🚀 go-pugleaf

"Double Z" <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote in message 
news:ftWdnRtZcIGB1Y3anZ2dnUVZ_q6hnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump 
> a little higher, tho.
>
> The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a 
> tripod.
>
> The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>
> But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>
> I was wondering what others think of it.

I think it's wonderful. The jumping seems harshly reduced because it was so 
far out of hand before. It should help with all the bunny-hopping DM games 
that go on.

I'm with you on the maps thing. I'd love to see what's going to ship with 
the retail. 

goPostal wrote:
> "Double Z" <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote in message 
> news:ftWdnRtZcIGB1Y3anZ2dnUVZ_q6hnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump 
>> a little higher, tho.
>>
>> The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a 
>> tripod.
>>
>> The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>>
>> But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>>
>> I was wondering what others think of it.
> 
> I think it's wonderful. The jumping seems harshly reduced because it was so 
> far out of hand before. It should help with all the bunny-hopping DM games 
> that go on.
> 
> I'm with you on the maps thing. I'd love to see what's going to ship with 
> the retail. 
> 
> 
Perhaps I missed this elsewhere, but there are still going to be 
mutators, right? I didn't see any place for them, and IIRC, the '04 demo 
had a few. Also, is the full release going to be limited to 16 
players/bots? Seems like a bummer to go DOWN from the 32 allowed in  '04.

Shock Combo looks awesome, haven't seen the 'deemer yet.

> Perhaps I missed this elsewhere, but there are still going to be
> mutators, right? I didn't see any place for them, and IIRC, the '04 demo 
> had a few. Also, is the full release going to be limited to 16 
> players/bots? Seems like a bummer to go DOWN from the 32 allowed in  '04.
>
> Shock Combo looks awesome, haven't seen the 'deemer yet.

I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere official that mutators are back, but 
you're right I didn't see a place for them either.  I think the 16 bot limit 
is only on the demo.  If you bring up the console (~ key) and type 'loaded' 
you can get the redeemer to play with (instant match, not online of course). 
Might also want to add 'god' so you don't blow yourself up, it's got a 
pretty big blast radius! 

AdrGTD wrote:
> goPostal wrote:
>> "Double Z" <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote in message 
>> news:ftWdnRtZcIGB1Y3anZ2dnUVZ_q6hnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able 
>>> jump a little higher, tho.
>>>
>>> The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like 
>>> a tripod.
>>>
>>> The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>>>
>>> But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>>>
>>> I was wondering what others think of it.
>>
>> I think it's wonderful. The jumping seems harshly reduced because it 
>> was so far out of hand before. It should help with all the 
>> bunny-hopping DM games that go on.
>>
>> I'm with you on the maps thing. I'd love to see what's going to ship 
>> with the retail.
>>
> Perhaps I missed this elsewhere, but there are still going to be 
> mutators, right? I didn't see any place for them, and IIRC, the '04 demo 
> had a few. Also, is the full release going to be limited to 16 
> players/bots? Seems like a bummer to go DOWN from the 32 allowed in  '04.
> 
> Shock Combo looks awesome, haven't seen the 'deemer yet.

Adrenaline, combos, are they going to be present? Most of the game looks 
great, I really like the effect seen when vehicles respawn. The 
Bio-rifle goo looks cartoonish and fake. Shock Combos look AWESOME, but 
nearly the same effect is by the longbow missiles, which seems kinda out 
of place. The Redeemer explosion looks ok, , judging by how cool the 
shock combo looks, it could be much better.

I'm not throwing away 2k4 yet. .

Double Z wrote:
> 
>> Perhaps I missed this elsewhere, but there are still going to be
>> mutators, right? I didn't see any place for them, and IIRC, the '04 
>> demo had a few. Also, is the full release going to be limited to 16 
>> players/bots? Seems like a bummer to go DOWN from the 32 allowed in  '04.
>>
>> Shock Combo looks awesome, haven't seen the 'deemer yet.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere official that mutators are back, but 
> you're right I didn't see a place for them either.  I think the 16 bot 
> limit is only on the demo.  If you bring up the console (~ key) and type 
> 'loaded' you can get the redeemer to play with (instant match, not 
> online of course). Might also want to add 'god' so you don't blow 
> yourself up, it's got a pretty big blast radius!

I did that, only used 'allweapons'. It looks OK, but the shock combo 
looks much better. Lol, that'll be the first mod I make: A redeemer with 
the shock combo's effects.

> I'm not throwing away 2k4 yet. .

Heh, I just played a few rounds a little while ago, to sort of contrast and 
compare 

Double Z wrote:
> 
> I was wondering what others think of it.

I'm mostly comparing UT with UT3 as for me the original one is the one I 
played like 99% of my total UT game time.

I played a little DM and TDM both off- and online last night and did 
okay I think but it did feel pretty frantic. Is it just me that is 
getting old or is the default gamespeed pretty high compared to UT?

As for graphics I found them pretty good but with the pace of the game 
it is pretty much a waste since it's not like there is time to take in 
the view:-)

My machine struggles in the first couple of seconds after loading a new 
map and I'm guessing it's some sort of memorycache that needs to be 
filled or something and that is whit the default level of detail but 
with the resolution raised to 1920x1200. (P4HT 3Ghz, 2 GB ram, Radeon 
1900XTX). Is there a way to do a timedemo so we could compare 
performance and find out how important CPU, memory and so on is?

The GUI I don't like. It may be more user friendly with it's limited 
amount of options but I much prefer the drop down menues of old. It was 
faster and gave a better overview of all things. Also while gaming it 
seems there are some problems where the scoreboard is not displayed when 
you're fragged and at end game it's does not always show and if it does 
  one can't see the typed messages from players.

I will most likely buy the game for my PC when released but I'm still 
thinking the odds is really that it will just rekindle my UT appetite so 
in effect it will just make me play UT againg :-)

Kind regards
Bruno aka Cool.DK

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:14:11 -0800, GTD <Stoooopid@duuuh.net> wrote:

>goPostal wrote:
>> "Double Z" <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote in message 
>> news:ftWdnRtZcIGB1Y3anZ2dnUVZ_q6hnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump 
>>> a little higher, tho.
>>>
>>> The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a 
>>> tripod.
>>>
>>> The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>>>
>>> But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>>>
>>> I was wondering what others think of it.
>> 
>> I think it's wonderful. The jumping seems harshly reduced because it was so 
>> far out of hand before. It should help with all the bunny-hopping DM games 
>> that go on.
>> 
>> I'm with you on the maps thing. I'd love to see what's going to ship with 
>> the retail. 
>> 
>> 
>Perhaps I missed this elsewhere, but there are still going to be 
>mutators, right? I didn't see any place for them, and IIRC, the '04 demo 
>had a few. Also, is the full release going to be limited to 16 
>players/bots? Seems like a bummer to go DOWN from the 32 allowed in  '04.
>
>Shock Combo looks awesome, haven't seen the 'deemer yet.

Bring down console, type in "allweapons" followed by "allammo". You'll
see every weapon available.  :)

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:42:12 +0200, Bruno <dont.use@this.address.ever>
wrote:

>Double Z wrote:
>> 
>> I was wondering what others think of it.
>
>I'm mostly comparing UT with UT3 as for me the original one is the one I 
>played like 99% of my total UT game time.
>
>I played a little DM and TDM both off- and online last night and did 
>okay I think but it did feel pretty frantic. Is it just me that is 
>getting old or is the default gamespeed pretty high compared to UT?

It's faster, for sure.

>As for graphics I found them pretty good but with the pace of the game 
>it is pretty much a waste since it's not like there is time to take in 
>the view:-)
>
>My machine struggles in the first couple of seconds after loading a new 
>map and I'm guessing it's some sort of memorycache that needs to be 
>filled or something and that is whit the default level of detail but 
>with the resolution raised to 1920x1200. (P4HT 3Ghz, 2 GB ram, Radeon 
>1900XTX). Is there a way to do a timedemo so we could compare 
>performance and find out how important CPU, memory and so on is?

I have an explanation of how to run a benchmark here:
http://pubheroes.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3599&postcount=64

>The GUI I don't like. It may be more user friendly with it's limited 
>amount of options but I much prefer the drop down menues of old. It was 
>faster and gave a better overview of all things. Also while gaming it 
>seems there are some problems where the scoreboard is not displayed when 
>you're fragged and at end game it's does not always show and if it does 
>  one can't see the typed messages from players.

The UI is an abomination, dumbed down for the console crowd.  Epic's
getting a ton of negative feedback here:
http://utforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=578486

>I will most likely buy the game for my PC when released but I'm still 
>thinking the odds is really that it will just rekindle my UT appetite so 
>in effect it will just make me play UT againg :-)
>
>Kind regards
>Bruno aka Cool.DK

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:22:29 -0500, "Double Z"
<zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote:

>Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump a 
>little higher, tho.
>
>The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a 
>tripod.
>
>The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>
>But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>
>I was wondering what others think of it. 

Great gameplay, lousy UI. 

In terms of polish, this is the worst demo that Epic has produced so
far.  The server browser is a joke.... how could something as simple
as being able to sort a numeric list (pings) get past QC?  You can't
tell what players are in a game, you can't see other people's pings
and most of the servers aren't even showing up due to bugs in running
a dedicated server on either a MS 2003 server *or* a Linux servers. No
ability to add a favorite, no ability to get to a server by IP address
unless you're familiar with the "open" command in the console, which
means most newcomers are playing online on lousy listen servers run by
some kid using their parent's crappy DSL line.  And why the hell
didn't Epic/Midway set up their own dedicated servers like they did
with 2K4?  And there's a ton of small stuff like no ability to throw
weapon, inability to go 1st person in a vehicle or zoom the vehicle
perspective, no easy way to change some keybinds ('Q' for hoverboard
sucks for me, since it's on the other side of the keyboard from all my
other keys).  No per-weapon crosshair choices.  Mouse sensitivity is a
stupid dumbed-down console slider instead of being able to dial in a
number like 2.4.  Yada, yada.

I know it's a beta demo, but there appears to be a major pile of shit
that needs to be addressed and I'm doubting they can do it all in the
30 day timeframe that's required for the thing to go gold in
mid-November.  They've had three years to address things and this
steaming pile of a UI is the best they could come up with?  I knew
that Epic's success with GOW and the decision to port the UT series to
console would have negative effects on the series... I guess I was
hoping I would be wrong.

Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.

"Folk" <Folk@folk.com> wrote in message 
news:b5n4h3t2g3l8dg1itfspl55c83ik3al18n@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:22:29 -0500, "Double Z"
> <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump 
>>a
>>little higher, tho.
>>
>>The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a
>>tripod.
>>
>>The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>>
>>But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>>
>>I was wondering what others think of it.
>
> Great gameplay, lousy UI.
>
> In terms of polish, this is the worst demo that Epic has produced so
> far.  The server browser is a joke.... how could something as simple
> as being able to sort a numeric list (pings) get past QC?  You can't
> tell what players are in a game, you can't see other people's pings
> and most of the servers aren't even showing up due to bugs in running
> a dedicated server on either a MS 2003 server *or* a Linux servers. No
> ability to add a favorite, no ability to get to a server by IP address
> unless you're familiar with the "open" command in the console, which
> means most newcomers are playing online on lousy listen servers run by
> some kid using their parent's crappy DSL line.  And why the hell
> didn't Epic/Midway set up their own dedicated servers like they did
> with 2K4?  And there's a ton of small stuff like no ability to throw
> weapon, inability to go 1st person in a vehicle or zoom the vehicle
> perspective, no easy way to change some keybinds ('Q' for hoverboard
> sucks for me, since it's on the other side of the keyboard from all my
> other keys).  No per-weapon crosshair choices.  Mouse sensitivity is a
> stupid dumbed-down console slider instead of being able to dial in a
> number like 2.4.  Yada, yada.
>
> I know it's a beta demo, but there appears to be a major pile of shit
> that needs to be addressed and I'm doubting they can do it all in the
> 30 day timeframe that's required for the thing to go gold in
> mid-November.  They've had three years to address things and this
> steaming pile of a UI is the best they could come up with?  I knew
> that Epic's success with GOW and the decision to port the UT series to
> console would have negative effects on the series... I guess I was
> hoping I would be wrong.
>
> Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
> what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.

In reflection I will have to agree. It feels much more like I'm playing a 
PS3 port than a pc game. They can keep the new interface but give us the 
ability to change to a "pro" style that lets you tweak without resorting to 
editing ini's. The server browser really is a mess too. It looks like we can 
clearly see where Epic is going with the franchise.

Can't wait to play with the editor though. I want to see how these meshes 
work. There looks to be a TON of bsp and mesh polygon calculation but 
somehow it's kept really low. FPS is very good considering the level of 
viewing detail. 

> I'm mostly comparing UT with UT3 as for me the original one is the one I 
> played like 99% of my total UT game time.

    Same here, I still pop in UT every now and then, for the hell of it

> I played a little DM and TDM both off- and online last night and did okay 
> I think but it did feel pretty frantic. Is it just me that is getting old 
> or is the default gamespeed pretty high compared to UT?

    Yeah, it's definately faster

> As for graphics I found them pretty good but with the pace of the game it 
> is pretty much a waste since it's not like there is time to take in the 
> view:-)

    The lighting is incredible...I haven't played Crysis yet, but I bet it's 
on par

> Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
> what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.

    I guess they're feeling the heat over there to get this thing out, 
hopefully they can use what time they have left to work on tweaking the 
UI/Server Browser, seeing as a total overhaul is probably out of the 
question... 

double zee wrote:
>> Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
>> what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.
> 
>    I guess they're feeling the heat over there to get this thing out, 
> hopefully they can use what time they have left to work on tweaking the 
> UI/Server Browser, seeing as a total overhaul is probably out of the 
> question...

I'm thinking opening up the archive and getting a few KB of code from 
UT/UT2003/UT2004 should make it pretty easy for them to make the GUI 
into something a lot better. And I really do think they need to because 
people will want more control - even on the PS3.

Kind regards

Bruno aka Cool.DK

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:01:47 -0700, "goPostal"
<agutgopostal@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Folk" <Folk@folk.com> wrote in message 
>news:b5n4h3t2g3l8dg1itfspl55c83ik3al18n@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:22:29 -0500, "Double Z"
>> <zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able jump 
>>>a
>>>little higher, tho.
>>>
>>>The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a
>>>tripod.
>>>
>>>The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
>>>
>>>But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
>>>
>>>I was wondering what others think of it.
>>
>> Great gameplay, lousy UI.
>>
>> In terms of polish, this is the worst demo that Epic has produced so
>> far.  The server browser is a joke.... how could something as simple
>> as being able to sort a numeric list (pings) get past QC?  You can't
>> tell what players are in a game, you can't see other people's pings
>> and most of the servers aren't even showing up due to bugs in running
>> a dedicated server on either a MS 2003 server *or* a Linux servers. No
>> ability to add a favorite, no ability to get to a server by IP address
>> unless you're familiar with the "open" command in the console, which
>> means most newcomers are playing online on lousy listen servers run by
>> some kid using their parent's crappy DSL line.  And why the hell
>> didn't Epic/Midway set up their own dedicated servers like they did
>> with 2K4?  And there's a ton of small stuff like no ability to throw
>> weapon, inability to go 1st person in a vehicle or zoom the vehicle
>> perspective, no easy way to change some keybinds ('Q' for hoverboard
>> sucks for me, since it's on the other side of the keyboard from all my
>> other keys).  No per-weapon crosshair choices.  Mouse sensitivity is a
>> stupid dumbed-down console slider instead of being able to dial in a
>> number like 2.4.  Yada, yada.
>>
>> I know it's a beta demo, but there appears to be a major pile of shit
>> that needs to be addressed and I'm doubting they can do it all in the
>> 30 day timeframe that's required for the thing to go gold in
>> mid-November.  They've had three years to address things and this
>> steaming pile of a UI is the best they could come up with?  I knew
>> that Epic's success with GOW and the decision to port the UT series to
>> console would have negative effects on the series... I guess I was
>> hoping I would be wrong.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
>> what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.
>
>In reflection I will have to agree. It feels much more like I'm playing a 
>PS3 port than a pc game. They can keep the new interface but give us the 
>ability to change to a "pro" style that lets you tweak without resorting to 
>editing ini's. The server browser really is a mess too. It looks like we can 
>clearly see where Epic is going with the franchise.

Mark Rein posted to the Epic forums and admitted that the server
browser in particular and the UI in general needs work.

>Can't wait to play with the editor though. I want to see how these meshes 
>work. There looks to be a TON of bsp and mesh polygon calculation but 
>somehow it's kept really low. FPS is very good considering the level of 
>viewing detail. 

Have you heard about Kismet yet?  

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 19:13:25 -0500, "double zee"
<zzinkmetairie@nospammingplzbellsouth.net> wrote:

>> Don't get me wrong guys... I think the gameplay is top-notch.  This is
>> what UT2003 should have been.  I'm just disappointed in the packaging.
>
>    I guess they're feeling the heat over there to get this thing out, 
>hopefully they can use what time they have left to work on tweaking the 
>UI/Server Browser, seeing as a total overhaul is probably out of the 
>question... 

Correct.   There's no way they will completely overhaul the UI at this
late stage in the game.  Hopefully they will at least expose a bunch
of missing options.

"Folk" <Folk@folk.com> wrote in message 
news:2r97h39k6n6i233t7puf788ldaq7n5k7ma@4ax.com...
> Have you heard about Kismet yet?

Curiosity is aroused now....

I googled it and now I have about a thousand more questions. Anything that 
makes Uscript easier to use though is fine by me. 

Double Z wrote:
> Seems like a pretty solid game...I like it.  I would like to be able 
> jump a little higher, tho.
> 
> The redeemer kicks ass; it's a bit bigger now and unfolds kinda like a 
> tripod.
> 
> The hoverboard is cool in CTF.
> 
> But ugh, the demo only has 3 maps...I want more!
> 
> I was wondering what others think of it.

Visually a little strange...but overall feel is nice...
I think I could get back into this....
Thankfully the old sniper is back (hated that damn lightning gun!!!!)

Love the hoverboard... that's is freakin' fun.