Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411273 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 03:21:07 AM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperDesignUT99 vs Quake/s
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Author Topic: UT99 vs Quake/s  (Read 5635 times)
Eigen
Level 10
*****


Brobdingnagian ding dong


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 23, 2013, 01:39:47 AM »

The funny thing is when quake was released in 1996 everyone complained about it being too slow.

If you come from Doom then Quake is slow.
Logged

InfiniteStateMachine
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2013, 01:45:17 AM »

I do come from doom. Maybe that's why quake felt just right.


Doom deathmatch is still awesome too. The revival is great but it's hard to keep up with the stream of mods out there. Sometimes I just want to play pure.
Logged

Graham-
Level 10
*****


ftw


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2013, 11:30:22 AM »

I played UT99 first, on Dreamcast too. Then CS: Source later in my years.

I was frustrated by UT. It was the first big multiplayer game I played. I got owned over and over. Now I'm okay at CS. I was too naive for UT. Loved single player though.

God I love the mouse.
Logged
rivon
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2013, 02:56:43 PM »

What about making a little TIGS UT99/Quake Lovers tournament? :D
Logged
InfiniteStateMachine
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2013, 03:35:43 PM »

I would love to but my ping would probably be over 500 :X

When I get back to north america I'm down Smiley
Logged

Schoq
Level 10
*****


♡∞


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 25, 2013, 06:15:39 AM »

most people in this thread are euros though :P

I'd be down as well, if someone would organize such a thing.
Logged

♡ ♥ make games, not money ♥ ♡
InfiniteStateMachine
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 25, 2013, 03:40:26 PM »

even then. It's not really about where I live. It's the fact my internet is this godawful Wimax that adds at least 200 ping to everything I do.



To think I could have gotten fiber 1gps for less money.....
Logged

munkman
TIGBaby
*


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 26, 2013, 12:47:32 PM »

Still UT is way faster than any Half-Life game. Those are the real slow ones.

HLDM is some of the craziest I've seen. gauss jumping makes it like qw but way faster.

Logged
Sharkoss
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2013, 08:47:22 PM »

Quake III is much faster-paced, and all-around more twitchy.
Unreal Tournament has a much more interesting and creative weapon set.  That Quake III's is more balanced isn't a point in its favour when pretty much all the weapons do is shoot numbers.  Nobody should be impressed by that, least of all people posting in this board.
Unreal Tournament encourages development of a richer pool of skills.
Unreal Tournament is a better game.
Logged
Gregg Williams
Level 10
*****


Retromite code daemon


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2013, 10:31:03 PM »

QuakeWorld, especially with mods like mega team fortress. UT was just so slow, though I will admit to loving some of the low gravity maps.

Also UT had the super area of effect weapons like the combo with the laser, and that instant kill AOE rocket thing, which I always thought was a bit lame. I enjoyed Solider of Fortune 1 more than UT in the end, and Quake more than both.

Didn't ever play the later quakes/UTs much though.


Logged

s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 28, 2013, 02:41:52 AM »

Quake III is much faster-paced, and all-around more twitchy.
Unreal Tournament has a much more interesting and creative weapon set.  That Quake III's is more balanced isn't a point in its favour when pretty much all the weapons do is shoot numbers.  Nobody should be impressed by that, least of all people posting in this board.
Unreal Tournament encourages development of a richer pool of skills.
Unreal Tournament is a better game.
"variety" without balance is pointless in a competitive gam.

also "richer pool of skills" such as clicking the right mouse button sometimes
Logged
Sharkoss
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 28, 2013, 05:54:37 AM »

It's not like UT is especially unbalanced - it's just not quite as balanced as a game that is pure spreadsheet.  It's a moot point anyway, as you still have more viable options in UT than Q3, internal balance or no.
There are single weapons in UT that are more interesting than all the weapons in Q3 combined, and that's not even hyperbole. Further, people who like Q3 are stupid babies what wet themselves.
Logged
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 28, 2013, 06:45:11 AM »

people who like UT are scrublords w/ the reaction time of a sloth B)

gota goo fast
Logged
Fallsburg
Level 10
*****


Fear the CircleCat


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 28, 2013, 07:17:07 AM »

That Quake III's is more balanced isn't a point in its favour when pretty much all the weapons do is shoot numbers.  Nobody should be impressed by that, least of all people posting in this board.

Actually, I think it's something people on this board should pay more attention to.  Uniqueness and creativity aren't synonyms for good.  A good, balanced game is a fucking lot of hard work, and that tends to get glossed over on these boards as people clamber for unique, creative games.  Any jackass can come up with "A missile launcher that loads more missiles" but to perfectly (or nearly perfectly) balance a variety of weapon types is an impressive act.
Logged
Schoq
Level 10
*****


♡∞


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 28, 2013, 07:23:43 AM »

Well, another common problem for indie games is that they just don't have enough weapons/actions/items/stuff to do at any given time, so I think people here can take a valuable lesson from both games.
Logged

♡ ♥ make games, not money ♥ ♡
Sharkoss
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 28, 2013, 07:59:47 AM »

That Quake III's is more balanced isn't a point in its favour when pretty much all the weapons do is shoot numbers.  Nobody should be impressed by that, least of all people posting in this board.

Actually, I think it's something people on this board should pay more attention to.  Uniqueness and creativity aren't synonyms for good.  A good, balanced game is a fucking lot of hard work, and that tends to get glossed over on these boards as people clamber for unique, creative games.  Any jackass can come up with "A missile launcher that loads more missiles" but to perfectly (or nearly perfectly) balance a variety of weapon types is an impressive act.

You're quoting me, but your response is so detached from what I was saying that I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a straight reply or if you're just using my comment as a springboard to talk about something different.
Logged
Fallsburg
Level 10
*****


Fear the CircleCat


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2013, 09:57:56 AM »

I was rebutting your point.  Your point was stupid.  I was telling you why it was stupid.  Your other points were also stupid, but I didn't feel like rebutting them. Going down the list:

1: Quake III is much faster-paced, and all-around more twitchy.

Statement of fact (mostly), no need to rebut.

2:Unreal Tournament has a much more interesting and creative weapon set.  That Quake III's is more balanced isn't a point in its favour when pretty much all the weapons do i
s shoot numbers.  Nobody should be impressed by that, least of all people posting in this board.
Your stupidest point, the one I felt the need to rebut.

3:Unreal Tournament encourages development of a richer pool of skills.

Personal opinion with literally nothing to back it up.  So stupid that it isn't worth discussing until you actually support your argument.

4:Unreal Tournament is a better game.

See 3.

Logged
rivon
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 28, 2013, 10:42:58 AM »

There are single weapons in UT that are more interesting than all the weapons in Q3 combined
Oh, which ones are those?

Further, people who like Q3 are stupid babies what wet themselves.
Yeah, now you're a real badass Big Laff
Logged
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2013, 10:46:46 AM »

It's not like UT is especially unbalanced
it's not like it's especially "deep" on a "tactical" level either tho. between a well balanced pure twitch shooter and a slightly less balanced slower twitch shooter with a tiny bit of so-called "depth," the former wins for me.

ANYWAY
Quote
Uniqueness and creativity aren't synonyms for good.  A good, balanced game is a fucking lot of hard work, and that tends to get glossed over on these boards as people clamber for unique, creative games.
i think originality is important but the neither of the games that we're comparing here are exactly paragons of innovation so the point is kinda moot
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 10:54:22 AM by C.A. Sinclair » Logged
Sharkoss
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 28, 2013, 02:54:48 PM »

I was rebutting your point.

No you weren't.  You started ranting about uniqueness and creativity not being synonyms for good like I was making some sort of general point about that.  But the weapons in UT are unique, creative and good.  So it's a straw man and/or false dichotomy or whatever.  They're also as well-balanced as could possibly be expected of a game with actually interesting mechanics that can't easily be mapped to a spreadsheet.  Further, given that UT has more viable combat options in general than Q3, the balance factor is a red herring - it's not like UT has an uberweapon that makes other guns redundant, it just has a couple of duds (which are still pretty fun to play with and useful in a pinch). So does Q3, actually, but I conceded the point from the get-go for the sake of argument.  Your point about simple games being hard enough to balance is only half true - in any case, my actual point was that a game without any interesting mechanics is scarcely worth playing at all, no matter how balanced it is as a consequence of being uninteresting.  If the choice is between an interesting poorly balanced game and an uninteresting well-balanced game - don't play either.  At least, not for very long.  Play UT instead!

There are single weapons in UT that are more interesting than all the weapons in Q3 combined
Oh, which ones are those?

The shock rifle.  You could make a case for the translocator, pogo stick, ripper, bio rifle, enforcer and redeemer too.  I'm cheating, but the link gun from later games buffs the floor with every idea iD software ever had (which isn't saying nearly enough), and is one of the nicest and most elegant pieces of game design ever game designed.

EDIT:  I just wanna say that the language I used in that post like "richer pool of skills" that people are smirkily putting-quote-marks-around was borrowed directly from the OP.  I was just responding point by point using that format.  So you can stop now.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 03:03:37 PM by Sharkoss » Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic