in the first rounds but atleast the semis and finals will crowd the GTV, no doubt.

Game a night? IMO thats just absurd. It can be pretty rough to travel around the world for a game or two for every (other) weekend?

<< Comment #83 @ 09:13 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nicky - Reply to #71

not everyone watches ALL matches on GTV but the option is there... and for them that dont we have demos... and you cant have lans spread out over a certain amount of time... ppl have to travel to these events and pay for places to stay etc so is quite out of the question

<< Comment #91 @ 09:51 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

mashles - Reply to #71

Most "tour" style sports are played all day over usually around a week. I sat and watched a good 5 hours per day of the open golf. Had wimbledon on pretty much all day in the background, then chose to sit down and watch the matches that interested me.

<< Comment #101 @ 10:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nellie - Reply to #91

Get a job bum !

<< Comment #80 @ 09:04 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Zonic

Where is Åke Vader with his "bring QW back!!!!!"? :P

21%

<< Comment #82 @ 09:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Khorney - Reply to #80

Dunno, but that fellow has a good point!

<< Comment #246 @ 18:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani - Reply to #82

Indeed, I don't get this shit.
If going back to anything, it should be qw, not q3.

<< Comment #240 @ 17:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

n0me - Reply to #80

I'd rather watch qw than q3. It's more entertaining but q3 is fun to watch too, better than q4 on some shitty stream.

<< Comment #81 @ 09:06 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

stunt.us

did young supa Star av3k say he perfer q3?

<< Comment #84 @ 09:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Lethe

blue has in-depth answers =)

<< Comment #85 @ 09:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

trz

Sabian 'fzer0-Clamp-ok' Hayblum: [...] No one wants to go back in time to Quake 3

Clearly not!!!

<< Comment #89 @ 09:48 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Bob

"since more people like to watch 2v2 then Q3 duels"

NO THEY DONT stop saying this in ur iviews tox, it may be more fun for u to play, not to watch

9%

<< Comment #95 @ 10:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

lptrp - Reply to #89

agreed

<< Comment #145 @ 12:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Krz - Reply to #95

This is like the 3rd interview i've seen him say everyone prefers 2v2 to 1v1... I've never heard anyone say it in my life.. lol... I'm sure everyone knows he's only really saying it cause him and fox were probably the best 2v2 pairing in q3, and he knows if q3 got CPL cash backing it will bring back all the real pro 1v1 players and he won't even get in the top10 anymore :P

Personally I prefer CTF over any gametype but I'd never vote for it over 1v1 in spectator terms cause 1v1 is far more spectator friendly.. (no matter who you're watching you see all the action =p). Unless we get MvD in OSP or use CPMA/vQ3 and we can change the pov ourselves.

Edited by Krz at 12:04 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #99 @ 10:25 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

neuron - Reply to #89

i like watching a 2v2 game more then a duel game...

5%

<< Comment #100 @ 10:29 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #99

great, you are only here to show us statistics are always true, and that there is always a minority, whatever the topic.

<< Comment #110 @ 10:45 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #100

now, we only have to find out what the minority is

<< Comment #115 @ 10:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #110

well, it's time we started another esr useless poll, isn't it?

<< Comment #118 @ 10:59 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

neuron - Reply to #115

yeah, good idea.

What do you prefer watching:
a) a duel game
b) a 2v2 game
c) a mouse eating cheese

<< Comment #134 @ 11:41 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #118

Actually a poll with these options would be nice:

1) Duel
2) 2vs2 TDM
3) 4vs4 TDM
4) CTF

<< Comment #136 @ 11:45 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

neuron - Reply to #134

True!

ctf ftw!!!

<< Comment #205 @ 15:40 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #134

I'd go for the CTF, because of the lack of "meaning" in the DM-aspect of a teamgame. But then again, I'm playing CS, so CTF would be the thing that is closest to "my" gameplay.

<< Comment #211 @ 15:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #205

no: Clan Arena is what is closest to cs i guess

<< Comment #213 @ 16:03 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #211

CTFS is

<< Comment #217 @ 16:09 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #213

don't know this, so maybe

<< Comment #218 @ 16:09 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #217

It's Clan Arena CTF basically :)

<< Comment #316 @ 18:06 UTC, 27 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #211

CA isn't, as there is no other mission than just killing each other ;-) It's just DM with turnbased deaths and revivals

<< Comment #230 @ 17:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Bob - Reply to #134

i still want my poll to go up...[+] me if u agree coz the admins r too gay too

Will you vote no?
- yes
- no

<< Comment #232 @ 17:06 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #230

Why bother?

<< Comment #289 @ 00:31 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

LilliZ - Reply to #118

>What do you prefer watching:
>a) a duel game
>b) a 2v2 game
>c) a mouse eating cheese

and add

d) 4on4 TDM
e) watching paint dry

Some of my best memories is of clanbase eurocup 1 and 2, the TDM 4on4 cups were the best I've seen in coverage, we had GTV, we had Godsmurf eating a veggie burger at the same time he commented the formoza games with devil and satan :)

Duels are only fun to watch if the duellants are somewhat evenly matched, seeing an utter annihilation from start to en is about the same as choice c or e.

If quake 4 could have GTV it would promote itself alot imho..

/L

Edited by LilliZ at 00:32 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #132 @ 11:34 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xgo - Reply to #99

me2

<< Comment #135 @ 11:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zealot - Reply to #89

honestly 2on2 is the most fun way to play q3. I've been saying it for years .)

<< Comment #93 @ 10:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian

most of the answers show something very clear, those "pro-players" give a shit about anything but the money they may earn. they don't care if someone can spectate, they don't even care if they've fun with what they're doing. they're nothing more than a bunch of mercenaries and this attitude pretty much suxx. call me a dreamer, but i don't think that that this attitude will bring us far.

Edited by BlindGuardian at 10:03 UTC, 25 July 2006

25%

<< Comment #102 @ 10:32 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Nellie - Reply to #93

Bingo

<< Comment #103 @ 10:33 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #93

wake up man. That's our capitalist society!!
Just a question: during your career, some company proposes you the same job, but increases your wages. What are you gonna do? Not quit? No kidding

<< Comment #120 @ 11:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #103

you can't compare the two. in the end, all those players stand not only for the possibility of earning money through gaming, or making even a living out of it. But the whole point about pro gaming is, that you can earn money by doing something you actually LOVE to do. some of the answers state something like "training for q4 feels like work, not fun" and so on, which compromises the picture of pro gaming that i'd like to see, which is probably similar to something like pro surfing: havin fun and earning money with.

you asked me about my regular job: i'd rather take a job where also have fun and which i like with less of the money than working in a job that i don't like at all, but with better wages

<< Comment #122 @ 11:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #120

u seem already hopeless about your (future) job regarding fun, it's sad.

<< Comment #123 @ 11:15 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #122

what is sad about that? my current job is no fun for me at all, it's only work, and as we all know, work suxx :D

<< Comment #161 @ 13:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

eri - Reply to #122

Dont blame him, blame society, that's where something smells bigtime right now

As sad as his future vision may be, hes very likely right

<< Comment #163 @ 13:23 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #161

well i may consider myself as lucky so...

<< Comment #164 @ 13:29 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

eri - Reply to #163

No , youre neither right or wrong and certainly not 'lucky'.

At the age of 24 as your profile says you really are not qualified to discuss this matter, neither am i or 95 % of esr for that matter.

Sure you may be happy right now in your job still being young and somewhat enthousiastic , but answer the same questions when uve been working for say 15 years, your answers then might be very different.

<< Comment #166 @ 13:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Goth4m - Reply to #164

my age is correct, and probably so is your last sentence.
do the pro-gamers (initial topic) have a history of 15 years of play behind them? No. So i guess i can compare my interest / fun in my job with their.

<< Comment #323 @ 20:00 UTC, 13 August 2006 >>

By

endi - Reply to #166

drex does

<< Comment #112 @ 10:48 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #93

so, basically you're saying that noone can like Q4, just because you and others don't like it. You don't give them any benefit of doubt, but just assume they have no fun playing it, at all.
So, you simply conclude it must be about money, which makes them evil.
While you can be the hero, who dreams of a world where everyone only likes Q3 and no different opinions are allowed.

<< Comment #116 @ 10:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #112

I think you got me wrong here. I was aiming at some of the answers that were given which give the impression that in the end the only deciding factor is the money when it comes down to chosing the game they play. it's not like that i made that up, and it doesn't matter what I think the better game is.

I am pretty sure there are loads of players who actually love to play Q4 of the guys in this article, but some the answers given just make another impression.

<< Comment #125 @ 11:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #116

yes, seems like i got you wrong. And I agree that money is a deciding factor. But I can't see it as negative as you do. After all if they see gaming as a job (at least to some) and want to earn money with it. But you wrote they don't care if they've fun and I diagree with that. It probably is another deciding factor.
But those are choices everyone has to face in his life.
E.g. when I was in school I had fun playing baseball, sailing, riding a bike and driving a car (in the later years obviously).
With the first being the favorite.

And I also wanted a small job to earn pocket money. Couldn't earn any with Baseball and Sailing, I could get 5€+ tip for working as a bike messenger and 7€ + tip for pizza delivery.
I decided to go with the messenger job and spent time on it than Baseball or Sailing.
the point is, does that make me a mercenary whose attitude suxx?

<< Comment #131 @ 11:33 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

BlindGuardian - Reply to #125

of course not :) as i explained in #120 i think, that gaming is most importantly about fun. the whole concept of gaming is built on fun. so it is sad to see, that at some point, this becomes less of a factor in gaming.

regular work is something completely different.

<< Comment #137 @ 11:45 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #131

it should be only about fun, but i don't think it is anymore.

And at that point regular jobs aren't that different anymore. There are a lot of people who turned their hobbies (neither gaming nor sports!) into their regular job, or the other way around made their job their hobby.
So, I don't think you blame the players who said they prefer Q4, neither if it's because they prefer the fun or simply the fact that more money is in one game.

<< Comment #170 @ 13:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

soulnrgizer - Reply to #137

There'll be always someone who only goes for the money and this doesn't really surprise me, know what I even respect them. What I personally don't like is that some of the pros justify this attitude by spending (imho false) words about how q4 is the new shit and the way go, while they perfectly know it's inferior to his predecessor by all means, pretending that we follow them on the bad route, just to allow them to gain more money.

<< Comment #130 @ 11:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Emp^y - Reply to #116

I can see this guys point !

I waited 5 years and passed up no more than 7 much higher paid jobs to get the one i currently have .

Why ? because i have fun in this job , i want to get out of bed in the morning to do it and i dont care about the wage becuase no matter how small itis compared to other jobs , this one i enjoy and i can have it almost for the rest of my natural (and unnatural) life :).

Being happy in work is much much better than not....

<< Comment #186 @ 14:46 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

jarlb - Reply to #93

agree

<< Comment #96 @ 10:19 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Akuma

Jason 'coL.socrates' Sylka: It's cool to go back to the game everyone hates to admit is better. Hopefully we all spec some good games via gtv/demos and put some of the fun back into dueling.

Spot on, well said soc :)

<< Comment #113 @ 10:49 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Sidekick

Destrukt's name is Flanders?
Hehehe, I hate Flanders! ;P

<< Comment #126 @ 11:24 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #113

yeah, it's Rod, Todd and Brian Flanders although Brian wasn't shown a lot in the series :P

<< Comment #121 @ 11:00 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Hawr1x

CPL makes huge mistake by taking Quake 3 back for the tour, but PLAYERS will pay for it ... if there is solution, than it is playing both games.

Never mind, it is actually second mistake of CPL - 1st was by rename CPL Summer for Intel Summer, but money are money :)

What I want to say is that Quake 4 was added all over so fast, so many ppl gets angry ... but by this step CPL looses its credit. (In my eyes for sure) Quake 4 will be played if it is on CPL or not.

Edited by Hawr1x at 11:02 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #195 @ 15:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ultraviolet - Reply to #121

Wasn't Painkiller a CPL mistake? :)

<< Comment #204 @ 15:37 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #195

By the numbers it wasn't, and in the end it is the numbers that are important. They had 1 million dollars in prizes, they had 10 tournaments, fielding the best of the best every time, and they had MTV covering the finals. In my eyes, those facts are the ones which counts. I understand the disappointment from a community-perspective, but to call it a would be ignorant.

16%

<< Comment #239 @ 17:51 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ultraviolet - Reply to #204

The 1 million dollars and the MTV coverage were all in place before Painkiller was even ready or chosen as a competitive game, and not a product of the game itself.

These arrangements were a function of the World Tour marketing and contracts first time around, whichever game was used.

For Painkiller as a game, Angel has already admitted in the interview that there were mistakes in expecting so much from the developers and being let down. DC broke contractual promises letting down the CPL failing to deliver the most basic of components required for this type of event from the point of view of the game.

The fact the community shunned it and a much lower audience than it could have been also makes it a mistake. It is far from ignorant to observe that Painkiller was not as popular as some games within the 'pro' community, or within the mainstream / mass market community - ultimately large prizes or tournaments for a game only a few want to play or watch is *not* what counts when it could have been so much more.

I think the phrase is 'wasted opportunity'.

--

The clear lessons from Painkiller from a WT game for CPL were:
1. Do not use a game which is not ready for competitive tournaments.
2. Do not use a game which appeals to a minority of 'pro', or of casual players, or of the mainstream.

It's good to see with the choice of Q3 over Q4, that they've learnt... even if you choose to shrug off the charade of a stunt poll with a predictable outcome.

--

Oh and it is comedy that the person who [+]'d you is the one person who benefitted most from the mistake - need I say more?

Edited by Ultraviolet at 18:19 UTC, 25 July 2006

2%

<< Comment #317 @ 18:15 UTC, 27 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #239

Well first of all, the million wasn't granted. Dreamcatcher did spit a great deal of money in the purse. And besides that, I've never said that PK did attract those things. My argument would be that for CPL, PK wasn't a failure. The game simply did it's job. It is not the job of CPL to create a community or sell games - CPL needs to earn money - and make great tournaments.

<< Comment #320 @ 12:14 UTC, 28 July 2006 >>

By

Ultraviolet - Reply to #317

I didn't say failure, I said a mistake - note there is a difference

<< Comment #124 @ 11:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

krabban

"I think they are splitting up the 1v1 community"... err, yeah. How many play Q4 outside the pro' scene?

<< Comment #127 @ 11:24 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dosman - Reply to #124

http://www.csports.net/(saqzg245ruhkhy553uyjww45)/TopGames.aspx
http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/

5. Unreal Tournament 2004
2614 servers, 5747 players

11. Quake 3: Arena
1750 servers, 2075 players

36. Quake II
360 servers, 173 players

39. Quake 4
568 servers, 138 players

Even some demos have more players online than Quake 4.

Edited by dosman at 11:26 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #128 @ 11:25 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

becks - Reply to #127

http://www.clanbase.com/news_league.php?lid=2522

Edited by becks at 11:26 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #203 @ 15:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #127

Ok, now we've counted the retards that actually is dumb enough to use GameSpy. What about the part of the community who actually got a brain?

<< Comment #250 @ 18:22 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ultraviolet - Reply to #203

It is calculated by polling servers on the master client list, nothing to do with the server browser client on players' machines.

<< Comment #318 @ 18:22 UTC, 27 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #250

Then I don't get why Steampowered (the official site for HL, CS, HL2, CS:S and so on) shows like 500% more gamers online in CS:S than CSPORTS.net do. And around 200% more than GameSpy. You could be right, but I just don't get the difference in numbers then.

<< Comment #133 @ 11:36 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sudstah

Toxic knows hes not good enough in quake 3 to win any :]

<< Comment #138 @ 11:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Few of these who were asked still bring the two stupid answers:

'no place for new talent' -> Just fuck new talents they can go play warcraft or CS instead if they're not good talents enough to grow as good as old q3 stars then they're not 'new talents' imo...

'splits the community' -> No we just made reverse, we've revived one of the two communities who were split between a bad game (q4) and the still good remaining one (quake 3). People have chosen to unsplit the community by adding the let's say 500 people playing q4 regularly to the 3500 playing q3....

It looks like they did not read or understand people's arguments for quake 3 over quake 4 on the CPL thread. Too much gaming not enough studying@school ? :o

<< Comment #139 @ 11:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (www-cacheD.usyd.edu.au)

at the end of the day, the better game won

finally.

<< Comment #140 @ 11:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (p5495B478.dip0.t-ipconnect.de)

quake4 is just another dead fuckin game.
no communitiy---> no interest----> less cash for pro-gamers.
quake has survived all the " new" titles like doom3, ut2k9582958 etc. , while everybody said it would kill quake3 soon.
now, after the cpl decision, you can see almost a double number of players on the quake3 servers, and it pretty cool to see how this will develop in the future.
i can imagine that players who play both games will realize that q3 is simply the more funny game, more action, better graphics, better balance, better physics, better everything simply.
i cant see anything better in q4 except shooting through teleporters ( a feature which already EXISTS in q3 mods) shooting on jumppads and crouchsliding.
i guess its not that big problem for programmers to develop this features in q3.
the quake4 code is also very shitty,like arQon said, in comparison to q3.

<< Comment #144 @ 11:58 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sudstah - Reply to #140

UT2k4 should be the game of choice atm, Quake only survives because so many people unconciously bum it.

<< Comment #162 @ 13:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

eri - Reply to #144

and because ut frankly blows

Doesnt suit a quake player at all

<< Comment #196 @ 15:13 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Levi215 - Reply to #162

Bumming quake are we?

<< Comment #214 @ 16:04 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #196

Sure am

<< Comment #247 @ 18:10 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

eri - Reply to #196

No, its not bumming, ive played q3 for 7 years and yet i even ejoy playing cs public at times

But i simply cannot get into the ut movement, the guns are neat though =)

<< Comment #141 @ 11:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini

Why is Chance so certain about Quake4 1.3 patch?

Either he is testing it or he's just got far too much faith in id :/

<< Comment #183 @ 14:33 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

cYmoZz - Reply to #141

I think some players have 1.3 yet. Some days ago I saw a swedish server with 1.3 on it. Serverdetails said something like: serverurl: fojjiserver

<< Comment #187 @ 14:51 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #183

Go FOX!

<< Comment #142 @ 11:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Krz

Chance 'chance' Lacina: Q3 cannot support MVD, and doesn't have instancing (that Q4 has yet to properly utilize as well).

...what..the..fuck... never played cpma? MvD came from CPMA and rocket-arena has had multi-arenas (who the fuck calls it instancing ...) for years. I didn't know a "pro" could be so fucking thick =]

Jason 'coL.socrates' Sylka: The game works, it can be viewed via GTV and now we have a reason to stay up late and sit on GTV spamming bs to each other.

A part of my life I missed so much <3 late night GTV \o/ <3 reeb

6%

<< Comment #212 @ 15:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Corpsegrinder - Reply to #142

OMG I'M SPRAYING CUM EVERYWHERE

5%

<< Comment #221 @ 16:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ix - Reply to #142

Q3 also had a mod called Oreo years ago that supported instancing.

<< Comment #147 @ 12:11 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

flu1d

I'll say this again...the so called "professional players" do not care what game is played (to the extent of what game they are better at of course). The game can be ball-in-a-cup, and sure enough the pros will sign up and play. Why? Because they are sell outs; they have no passion for any game. As long as there is money at stake they will play.

5%

<< Comment #148 @ 12:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

mrobrien - Reply to #147

well you're a cheerful one.

<< Comment #158 @ 13:12 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (62.176.136.233) - Reply to #147

definetly not. its about competition. Everyone who tried to compete in "real" sports or esports just knows what its about.

<< Comment #223 @ 16:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

MrBozo - Reply to #147

This is partially true. All the pro gamers start with a game they feel passionate about, and THEN move on to the games where the money is. I do not believe it is possible to reach the pro level without first having a game you love.

<< Comment #153 @ 12:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (ppp-77-22.burnet.ru)

so foolish... why cpl didnt choose q3 in 2001? =( the last big q3 champ was CPL Babbages in USA with 100000$ in december 2000, and small CPL holland in may2001... if CPL did have for primery game q3 HOW MANY GREAT TOURNEYS AND GAMES we did can to see...

I think zero4 will not comeback... czm may be but zero4 not...
some interesting what results are can to take cooller and z4muz it they will be training eachother...

<< Comment #154 @ 12:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

kjhbiygi87ygh9i

I say fuck quake 3 and quake and lets play beer pong and excitebike

7%

<< Comment #155 @ 12:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (194.106.184.3)

Some stupid answer by old q3 1v1 nobs but thats ok. Good choice by cpl, q3 the game that have all! q4 need time? yeah but till then do not hate q3 for unsuccesful q4! btw 1.3 \o/ wtf it give to us? NOTHING much .. when q4 got netcode so u can play with 64k etc and fix sound shit etc etc cya =)

<< Comment #160 @ 13:18 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD

The most insightful commont was made by RocketBoy; who reasoned that sponsors prefer to sponsor a game which utilizes their latest technology. Ie. Q3 is a dead end. Also nice to see the top players are insightful enough to recognize how this decision leads to another split of a small community. Go bitter nostalgics! ;P

<< Comment #165 @ 13:34 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #160

Yeah they clearly do when the sponsors sponsor CS and preferred Quake3 over Quake4

2%

<< Comment #176 @ 14:17 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #165

"Oh, my CS 1.6 only manages 400 FPS now, time to buy a new Intel chip!" Yeeeahh.. this kind of blind sponsorship is not gonna last, sorry.

<< Comment #194 @ 15:11 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Jabb0r - Reply to #176

If gaming wants to grow the sponsors are going to have to be in it for more than selling a few processors so the 1-2 fans can watch the latest demos. ie. BIG EXPOSURE due to the game being popular and having hundreds of thousands or millions of spectators. Red Bull don't sponsor nip because the games they play require the latest hardware. Pizza hut don't sponsor the CPL for that reason either.

Summary of my post: stfu

<< Comment #198 @ 15:17 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Levi215 - Reply to #194

Think you've got your head in the sand tbh, it's all about the demographic.

<< Comment #216 @ 16:06 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #198

Yeah that being COMPUTER GAMERS. 90% of computer gamers buy new games and like to upgrade their pc at some point.

<< Comment #236 @ 17:29 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

qtip - Reply to #198

naw its all about the Pizza!

<< Comment #293 @ 06:34 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

lptrp - Reply to #198

It's all about quantity, reaching out to as many customers as possible. That's when the big bucks start rolling in. Take any sport, it's never the sportsgear companys that provide the big bucks it's the beer, food and soda companys etc.

So any game that draw enough people will generate money.

And I second, stfu! :)

Edited by lptrp at 06:35 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #260 @ 19:01 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #194

If (PC) gaming wants to grow, it has to rid itself of conservative anal-fixated tendencies like this.. Right now the console online market is where PC gaming was 10 years ago, with 100x more customers. --- When I was in Paris at ESWC a few weeks ago, Q4 was actually beating CS as a spectator sport, it got more cheering and interest. In my opinion because it looks good, it flows good, and it has a young and fresh scene which makes it easier for "non-quakers" to care about it.

<< Comment #167 @ 13:43 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

KraaL - Reply to #160

I thought that too, before realizing that major sponsors hugely funded CS1.6 competitions, even after the CS:S->CS1.6 backstep. And now, 90% of the same sponsors are in favour of going to an older, but better and community-supported game, q3, in place of the very q4 that even most recent hardware cannot run correctly (ok, 1v1 games on small maps may do, but forget about ffa melees). Facts should make you change your mind.
These sponsors seem to want representation, and not only making sell games that will make sell their products. Much like Soda brands or Banks in sport competitions.

1%

<< Comment #169 @ 13:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

rdmz - Reply to #160

dude ......................

2%

<< Comment #173 @ 14:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

soulnrgizer - Reply to #160

Pls someone has to make a standing newspost /column for at least a month which states that the sponsors prefer games not just to showcase their latest technology but actually to REACH THE WIDEST AUDIENCE POSSIBLE and you don't get that with a friggin' 200 player base and without the possibility to follow coverage in a decent way! Maybe ppl will understand what the fuck Brand Recognition actually means, once and for all.

<< Comment #175 @ 14:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #173

And what when they do some marketing and find out that the "wide audience" you're talking about consists of stubborn "one game"-players with a 3 year old rig and no plans of upgrading?

Edited by danseko.dD at 14:08 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #179 @ 14:23 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #175

Well geuss what? You're not the first geniouse to have that idea. You think they make decisions based of guessing?

<< Comment #262 @ 19:05 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #179

So what you're saying is, when the sponsors ditched Q3 and went 100% for Q4 on every event lately, they knew exactly what they were doing? I'm glad we agree!

<< Comment #267 @ 19:14 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #262

No we don't. CPL ditched Q3, not sponsors. Go head and look up the official version of why. Angel claims it was a licensing dispute with id Software.

<< Comment #271 @ 19:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #267

So you're basically saying the sponsors wanted to pay for Q4, but got Q3..

<< Comment #275 @ 19:36 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #271

Where the fuck am I saying that?

Edited by Yeltsin at 19:40 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #276 @ 19:38 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #275

The event was originally Q4, and the sponsors signed up. You're saying it wasn't the *sponsors* who changed their minds, but the arrangers. Ie. unlike what you originally claimed, the move to Q3 has nothing to do with sponsors' decisions, has it?

<< Comment #277 @ 19:40 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #276

Read the press release, in black on white it says that Sponsors have voted for Q3 over Q4. Why was Q4 chosen at first? Because it was ASSUMED that the game will be popular and decent from all the hype it recieved before even being released. The hopes turned out to be baseless, so they switch, I don't see whats so hard to understand

<< Comment #280 @ 20:19 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #277

All right then, still your argument is wafer thin, as your point was "sponsors know what they are doing". They've been sponsoring Q4 for a loong time now. Did they know what they were doing?

<< Comment #282 @ 20:32 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #280

Apparently sticking with CPL who were giving Q4 a chance?
And I made no arguments, I was pointing out facts, so they couldn't possible be "thin". Sponsors have groups of people who decide how spending money would increase the spread of their advertisment.

<< Comment #285 @ 21:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #282

..in other words, sponsoring Q4 was an "expert"-supported decision and probably the right one, as it will be in the future. All right then. EOD

<< Comment #286 @ 22:19 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #285

CPL makes a guess at a popular game, sponsors concure. The guess turns out to be a bad choice. CPL chooses the better game at the moment and advertisers concure. What IS SO HARD TO GET HERE? The guess was wrong because it was a guess. If Q4 turns out better in the future they will have to change. There is never permanent "correct" decision. EOD long ago, just a dead horse.

Edited by Yeltsin at 22:25 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #296 @ 09:29 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #286

rofl.. this was exactly my point..... your first comment was "You think they (sponsors) make decisions based of guessing?" :P

Edited by danseko.dD at 09:50 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #304 @ 11:42 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #296

I thought your point was that picking Q3 was made based on guessing. Picking Q4 was CPLs guess, not the sponsors. SIGH.

<< Comment #307 @ 13:40 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #304

Which means Sponsors are guessing that CPL are right.. and CPL are ALSO "guessing"? Didn't the sponsors know EXACTLY what they were doing? Nevermind, this has gone too far and you will never see my point.. in conclusion, you were wrong from the first post.

Edited by danseko.dD at 13:42 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #309 @ 14:10 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #307

That fact that the CPL makes a decision based on what they know and hope to be true(educated guess!)m doesn't mean sponsors had any part in making that guess. They CONCURED. I don't see why it's so hard to realise thats not the same as doing the guesswork themselves.

Didn't the sponsors know EXACTLY what they were doing?

Yes they did. A new quake game with huge amounts of pre-release hype. Gamers want it, gamers WILL play it at a first tourney having signed up in HUNDREDS. Of cource thats what sponsors want, a popular tourney. And thats EXACTLY what they got. Now the game has died down itself and turned out to be hugely unpopular, sponsors, as they did earlier, concur with CPL on choosing Q3.

Nevermind, this has gone too far and you will never see my point.. in conclusion, you were wrong from the first post.

Nevermind, this has gone too far and you will never see the real picture, clouded by your mighty point(which is what?) in conclusion, you have no clue. But I don't mind sticking a clue stick up your arse.

Edited by Yeltsin at 14:16 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #313 @ 21:03 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #309

If you are still too stupid to see that sponsors' "concurring" to both Q3 and Q4, basically means sponsors are currently "guessing" anyway, then that is *your* problem. Goodbye.

Edited by danseko.dD at 21:09 UTC, 26 July 2006

<< Comment #314 @ 00:57 UTC, 27 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #313

If you are so stupid to see that picking a not yet released game that has NOT proved itself is more of a guess then picking a game with established history, community, otherwise proved to be good, then will never bear the fire of enlightenment! Farewell my dear!! Come back for another clue stick, I know your arse wants me to fire another one up!

<< Comment #185 @ 14:42 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

soulnrgizer - Reply to #175

Apart the 30 guys who makes their living by playing only one game (and by now that's like 1/7 of Quake 4 community), there's a whole shitload of ppl that ranges from high to low skill that love Quake 3 but still appreciate (and love too) other games, which may be more demanding than it.
So if Amd and Ati sponsor a game followed by thousands of individuals (Quake 3) where the fans can actually enjoy the event - gtv - and Nvidia and Intel one followed by hundreds (Quake 4) where the best coverages is reading newsposts - streams are nearly unwatchable - then given this facts, what company will get more Recognition from their sponsorship?
That doesn't mean that from that moment on a generic guy will buy ONLY Amd and Ati stuff, but the name Ati starts building a reputation in his mind even if only uncounsciously and that could be a deciding factor in a decision made by an un/informed buyer.

<< Comment #188 @ 14:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #185

Yes, this is the concept of advertising, but another concept is to pick the right target group (or "segment") for advertising.. with a new market you sometimes have to go trial/error, which is what sponsors are still doing. Once they find out just how stubborn people who play a 6-7 year old game are, I'm sure they'll start considering other ways to spend their money.

<< Comment #193 @ 15:05 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

fanfreluche - Reply to #188

So if i get your logic right , we should all endure q4 because its better for ati/intel/nvidia ??

Even if we were 100 000 active players, those sponsors dont make their money with the players themselves. Players are obviously already equipped with the needed hardware for the most part. Sponsoring an event for them is nothing but putting their logo and brands in the minds of people.

Sponsors care about return on investment, more people watching means more chances for the to sell eventually. Let's face it , quake 4 tourneys are not popular at all compared to q3 ones of the past.

I think we should care about whats next rather than about sponsors, cause if we stick to it and make it big in terms of popularity , they will follow. They would follow even if we played doom1 , or warsow....

<< Comment #255 @ 18:50 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #193

Endure? Q4 is a great game, my argument is you old Q3'ers are too damned stubborn to see it. You are all village fools in your own closed up little gaming village. "WOOAW Q3 IS THE BEST 1V1 GAME EVAR AND UT SUCKS". Get a fucking grip. Q3 got _medium_ big because "most people" bought it. "Most people" bought it because Q1, Q2 and IDSoft were huge names with a bjg appeal.

<< Comment #269 @ 19:17 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #255

But why are are there still 3000 players for Q3 and 180 for Q4 RIGHT NOW? You might like Q4, but that makes you part of a small minority.

<< Comment #272 @ 19:32 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #269

Because of stubborn Q3'ers and because unlike what Q2 did for Q3, Q3 didn't create enough of a good reputation for Q4 to get a big "noob base".

<< Comment #273 @ 19:35 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Demiurge +' - Reply to #272

You can not judge a high player base on stubborness. There are actually new players picking up Q3 still, and Q4 had all the chances. The only think you can conclude is that Q4 is not nearly as favored as Q3, calling people playing a older game stubborn has absolutely no basis besides your own delusion.

<< Comment #197 @ 15:15 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

soulnrgizer - Reply to #188

Fact is the companies are sponsoring events by many years now and they learnt where the market is. The most sponsored games are the 7 year old ones : CS and BW. Do you think that's casual or trial/error?

<< Comment #294 @ 06:37 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

lptrp - Reply to #188

There are other companys then hardware manufactures. Coca Cola, McDonalds etc. etc... As long as you have a big scene you will get sponsors...

<< Comment #297 @ 09:46 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #294

And then we remember the fact of the matter.. Q3 is not a big scene, but a medium scene. When sponsors think size, they think CS and WC3, and there are more than enough events to pick. Quake is chosen more for show factor and for being good spectator sports.

<< Comment #305 @ 13:00 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

lptrp - Reply to #297

I didn't say that it is a big scene. However it can become a big scene. As esports grow in general I think Q3 has what it takes to draw a crowd.

<< Comment #306 @ 13:37 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #305

OK then, keep hoping for that.

gl..

Edited by danseko.dD at 09:11 UTC, 28 July 2006

<< Comment #308 @ 13:45 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

lptrp - Reply to #306

Thanks, I will :)

<< Comment #201 @ 15:27 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #160

In the case you are describing, you are only taking one factor into consideration, and that is that the situation of sponsors is going to be the same over a period of time.

This is wrong.

As in everything else, the sponsor-situation vil develop. It might take 5 years - or even more - but eventually it won't be "community"-companies like Intel and nVidia that will give the biggest amounts away. It will be "non-community"-companies - like in every other sport. (That is if eSports evolves with the current speed through a couple of years).

And you have completely looked over the fact that the highest concentration of gamers means the highgest concentration of possible customers :-)

<< Comment #258 @ 18:56 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #201

There's no "mass market" if the gamers you're talking about sit at home and eat their own brand of cereals and nothing else, drink their own brand of beer and nothing else, and plays - guess what - Q3, and absolutely nothing else... :P

<< Comment #315 @ 18:04 UTC, 27 July 2006 >>

By

Phil_SS - Reply to #258

Nor is there a point to drag out the newest games for the current sponsors, as the newest games isn't played on a regular basis at events. The only new game to actually get more than 1 or 2 events has been Q4 (and last year PK). And they haven't been very succesfull ^^

<< Comment #319 @ 09:13 UTC, 28 July 2006 >>

By

danseko.dD - Reply to #315

Heh, yeah, I thought the Unreal community was stubborn when I saw only half of them moved on to UT2k. Later I saw it was partly understandable, the game was so different, so hype'ish, bloated and glary, and lost a lot of its flow.

BUT - when I see only 10% -- or less? -- of Q3'ers move on to Q4 - a sequel so similar to Q3, so subtle, smooth-flowing and "compatible" as it is, I just gotta shake my head in disbelief.

The Q3 community, in it's stubborn-ness, will probably use 5-10 years to die out, which I guess is a decent "reward" for being stubborn-arsed. But if I were a sponsor, in those 5-10 years, I wouldn't want to spend my money on a group this conservative and picky.

And the effect it has for PC gaming? When console-gamers see PC-games with "1995-graphics", which have accumulated an extreme learning curve for new players? Or on the developer-side, when the Q3'ers, in their actions now, clearly show to developers they prefer to buy a game once and never buy a new game again..?

Figure it out for yourself.

Edited by danseko.dD at 17:38 UTC, 28 July 2006

<< Comment #168 @ 13:46 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

payze

These interviews explain why cpm should be taken over vq3. (no old players domination, well maybe except few ones but that's still a small amount compared to the only vq3 players)

Edited by payze at 13:48 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #174 @ 14:07 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (ppp-77-66.burnet.ru)

go to play 3dmxstudio...

<< Comment #180 @ 14:25 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

just a guy

Deja vu?

<< Comment #181 @ 14:31 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

dirtbox

they should have gone with QuakeWorld instead

3%

<< Comment #191 @ 15:01 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

stayout - Reply to #181

Hehe (Y) =)!
But anyway, what can I add, hmm... People will not go for "new game" if it is "stupid". No please don't get me wrong i'm not telling that q4 sux or sth. just that I can't figure out how to say it in other words at the moment. We want to play games that we can enjoy For example I'm still playing qwtf !! because I just love this mod and I will go with it forvever and ever and ever... :) & so on. What I'm a yerk now?! Nope, it's just the feeling you get when you are playing the game that you really like. And same is with the q3 & q4, people still love q3 and q4 hmm it's just a newborn, they'll have to get used to it. Every person will make a decision himself. But I think CPL made a nice decision bringing the quake3 "back", just that it may seem little wierd while quake4 is allready out ;). Aahh, Good Luck anyway! doesn't matter if it's a q3, q4 or q1 ;).

<< Comment #182 @ 14:32 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ins0mnia '

original idea... (kuch GGL kuch)

<< Comment #184 @ 14:40 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Slasher - Reply to #182

different questions, asked different players

5%

<< Comment #189 @ 14:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ben - Reply to #184

DONT LIE YUO COPY GGL YUSH FUNNY MAN

<< Comment #192 @ 15:02 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #189

WHO COPIED VIA CGA OR WHATEVER :(((((((((((((((((((((((((

<< Comment #209 @ 15:53 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Ins0mnia ' - Reply to #189

YUO LIEK SAMSUNG

<< Comment #190 @ 14:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

bruttO

alltherage/blue is a fucking tit! look at his answers... god what a tit...

2%

<< Comment #200 @ 15:21 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

uNhoLeee

ER whats with ''it will split the small 1v1 community' in half'.

LOL i doubt it will be half, the votes were like 10/1 in quake3's favour.
and wouldn't bring it back effectively make it larger?

<< Comment #222 @ 16:28 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Khorney

Wish I could [+] Cooller for those comments. He sees opportunities instead of obstacles.

Edited by Khorney at 16:28 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #226 @ 16:39 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #222

Yeah even hundreds/thousands of miles is no obstacle for him :)

<< Comment #279 @ 20:04 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Khorney - Reply to #226

True!

<< Comment #227 @ 16:44 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

NaAani

+

<< Comment #228 @ 16:48 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

krabban

It's fun to see people arguing about "If CPL doesn't choose this new game, the sponsors will have nothing cuz the old game doesnt require a good computer yadayada..."

Yeah, casual gamers who actually watch the matches etc. ONLY play the game that's used, they never try anything else?... right.

<< Comment #231 @ 17:01 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

zine

<3 fooKi's answers..

<< Comment #237 @ 17:30 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (68-67-224-91.chvlva.adelphia.net)

its understandable, the negative reactions some are having...they spent all this time practicing quake 4, now they gotta practice quake 3 again...not that, thats a bad thing...but, itll no doubt throw them off a bit.

I like this comment the best though:

Jason 'coL.socrates' Sylka: It's cool to go back to the game everyone hates to admit is better.

I actually chuckled when I read that. :-}

this might put a dent in id's bank account though...fewer game makers will want to buy their D3 engine now...but hopefully theyll recify this with quake 5

id..some advice..do NOT keep Carmack out of quake 5...not if you dont want this to happen again! (getting PJ to make some maps wouldnt hurt either ;-). )

<< Comment #249 @ 18:20 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

krabban - Reply to #237

Yeah, I'm still hoping that they've gone and done some nice improvements on the D3 engine (apart from the Megatexturethingy they're always talkin about) to ET: Quake Wars.

<< Comment #302 @ 11:15 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

Ultraviolet - Reply to #237

quake 4 > quake 5

<< Comment #248 @ 18:13 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

CaptFallout

Who hates to admit Quake 3 is better than Quake 4? I didn't realize anyone would argue Quake 4 is the better game at the moment.

Either way, UT2007 will boot both Quake 3 and Quake 4 out of the competitive spotlight in a few months.

Maybe this time around Quakers will learn to play a game that has as much depth in combat as it does in movement now that their sacred cow has been slaughtered.

Seriously now... Quake weapons are sleep inducing.

Edited by CaptFallout at 18:14 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #251 @ 18:24 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (83-71-34-228.b-ras1.srl.dublin.eircom.net) - Reply to #248

hehe, ur gonna get alot of flame posts. but in away i agree, quake at this moment is DEAD. deathmatch games are dying and ut has a larger player base then quake, sooooo everyone should play ut2k7 it all makes sense u know it does!1111

<< Comment #252 @ 18:26 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

xiko

Well, lets see if there are enough players to make a very good tourney.

If you are just voting for spectator issues we would vote on female ky wrestling.

I do hope ID fix q4 as they did with q3.

<< Comment #256 @ 18:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

sauna

Quake 4 is complete rubbish, all FPS-titles that are made both for console and PC are rubbish (especially on a singleplayer engine like Doom 3). The PC-version always has to sacrifice alot in features, customizability, skillfactor, etc. Stiff crap!

<< Comment #321 @ 15:20 UTC, 29 July 2006 >>

By

raide - Reply to #256

Actually, q3a was released for the Sega Dreamcast in early 2000. In fact, I played the console version before the PC :>. It wasn't too bad if you were nub enough to play with a controller. You could even play online versus PC gamers.

<< Comment #322 @ 08:07 UTC, 1 August 2006 >>

By

sauna - Reply to #321

Q3A was released on December 2, 1999 and was developed solely for the PC afaik. Anything coming after that would be a port probably, I might be wrong. Thus you get a good fps-title which doesn't have the stiffness and crap behaviour like Q4 does and all D3-engine based games since the devs don't have to compromise and drop features on the PC-version since consoles + FPS = complete shite.

I can understand pro-gamers jumping on the Q4 bandwagon due to all the competitions and the yearning for something new. But there's nothing good about a FPS-game like Q4 and gamers shouldn't really accept these failed attempts at making competitive FPS-games and show their dismay by not playing/buying them. Sure, every developer is in it for the money and to build on the franchise and thus the importance of actually creating a good game with loads of support and great competition value is severely diminished.
To this day developers haven't realised where the big moola is, despite the huge (and still ongoing) success with games like QuakeWorld and CS.

Simplicity, customizability, clan and competition support and a dedicated team fixing the problems early on is the key.
Nowadays we can expect 2-3 patches in the span of 1-2 years after the release of a title, in the early days devs were spamming patches left and right which was one of the many reasons to keep playing. Someone actually cared. Now it's $$$ in the top 10 spots of the priority list amongst things like "create an engine, make sure it sucks since it has to be able to support both consoles and PC so we can get maximum moola, license the hell out of it, start new project and rinse and repeat".

Bah, rant and such..maybe oldtimers like me should stop hoping for a better and brighter gaming future and sit down and accept all the garbage that's thrown at me like yet another fanboy superhero.

<< Comment #257 @ 18:55 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

gut

Henrik 'alltherage/blue' Bjork: I hate it.

poor blue, hehe

Edited by gut at 18:56 UTC, 25 July 2006

<< Comment #291 @ 04:51 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

revoN - Reply to #257

Q3 has left quite a scar on him.

<< Comment #292 @ 05:19 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #291

The blue-bug wasn't enough for him. So he found paradise in Q4.

<< Comment #295 @ 08:58 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

Arcita - Reply to #292

q4 is the blue-bug

<< Comment #259 @ 18:57 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

miya

It´s a pity Toxic can´t admit Q3 is far superior to Q4. He want´s to play 2v2 in Q3 (he hasn´t mentioned Q4 2v2), but not 1v1. This makes me think he just want's to play Q4 for the $bling$, and try to match Vo0's "ridiculeous" PK earnings in Q4.

2%

<< Comment #268 @ 19:16 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (adsl-69-209-67-213.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net)

"Yang 'Rocketboy' Meng: : And another important factor is Q3 has been BANNED in China, it means even if I will be the world champion of Q3, no one can stand the gaff to invite me."

LOL, Q3 is banned but not Q4?

<< Comment #283 @ 20:52 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Arcita

I'm glad cpl didn't wait for the q4 1.3 patch to make their decision. And then after the 1.3 patch and quake 4 still sucks perhaps cpl should have waited for the 1.4 patch before deciding. Get over it... quake 4 sucks.

<< Comment #287 @ 22:35 UTC, 25 July 2006 >>

By

Pilgr1m

Yang 'Rocketboy' Meng: : I'll train on Q4 until CPL Singapore, by then I can just consider whether I should turn from Q4 to Q3. I don't have much time and energy to play both 2 games, because my skill is not very well nowadays, I can just focus on one game, I'm not Cooller, haha.

*GOLD*
rofl

<< Comment #300 @ 10:12 UTC, 26 July 2006 >>

By

ashr - Reply to #287

hehe. i think moving to Europe would do wonders for Rocketboy. he actually is very skilled and is probably being held back by lack of competition in his country. from what i've heard, there aren't too many chinese players playing q4.