UT 2003, 2004 - what gives?

Just wondering what "fascinates" people about this game?

There is just something about these games that seems to make me want to hate them!

It isnt the fast-paced action, either, as Quake 3 contains fast-paced action and I think that game is sweet.......

does anyone else think this game is full of bs and totally overhyped?

chubz said:

Just wondering what "fascinates" people about this game?

I have enjoyed the entire series...even Na Pali...have you played onslaught? it kicks ass. I think/thought the unorthidox weapon designs work well, and they are creative

It isnt the fast-paced action, either, as Quake 3 contains fast-paced action and I think that game is sweet.......

It is the fast paced action...a part of it anyway. Quake 3? That was ok, I enjoyed it for a while, but the fact is that it shipped as only 1/2 a game. I mean fuck, there are maybe 3 decent DM levels out of the box, not counting the redone 'tourney' levels from a patch. 4 ctf maps? Not only that, but I got damn tired of playing in gothic style maps...and I HATE void maps.

UT2k3 and especialy 2k4 have a wide array of map themes...and a shitload of-em out of the box. It has more gametypes. Oh yeah, let's not forget that finding a quake 3 game online sucks. maybe if server admins wouldn't put bots on...christ, I'd spent all night looking and entering games until I found humans. You don't have that problem with ut2k4.

Don't get me wrong, Quake 3 could've been awsome. It does 'feel' better...and q3dm13 is one of my all-time favorite maps

does anyone else think this game is full of bs and totally overhyped?

It may be hyped quite a bit...so?

simply put, the game is smooth and fun to play

/remind me to stop posting wilst intoxicated

It is a very well-rounded and solid game. extremely configurable, very professionally done, and it is definitely fun to play. sound and graphics are excellent.
but...
I have to agree completely personally. the lack of player speed and their current bend towards teamplay makes it a very weak competitor to Quake3.
It's like having Christina Aguilera and Anna Kournikova anytime you wish... how often are you going to choose Christina... seriously. :)

Opulent said:

It's like having Christina Aguilera and Anna Kournikova anytime you wish... how often are you going to choose Christina... seriously. :)

I'd take 'em both

There was something about 2k3 that I didn't like. Yes, the models are well done. The maps are awesome to look at, the weapons are more balanced, the Adrenaline system is certainly something new for an FPS and I enjoy listening to the main menu theme. But there were little details that turned me off from 2k3. The link gun looks cool, but its firing sound is wimpy. The lightning rifle could have used some bass. The assault rifle seemed kinda weak compared to the '99 Enforcer. The blobs of goo from the Biorifle look microscopic. Somehow it doesn't feel UTish to me.

I haven't downloaded the 2k4 demo, but I do hear it's closer to UT99 than 2k3.

Unreal 2003 wasn't that special. But Unreal 2004 was a landmark, an accomplishment. Special and amazing. :D

2004 - honestly - still isn't good enough for my tastes. But I do concede that it is FAR improved over 2003. Definitely, definitely improved.

It isnt the fast-paced action, either, as Quake 3 contains fast-paced action and I think that game is sweet.......

Quake 3 had fast-paced action?

You sure you aren't confusing Quake 3 for some other game?

The UT2003 control system seems a bit jittery to me (maybe i've just been playing AVP2 and Quake for too long), but otherwise it's great.

AgentSpork said:

Quake 3 had fast-paced action?

You sure you aren't confusing Quake 3 for some other game?

Ha. Watch a ztn3tourney1 demo of Cooller, or a proq3dm6 demo of ZeRo4. Or perhaps a fox demo on proq3tourney4. Or maybe a fatal1ty (old) demo of q3dm17. :)

Opulent said:

It's like having Christina Aguilera and Anna Kournikova anytime you wish... how often are you going to choose Christina... seriously. :)

This is where the emphasis on teamplay comes in for me.

Numbermind said:

This is where the emphasis on teamplay comes in for me.

:D hahaha
(my point is that you can only play ONE game at a time on your PC (realistically anyway)) You must make a choice whether you spend your time on Doom, Quake, ..... UT is just too far down the list to ever choose it (for me).

i thougth UT was a far better game compared to quake 3. had more game modes and was more compatible. it had software support, ut2004 does too.

however i dont think they need to make a new one every year

i use to play alot of quake 3, until i bought UT a year later. I played UT far more than quake 3 after than

I think that they are some of the best games ever.

mje said:

2004 - honestly - still isn't good enough for my tastes.

well, wtf? You must have quite the standards when it comes to enjoying a game

Quake III is far better. Quake III actually has a reputable weapon balance and the physics are much more fun. Also, the tournament maps in Quake III simply better than any map in UT2004.

Quake III is just designed better for the serious gamer. That's all there is to it.

This is all in my opinion, of course, but it's no secret that Quake III is the only tournament game to last as long as it has.

Go to any pro gaming site -- cyberfight.org, esreality.com, cached, I don't care. Find their demo section.

See how Quake III has about five times more demos than any other game (except for maybe Counter-Strike)? This is because it is THE tournament game. It really is just better than all the rest.

I hope that DOOM 3 will knock it off of its perch, we'll see. But at the moment, it will take more than 100+ maps, a silly goo gun, slow moving characters, and ffa-focussed gameplay to reel me into the Unreal universe.

Oh - not to mention the character models are incredibly dorky. :) (the Egyptians - ha, and those undead fags - to name a few)

actually, Quake(1) has 10x the pro demos of any other game. Q2, Q3, and CS are about even.
something important to note is that many of the pro-gamers for the Quake games also play UTxxxx as well.(partially because of the money, but that's not the only reason)
even the highlight reels and movies of UT are dead boring in comparison to the id games... IMHO.
UTxxxx is still a great game -- once again in my VHO, it is the only non-quake-engined FPS game that gives id's games a run for their money.

Quake I is not played anymore though. It died within a couple of years of Quake II's release.

The only recent tournament that Quake was played at was ASUS Spring Cup 2004, and it was alongside Quake III.

I'm not kidding about Quake III being the most played tournament game. Look at the sites I listed. It's still very active.

no offense mje, but you don't know what you are talking about.
in 2004, QW is much more active than any other idsoftware game(professionally anyway).

Goliath said:

I think that they are some of the best games ever.

Never played UT03 but UT04 kicks ass, very big modding community, and I gotta love the bonus packs too!

The Assault and Onslaught modes in UT2004 are really good.
...
And UnrealEd 3 is much more easier to use than UnrealEd 2.

UT2k4 has ragdoll physics, and that's good enough for me...

Yea, but it's not Havok physics engine, it's Epics own physics engine, called Karma.

Both are very good, comparing Painkiller's Havok to UT2004's Karma physics

Heh, so Valve couldn't be bothered to make their own Physics engine? Everyone I hear is like "OMG HL2'S PHYSICS ENGINE IS SO 1337 OMG" when it's not even their own.

Just like they used Quake's engine for the first half-life..

Mr. Chris said:

Yea, but it's not Havok physics engine, it's Epics own physics engine, called Karma.

Epic didn't make Karma.

Okay, so it's not theirs. I made a mistake :P

They're both pretty good.

Regarding Half-Life mentioned, I'm pretty much Anti-HL/Steam now.

Opulent said:

no offense mje, but you don't know what you are talking about.
in 2004, QW is much more active than any other idsoftware game(professionally anyway).

Where are you getting that information?

ESWC - biggest tournament in the world, at the moment. No QuakeWorld.

ASUS Spring Cup 2004 - some QW, along with Quake III.

Cyber X Games Finals - No QW

ASUS Winter 2004 - no QW

Arbalet Cup 2004 - no QW

CPL Denmark 2003 - no QW

QuakeCon 2003 - No QW

AMD PG Challenge 2003 - no QuakeWorld

ASUS Spring 2003 - no QW

WCG 2002 - no QW

QLAN - No QW

QLAN 2 (2004) - No QW

I can go on -- and on -- and on -- and on. Nobody plays QuakeWorld professionally anymore. It is dead. Quake III, Counter-Strike, and here and there, some War Craft III, are THE competitive games today.

And I do know what I am talking about.

EDIT -- Just checked on the CPL website -- they haven't hosted a QuakeWorld tournament since 2001.

EDIT 2 -- A quick run through cached.net's demo section will show that two professional QW games have been recorded and posted there in 2004, a few in 2003, etc, but the majority of QW activity did indeed cease after 2001. An overwhelming majority of the demos released on that site in the past two years are either Quake III or CS.

okay, if you mean the tournaments that are played for money, then yes you are right.
No one plays QW professionally FOR MONEY anymore... but the QW scene is much stronger than any other id game at the professional level.
I was meaning tournaments played at a professional level, not sponsored events. About half of the best Q3 players don't play Q3 professionally for well over a year... that kind of puts a damper on the money tournaments.
The sponsored events don't have older games, because they are less flashy and don't bring in the money. If there were 50 million QW players, then the events would have QW, but there aren't. Current gamers play UT2004; and that's why it is a sponsored game.

Your original post referred to the number of demos not the number of sponsored events. I don't care if it's Death playing Cooller in his garage, the quality of the demo is all that is important.
I wasn't attacking you personally, I hope you don't take it that way, watching demos is what I do for a living. I have 100,000-some demos on my computer; I might have more FPS demos than anyone else on the planet.
besides, you and I agree about UT. :)

This is getting more and more off topic -- but I really want to ask this.

Why do people play Quake I? I will admit I haven't deathmatched in serious mode ever on it, so I can't exactly appreciate its weapon balance or really even physics.

But - for instance - why would one play it over Quake III? What in Quake's engineering makes it a worthwhile game?

mje said:

But - for instance - why would one play it over Quake III? What in Quake's engineering makes it a worthwhile game?

because they like it? because they're have fun playing it? it's like asking why the hell does anyone doom anymore?