<3 you GAZ

i bet it wont

how much matey

gaz toonz at the roflz of t0fflez at the brofflez

not that hard

ya, it gunna raep comps n put big weps on ur scr33n liek Q4 BUT IT WILL BE BETTER LOLZ!!!!1111one

well being better than quake4 is not really an achievement now is it?

I really hope UT3 will be worth starting to play, I'll always love CPMA and I probobly wont ever quit but I'm getting bored of always playing with the same people and the same clans in the small scene that is CPMA.
My biggest concern is that the movement will be a bit strange getting used to .. hopefully it wont be that bad.

Painfully simple, overscaled level designs, thinly veiled in FPS hogging static meshes, shit movement and bad weapon balance and you'll need a 1000 euro pc to run all this.

I look forward to seeing the tech behind it, but even that's not such a big deal anymore, everyone used to say it's miles better than Doom 3 engine, well, 3 years on and the thing is STILL not even released.

Well that's a positive way of looking at it.

UE3 was released nov 2006, almost a year ago now (GOW)

edit: you do know that lots of static meshes leave u with higher fps than lots of hardware brushes right? thought u did level design? :o

GOW was NOT like the tech demos I saw on the PC all that time ago. I'm still waiting for these.

Secondly, my point about static meshes was not to compare the performace vs brushes because the type of goemetry I was referring to would not be possible to build inside the editor with brushes.
hence, why I specified a static mesh and why your argument for the comparison of brushes vs static meshes is a valid point in general, it's ultimately inapproapriate in this instance.

P.S.
GOW was a good game and I'm sure the single player experience of UT3 will be decent too, but ofc I was referring to multiplayer only.
As most people do on this site as that's the thing that keeps people hooked.

updated ut3 footage at comic-con

there's a bunch of ingame footage played by randoms who came to comic-con.

so far it's the best view there's been on the game, on how it's actually played by people who play to frag and not to show off that beautiful level design or new weaponmodel ;)

i just hope you can turn all this fancy blingbling-eyecandy shit off! and wtf is up with the maps. in ut we had good maps like liandri, turbine, tempest, codex, curse, deck etc (notice how all those maps are indoor maps) and in ut2kx we had shit like antalus and a shitload of other outdoor maps which all sucked big time. and all i've seen in ut3 so far is outdoor maps...

how many dm maps have they shown so far....

the answer is 1, and that map is a mix of outdoor/indoor.

in ut2k4 there's few "out-door" maps, but ok, there's many open spaced maps I agree.. there was actually a bunch of the stock 1on1 maps that never got picked up, that was very close and fairly tight, compared to the other maps we play.

but yeah, not that I like ut1, but I surely hope that they make tight and close maps again.

there is no ut3 SP, that's just marketing bullshits, unless you call bots on a mp map a SP game

but when u say "fps hogging static meshes" u make it sound like hardware brushes arent as fps hogging, when they take a bigger toll than static meshes. kk? regarding ue3, the tech demos look better than gow but viewing ue3 on a tv set is kinda shit, and i bet details had to be set to medium to get good frames on a console. it is capable of much more and you'll see that on a good spec pc. having said all that, gow looks the shit

You're getting muddled up. I have to clear this up with you.
"Hardware Brushes" and "Static Meshes" are exactly the same thing. "Hardware brushes", is just older terminolgy for "Static Meshes".

To be honest I did not mean for one second to bring up the discussion of what is faster. However....

I'm well aware that "previous" UT games have per vertex lighting on "static meshes", as opposed to per pixel lighting on std brushes.

But, with UT3 I forsee is requiring A LOT more high detailed geometry (static meshes), so whether they can get away with staying with vertex light, or whether they have to use per pixel lighting remains to be seen. that might well change the situation.

whoops, ofc i meant bsp brushes vs static meshes. tbh i dont get your gripe with static meshes, they're efficient and add loads of detail, the lighting issue doesn't seem to mess with visual quality too much in ue2 but maybe they've fixed this in ue3, dunno.

edit: i remember one big gripe players had with meshes was that you'd find yourself stuck on some mesh poking out of the wall, but now those stock maps have been edited and mappers are using blocking volumes to prevent it, so there's very little case against them

I think his gripe is that you often get "stuck" in staticmeshes around the maps.

I have a hate/love relationship to staticmeshes.. at some point they're nice and add massive amounts of detail to a map, on the other hand, getting stuck in one is fustrating like hell... the positive side of this is that it imo raises the skillbar by a little bit becuase you have to move with perfection to get around a map very fast, but I think they annoy me more than what's good :P

Well, as I said static meshes will play a huge part in UT3 so they better sort something out:)

I have not played enough UT to really notice it, but I know what you're talking about as i played enough doom 3 and most of these editors work the same as they all have shit polygon/brush control.
I have always used maya for level creation, it's the proper way to do things AND it's future proof.

The editors like id's/epic etc have their plus point's with regards to real-time compilation of scenes, but I really dislike them for creating levels. If you're used to maya or max it's almost painful to use these hideous things.

"std brush"

made me lol :P


/edit

even messed up replying because of it O.o

Yeah, haha! Priceless...

jjiz

worst quake > best ut

worst girl > men

totally agreed d1ckz.... after watching those gameplay videos I'm even more hyped.. it looks like they've taken care of the whole scale issue and also the balance seems to have changed towards more closecombat.

atm I can't really spot anything that will make this a bad game.

wait till its released before u make ur mind up

why? I'm going to buy it no matter what, so doesn't really matter what I think of it in advance :P

exactly

just because some nonce runs head first at a bunch of novice bots doesnt mean its gonna be a close combat favoured game

theyve still included the shock rifle in ut3, sadly

judging by the difficulty of each weapon, shock looked harder, same with combo (ofc I can see that they were kinda crap, but nevertheless, the combo looked more difficult to do) flak looked easier in very close range but not as much spammy on mid/long range beacuse of the bigger spread.

rockets looked more bouncy and bigger splash and such shaft looked much more useful and especially the plasma...

all things that speak towards a more in your face game, it might end up being some hitscan shit anyway, but I'm sure it'll be less than the current ut games.

come on, you know it.. when shock is mentioned as the shitty unbalanced weapon of ut, we obviously don't talk of combo (which requiers skill) but of the ridiculously overpowered primary fire
plus being a boring instant hit weapon

still combos are a bit too easy to do in ut2k4 :P

and if you look at it the videos I gave link to somewhere in this blog then you'll see that shock looks to have a slower rof... ofc the models are bigger now so it kinda outbalances the slower rof, nevertheless I don't think it'll be so easy just to hold prim fire down and bounce the opponent around

ye, I hope they figured out this 2k4 issue
anyway, instant hit weapons are lame, they shouldn't exist, even in cs

nade only cs!!

I don't mind that there's instahit guns, they should just be guns which are not as dominant as they are in most modern games

"nade only cs!!"
nope I was thinking of non instant hit guns, like stalker has (or in a slower projectile way : painkiller's stake launcher)

yeah, instant hit weapon should have their damage power lowered
having 80ms ping was ok five years ago, now it's kinda lame ; and so these weapons should be balanced according to the way our pings have improved
e.g imo shock's primary fire should give less than 20dmg ; its main purpose is to make shock combos, not play àla cs style

agree about using fast projectiles to replace hitscan weapons.

CANT WAIT FOR UT3 TO COME OUT and suck ass so you could STFU already :)

who needs new games? go play UT2K4.. what's wrong with that?

it's shit

it lacks of nervosity
with proper balancing, especially making "dodge+jump" faster/more nervous/less floaty on the moon, imo this would be the best ut gameplay
ut3 will be as simple as ut99 movement wise, which is too simple
not enough movement possibilities ; not mentioning covering a map from side to side in no time will not be possible now, making gameplay strategicaly limited

looking forward to onslaught though, it'll certainly be the best battlefield-like this year

ut has never been about getting from point a to point b fast, but about making the actual fights fast

whereas quake is the opposite...

people should just learn to play what they like instead of wanting to combine both, it's been done multiple times and all times so far it's turned out horrible if you ask me.

btw, they increased the walkspeed, so it's not like you'll be much slower around the map than in ut2k4 from what I can see and understand.

and from what I hear from epic, then ut3 movement will more be a mix of ut2k4 and ut1.

people should just let other people have their opinion about what they like best gameplay wise
;)

anyway I bet you that ut3 movement will not suit dueling ; but on the other hand tdm will certainly come back mainstream (and for fun sake that's a good thing). got no opinion on ctf, could be cool, could be shitty

just saying, they've tried doing it in mods... didn't turn out that well.

dno if duelling will be a flop in ut3 or not, but as you say, I'm sure tdm will be a hit there, which is very nice... always loved ut2k4 tdm above any other tdm game :)

yep, imo ut is for tdm (all about dodges using any angles) and quake is for ctf (all about moving fast in lined-curved path) (and I don't care enough about duel to have an opinion)

totally agreed... I'd say both games are good for duel, it just depends what type of duelling game you're looking for =)

ETQW has it beat by a mile.

that's not the same gameplay, there is objectives and maps arn't symetricals
anyway etqw gameplay looks great, too bad the engine/netcode is killing it

have you played beta2 yet? the netcode has been tweaked and is exceptionally better than it was previously.

yes, I don't see any difference
maybe that's because I got a tweaked net_clientprediction (aside other engine/netcode tweaks) from day one of beta 1, and I bet that's the only thing they could have possibly changed in beta 2 : just some variables
I don't believe they could have changed something into the code so fast

mod it and make the best of it

ITT: Quake fanbois don't wanna admit that q4 sucked monkey balls

ITT = ?

[e] the problem is ut3 is gonna suck bigger balls -.-

maybe for the quakers, but maybe it gives what the ut players look for.... and then I'd say it's not a game that sucked balls, it's a game which hit it's target audience, unlike q4 that didn't really hit any audience.

it hit me, all that counts :) i don't care about the mass, i thoroughly enjoy playing it :D

:)

I hope ut3 hits me aswell ;)

im a quake fanboy:

QUAKE 4 SUCKS DONKEY BALLS (monkey too)

happy now ?

/me jumps around in joy, happy happy happy! =)))))

on a sidenote: I totally agree with you.

thread invaded by tewic's UT3 propaganda!

ye, you'd think you'd been bought by the Epic PR department... ;)

im pretty sure there were ppl like u before the Q4 release... just like there were doom sayers aswell.

anyway, from the videos ive seen, itll be a bit of a 'realism deathmatch' game....

saying quake games u move faster than u fight.....(!!!) did u ever play QW??? Q2 is a singleplayer game. i wont bother with Q3 and Q4... many ppl found the move from the fast and visceral experience of QW to slower and more precision based weapons to be a bad move on iD's part. anyway, im dreading several things with this game.... unplayable framerates, focus on BF-like gametypes, and finally, that it was actually a fun game. :)

hehehe :DD

and yeah there were even more people hyping d3/q4, if we hype or don't hype, wont make a difference for the final product anyway, so ye well.

I havn't played enough qw to have a decent opinion on it, from the videos I've seen then it's a super fast game around the maps... with fast fights I mean that during a fight that positions may change a lot and the whole fight will take place over a big part of the map.... USUALLY in quake I always see that the frag is done fairly quick and because of strafejumping needs time to get up in speed then the fight phase is much slower than the speed around the maps... in ut2k4 is it imo the direct opposite

not saying that fights in quake is boring... I find them less interesting than in ut, BUT quake makes up for that with spawnraping, where as ut2k4 usually has less frags but the fights last longer.

both two good games, but as always a matter of what you prefer.


unplayable framerate I doubt you should be afraid of... the first time I saw UE3 in action was back in late 2004 I think, it ran perfect in full detail back then today they can run it perfect in full detail etc with a monster rig, and according to epic they run it on 7800GS in their testlab.

it'll suck some computing power, but I doubt it'll be as much as d3/q4 did at it's release (just guessing here from what I've seen)

I SECOND THIS, GAMINGBUDDY :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

UT1: 6 rockets and super-fast rate of fire Sniper ROFLe
UT2003: Attempt to copy a lot of Quake 3's gameplay (armor system and fast weapon switch) which ended up as a total failure
UT2004: awful hitscan only game that a CS player can pick up instantly (lol burnie)
UT3: Another iteration in being Quake's Down syndrome afflicted cousin. (or just ?????)

haha at gif :D

ROFL

as much as I love ut2k4 above ut1... then that gif was priceless!!

tewic u speculate far too much, whats the point of saying what u think it will be like? u might as well just say nothing and wait till u play the game to find out what its like.

but where's the fun in that ?!

there isnt any, other then disappointment cos a game never lives up to overhyped expectations

sorry, next time ill add some [sarcasm] brackets ;D

yeah well, you go and tell that also to the quakers who speculate far too much in how it'll suck etc..

and I doubt I'll get dissapointed... I was totally hyped on cnc3, it lived up to my overhyped expectations....

thing is, I'm not like the other cnc fans out there, or like the q3 players that waited for q4..

I don't expect more of the same old shit (like 99% of the fanboys that are stuck in the past), I hope for something new, for some change, improvement. I hope for a game that has some good parts from the older versions but brings new stuff in and gives a new refreshing experience (even if it's the same type of gameplay etc).

but in the end... you shouldn't care because it wont be you who get dissapointed if anyone gets dissapointed... (unless it's a massive hit and thus takes over some of the tournaments that quake could have... yeah I can see the dissapointment for the quakers then (dno if you're one of those, I just assume so :P))

im with u i hope its a great game but i refuse to speculate, and yes ur correct, quakers do narrow mindedly say it will be automatically shit, just because they cant be bothered to learn it and its different from what thier use to, i just find it irritating tho when people actively attack or defend a game before they have played it.

ahh, so you're not a quaker just attacking me because I look positively at it, that's reliefing to know =)

Would make it make you happy to know that it's not all good I think about this game? got some doubts here and there, I just prefer to ignore them and hope for the best (probably because my "life-vision" is partly based on smth like: the higher goals the better results, and that if you want something badly enough you'll eventually get it - so at times I think a bit different to so many other sceptic people)