Announcement

**Maniac** · 17 November 1999, 10:13

I would say that the look and feel of Q3, from the weapons to the arena's to the player models is more substantial and offers better physics and gameplay. UT seems a bit too Half-Lifeish which isn't necessarily a bad thing...

------------------
Celeron 300A@464 2.0V, Abit BH6 G400 16meg DH@150/200, Western Digital Expert 18gig, Ricoh mp7040A, Pioneer 6X DVD slot load, Motorola Cable Modem w/DEC ethernet card, Soundblaster Live Value Ver. 2, Viewsonic GT 775

**Fogduck** · 17 November 1999, 11:26

i have been playing single and multiplayer Quake since Quake1, and have lost countless hours to each successive version, including and up to 1.08 and the recently released DemoTest.

i picked up the UT demo days after it came out, quite sceptical.

after playing UT for 10+ hours/week, i can't bear to go back to Q3.

i know a lot of people will blindly swear by id Software -- i used to, but right now i feel they're playing a game of catch-up with UT. the latest "enhancements" in the latest Q3 DemoTest reek like "me too" enhancements, especially bot chatter, among other things.

furthermore, the bots in UT are unparallelled in their human-like behaviour. i avoided botmatching for the longest time because i felt it couldn't live up to the real thing. well, once again, i was surprised...i enjoy botmatching in UT almost as much as i enjoy fragging my friends.

the bots in Q3 are...well, lets just say: the easiest bot skill was too easy to kill, and the next level up was a MASSIVE difference, with me having to camp the armor and bigger weapons to stay on top. the bots in Q3 feel too...mechanical.

also...the performance in the latest Q3 demotest has degraded since 1.08.

up until a few days ago, i would have considered both UT and Q3 definite buys. now, only UT is a definite buy for me.

id Software deserves all the money it earns, but i feel let down with Q3 so far.

me: "UT vs. Q3 is like Q3 vs. Q2."

**Fogduck** · 17 November 1999, 12:31

mind you, i guarantee you that players who are new to the FPS genre and who also rely heavily on rockets will NOT like UT.

anyone noticed how public Q3 servers are rocket-fests 80%+ of the time?

not only is there a greater variety of weapons in UT, there are some weapons that are UNIQUE to UT/Unreal, and they are all very well balanced.

what is great about that is that GOOD players can maintain a good FPH with almost any weapon. it also means that less experienced players are encouraged to develop more than just rocket-lobbing skills.

**Wannabe** · 17 November 1999, 13:07

You are right, fogduck.
I don´t like this "rocket-launcher-and-nothing-else"-mentality.
It is pure fun to play UT.
Is it boring to fight against bots ? No way, you can adjust the difficulty just fine. The bots are clever (depending on the settings of course), and they have this kind of `human touch`. I love this game.

Yesterday I installed Q3, started the game, said "boah, pure eye-candy, outstanding", played it, ten minutes later I left the game and started an UT-Insta-Gib deathmatch against friends.

Statement: I am going to buy UT, and I´m looking forward to playing games based on the Q3 engine.

Insta-Gib rulez

Wannabe

**IceStorm** · 17 November 1999, 13:30

I don't know what the UT people did, but UT 348 is slower than the previous version.

Q3A runs great, and I can't tell the diff between 16bit and 32bit. This is good, because 32bit in DualHead multi-display mode doesn't work all that well (no DualHead, it's fine).

I preordered UT because I want the t-shirt. I'll probably pre-order Q3A for the tin box. :-)

Just hope the next rev of Matrox drivers have those DX7 enhancements, so UT runs faster...

Just my $0.02

------------------
Primary System: Athlon 550, MSI 6167 mb w/BIOS 1.3, 3x128MB PC100 ECC SDRAM CAS2, G400 MAX in multi-monitor mode, Two Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 900u monitors, Intel Pro/100+ Management Adapter, SoundBlaster Live!, DeskTop Theater DTT2500 DIGITAL Speaker System (Sweeeeeet!), WDC WD20 5AA 20GB HD, WD AC310100 10GB HD, Toshiba SD-M1212 6x DVD-ROM, HP 8100i CD-RW, Epson Stylus Pro, OptiUPS PowerES 650, MS SideWinder Precision Pro USB joystick, Gravis Xterminator gamepad (no DX7 drivers yet), Logitech 3-button mouse, Mitsumi keyboard, Win98 SE, Belkin OmniCube 4-port KVM, 10/100 5-port Linksys Ethernet switch, Epson 1200u scanner, Epson Stylus Pro printer, Logitech QuickCam Pro with the little stand and the lense kit (cool).

Secondary System: PIII-450, Soyo 6BA+ IV, 1x128MB PC100 ECC SDRAM CAS2, Millennium G200 AGP, V2 SLI rig, Intel Pro/100+ Management Adapter, SoundBlaster 32, WD AC41800 18GB HD,WD AC310100 10GB HD, Creative Dxr3 DVD decoder card, Hitachi GD-2500 6x DVD-ROM, Win98 SE

Tertiary System: PII-266, Asus P2B BIOS 1008, 1x128MB PC100 ECC SDRAM CAS2, Millennium II, 3Com 3C905, 3Com 3C509, ADSL Modem 640kbit down/90kbit up, Mylex BT-930 SCSI card, Seagate 2GB Hawk, Seagate 1GB Hawk, Quantum DLT 4000 tape drive, NEC 6x CD-ROM, Linux distro S.u.S.E. 6.1 (IP Masquerade works!)

Quaternary System: Ocean Rhino 9 motherboard w/Intel 430HX chipset, P200MMX, 4x64MB EDO Parity RAM, Millennium II, 3Com 3C590, SoundBlaster 16 MCD, Fujitsu 3.5GB HD, WD 1.2GB HD, Haven't chosen an OS yet.

And a JetDirect EX print server that bootp's its address from the Tertiary System.

All specs subject to change.

**DarkSyd** · 17 November 1999, 13:57

Petter-
If you like the sniper mode in Q3, you'll love the sniper rifle in UT (alt fire mode is the scope, complete with smooth zooming).

IceStorm-
The 348 patch on my machine was sloooow. I dl'ed the complete 348 demo and it was mcuh faster.

I've played Q1, Q2, and the Q3 test online and have enjoyed all three. I'll probably end up buying Q3 eventually, but my money's for UT as soon as it is released. I haven't played a game quite so addicting since the first Descent.

Can't wait till Friday (although I'm sure I won't get it till next week some time )

DS

**Fogduck** · 17 November 1999, 14:18

DarkSyd: there's a sniper rifle in UT? sweet. i didn't know about that. i loved the mass-driver in D3 and the zoom combo with the railgun in Q3.

IceStorm: slower? i found the same with 348 until i did a full re-install.

re Q3: i probably will end up buying it as well, in case all my UT playing buddies all disappear.

**IceStorm** · 17 November 1999, 15:00

Ah... I'll try the full deal, then.

Thanks for the tip.

**DarkSyd** · 17 November 1999, 15:36

FogDuck-
I wouldn't worry about your UT buddies disappearing. I think it will be the other way around. With UT being first to market, I'm figuring it'll put a pretty big dent in id's sales.

...and wait till you see the Redeemer

DS

**Minder** · 17 November 1999, 18:26

As a quake clan member, i tend to favor quake arena (of course ).

UT simply can't compete in hardcore online play. The whole immersion factor is just a level higher.

BUT...
the bots in the new quake3 demo test really suck. The first four difficult levels are easy. But then there is level 5 - this one just sucks. This is pure bot match. He never loses aim and is dumb like a young dog.

E.g. in tourney he simply ignores all the armor. But on the other hand the bot does not need it, as from the moment he gets the shotgun you're dead meat. Each shot a full hit (meaning after 5 shots with 100/200 status you're dead). He can look through walls. The moment you walk around a corner or leave the teleporter - bang - hit.

I played UT a couple of times and the bots are MUCH better. You really get the feeling of playing human players and not bots.

For me this is just one small minus for quake3. But I think this is a big point for the casual player who does not spend 10+ hours online a week.

So i have some fears for quake arena. You don't get the million sailes number with hardcore online players.

PS: Don't tell my clan that I've posted this

**Kenlon** · 17 November 1999, 23:02

"Aaaaaand the winner is. . .. "

Gamers. We can only benefit from having two strong competitors in the FPS Deathmatch arena.

Same as Intel/AMD, really. . .

------------------
Kenlon
"I am. All else is negotiable."

**Echo|Fox** · 17 November 1999, 23:37

It's a toss up.
I hated Unreal with such a passion I nearly passed on Unreal Tournament. To me, Unreal was just eyecandy with shitty weapons =)
I wasn't a huge Quake2 player, except for CTF for a few weeks when it came out...
With Q3 and UT though, it changes.
I've been playing Q3Test since its first released, and have had a lot of fun. The deathmatch is unparalleled. Everything just feels right. When Unreal Tourney's demo came out I downloaded it and installed it, played for about an hour or two doing some botmatches, found it was kinda cool, but I still hated the weapons.
Then 2 weeks ago I had a LAN party. The first game we played was Unreal tourney instagib on DM Morpheus and DAMN was that fun. Unbelievably fun. It really set the tone for the evening. We played many, many games of humans vs bots, bots and humans vs bots and humans CTF and Domination. After a while, we fired up Q3Test, since there was one diehard Quaker their and he was getting antsy =) To be honest ... it wasn't nearly as fun. In Unreal, everyone was shouting out orders, yelling, bitching, swearing, complaining, and generally having a good time. Q3 just felt kinda dull after that. We never even bothered for UT deathmatch, except for the ever popular instagib that everyone loved, simply because UT sucks for plain DM play.
After the LAN party I decided to play some online UT CTF and see how it was. Despite the fact that i was connecting to 70ms ping servers, and i'm on cable, it was virtually unplayable. The latency was wretched and it felt madly broken on every server i tried. I was depressed. So i fired up Quake3 and had fun again.
My verdict?
For pure deathmatch play over the Internet, Quake3 hands down.
For alternate gameplay modes on LAN, Unreal Tourney takes the cake.
Which will i play more when it comes out? That depends =)

------------------
P3-450@558mhz@2.1v, ABit BE6, 128megs 7.3125ns PC133 SDRAM, SB Live! Value, G400 32meg Dualhead (@120%), Acer ALN-201 PCI 10bT NIC, 6.5gig Seagate Medalist Pro 7200rpm, 13gig Quantum Fireball CR, Yamaha 4416e Burner, Pioneer 10x DVD-ROM, Panasonic e70 17" Monitor, Antec KS-188 24" Tower, 6 year old Honeywell-SUH 101key Keyboard, Logitech Trackman Marble+

**legaljaxor** · 17 November 1999, 23:42

couldn't agree more. i love em both. haven't played much UT online since i think q3 has much better netcode--or maybe its just the servers i'm on. i find UT really hard. I'm pretty new to deathmatching but i can hold my own (i actually won once) in quake (against average competition) in UT i just get hosed. As far as framerate my g400 vanilla (which has 16 megs of 5ns and 16 megs of 6ns--go figure) runs fine at 150/200 (UT no probs; q3 might see some artifacts after a while in the sky) and gets 58 in demo1 at 8x6x32bilinear16ztextures3/4 which is my "sweetspot". I get about the same in UT with similar settings (everything up except curved surfaces). I played the "demos" enough for each i'm going to have to buy both due to the public television guilt trip factor.

cph

------------------

**Ozymandis** · 18 November 1999, 04:12

I am in a Quake3 clan now, and I do have to speak up a little for Q3 and say that it is pretty good. But sadly, compared to UT it is lacking. Perhaps because I am in a Shogo MAD and play faster games, but UT r0x hard, much harder than Q3. UT CTF also rules, although I havent seen Q3 CTF. I will play Q3 because I have to, but UT is much more fun. And as for netcode, I am on an OC3 line (over ethernet) and find UT is much more precise in terms of netcode, with much better prediction. But who am I to judge?

Announcement

THE BIG DEATHMATCH - UT vs. Q3

THE BIG DEATHMATCH - UT vs. Q3

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment