UT99 to Ut2003--Modders, start the Engine

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Prophetus

Old Fart
Dec 4, 1999
3,099
7
38
55
...standing behind you...
OK, I've spent a fair amount of time reading several forums and hundreds of threads about UT2004 and if people will like it compared to UT99 and UT2003. I'm pretty fed up with all the debates between which version was better (UT99 or UT2003) and why UT2003 sucks. Hey, I agree UT2003 sucked--to a point--and that UT99's gameplay was better. However, every person has different reasons why both games were better or worse.

It is during these "I think the game sucked because..." debates that people will list their reasons and what were the changes that hurt UT2003. After reading all these rants, I've come up with a solution--Modders, rebuild UT99 using the UT2003 engine!

I challenge any mod team to recreate UT99 using the UT2003, or UT2004's engine. But, there are some rules.

Rules:

1. All maps must be EXACTLY the same as those in UT99. Meaning, the scales must be the same. However, textures and other eye candy from UT2003 must be used. If a UT99 map doesn't have fog, coronas...etc...don't put it in.

2. Models must be the same scale as in UT99. Models can be the same ones used in UT2003, but cannot double jump, wall jump, or have any abilities that is not present in UT99. Other stuff like animation and/or how the physics engine works with those models can be used. Models from UT2003 must have the same abilities as those in UT99...meaning their jump distance and air control must be the same as in UT99. This goes for any and all characteristics found in UT99's models.

3. Here is the tricky part. Both UT99 and UT2003 weapons can be used, but not together. The mod must ensure that only one game's weapons are used and cannot be combined.

4. Power up characteristics must be exactly like UT99's. Meaning that all health, armor, boots, amps...etc...must have the same values as those found in UT99. Their graphical appearance can look like UT2003's, just as long as they don't hold UT2003's power up properties.

5. No adrenaline and no extra features/power ups can be imported from UT2003.

6. Game types. CTF, DM, TDM and any other game type found in UT99 should be present. If the game type isn't found in UT99...it can't be included. Assault doesn't have to be included...since UT2003 doesn't have this game type by default.

Basically, this mod should make UT99-Next Generation a close representation of the original UT99, but using the UT2003/2004 engine. The goal: let people figure out just exactly what made UT2003 suck. Will it be the models? Will it be the weapons? Will it be the maps? Or is it just our imagination and inability to accept change?

I issue this challenge to any mod team to create a new sequel to UT99!
 

atropos

The One and Only
Aug 24, 2003
300
0
0
37
Belgium
A good idea, i enjoyed the Assault-mod with UT99 maps very much and if this MOD will be made, i will be very happy.
I got two maps planned, but after these are done, i might make a remake of an UT99 map, the only problem is, i can't get my UEd 2 running, so i don't know the scales.
 

Doc_EDo

LEFT
Jan 10, 2002
755
0
0
Maps can't be ported just like that. There are many more BSP errors with the newer engine. A lot of converting to static meshes and other tweaking must be done.

I have the code for Assault and 2 maps ported to ut2003. If you want that in your mod just ask.

For porting maps from UT to UT2003 see this tutorial i made:
http://www.planetunreal.com/roar/tutorials/porting.html

I've presonally uninstalled UT, but if you need tips on ut2003 i can help.
 
Last edited:

Radiosity

Minty Fresh!
Jan 3, 2003
2,217
0
0
46
UK
www.radiant-studios.net
Someone's already planning this:

http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=322876

I'll post here what I can't be bothered to post at ina - UT is not UT2003. And vice fricken versa. No-one will listen though so I'll just leave it there.

On topic for a moment, if some people here decide to go through with this (despite it already being done by someone else as well) then I can help out with maps, since I've already got ported versions of most of the decent maps that I've done myself. And most of them do import smoothly Parser, you just have to kill off all the non-solid brushes (zone portals, non-solid brushes, water brushes etc) to get rid of the huge amount of BSP errors that usually occur :)

To clarify, I'm not particularly interested in a remake of UT, but since I have the skills to quickly and efficiently port the maps across, I would be happy to help out (I also enjoy porting maps which is a bonus :D ).

edit: Doc_EDo posted before me, the scoundrel that he is :) I'm not sure where everyone gets these ideas that maps don't port well, I've never had any problems with it. Like I said above though, you need to kill non-solid brushes at the very outset to avoid the BSP errors. Paths, zones, lights, playerstarts, ambient sounds, most of that stuff ports as well with no fuss. Basically it's just the weapons and pickups that don't. And if you copy all the texture packages to your UT2003 textures folder, open all of them and then import brushes from UT, they'll rebuild fully textured too :) Albeit misaligned mostly, but it's enough to get updated textures slapped on at a good speed.
 
Last edited:

Prophetus

Old Fart
Dec 4, 1999
3,099
7
38
55
...standing behind you...
Glad to see some people are interested. I didn't realize another person had the same idea, might be a plus to get in contact with him/her and combine your efforts.

I'll be honest, I'm not looking for a UT replacement, but something to give the folks a good idea of what is really missing in UT2003. At the same time, revamping UT99 would be cool. I don't know how much work this would involve, but I know it would be worth the effort.

This idea actually came to me when I read all the threads and remembered this Quake III conversion (can't think of the guy's name right now...but well known in both the Quake and Unreal world) that made UT99 using the Quake III engine.

Will be interesting to see how well UT99's "feel" translates into the UT2003 engine.
 

NeoNite

Starsstream
Dec 10, 2000
20,275
263
83
In a stream of stars
At least some remember the right name of the game: UT, Unreal Tournament.
Just say it out loud. Sounds nice doesn't it? It simply flows :D
Now say Ut99.

:eek:


Btw: The ut->q3 conversion: -> unreal arena.

maps included: the demo maps. It still needs a lot of work.
 

Radiosity

Minty Fresh!
Jan 3, 2003
2,217
0
0
46
UK
www.radiant-studios.net
I don't think it would be a great deal of work really. The most time consuming part would be porting things like the DOM gametype, especially reworking the AI. Unless DDOM was going to be used, but then it wouldn't be UT ;)
 

Parser

Hello
May 7, 2002
1,531
0
0
120
England baby!
fraghouse.beyondunreal.com
Ok, I'm back now, so I'm going to start coding a mutator that will change player and weapon attributes to the UT1 values for a start, and disabling MultiJumps.
I'll post a checklist when I get something done, since my work on the "Uber Secret Fraghouse Project" for UT2003 is more or less done. :)
 

TossMonkey

brown bread?
Sep 4, 2001
6,101
7
38
41
Great Britain.
quakeguy.tumblr.com
I don't like rule 1.

Personally I don't want to see UT remade. But I want the essence of UT to live on. UT2003 doesn't have that feeling that UT had (and still has).

If people take on this challenge it will be, without a doubt, the biggest challenge they will have ever undertaken.
 

Parser

Hello
May 7, 2002
1,531
0
0
120
England baby!
fraghouse.beyondunreal.com
Ok, well I've got the player attributes done according to UT1's "Classic" speed settings. Classic running speed, swimming speed, no more multijumping or dodgejumping, just dodging. UT1's jump height value (only 20 less than UT2003's, but hey)...

Have I missed anything? I'm going to start on the pickups and weapons next.
 

Parser

Hello
May 7, 2002
1,531
0
0
120
England baby!
fraghouse.beyondunreal.com
I don't think that's a player attribute, but I'll look into it if some gametypes get going. Um.. xPawn attribute AirSpeed was set to 440, in UT1 it's set to 0, but changing it in UT2003 to 0 didn't make any difference whatsoever.
Oh yes, and I need to find a way to remove walljumping.
 

Hunter

BeyondUnreal Newsie
Aug 20, 2001
7,422
62
48
38
...Behind You...
www.unrealfans.com
i can look into getting a few maps over from ut to ut2 if a couple of people will work with me, im not great of both paths etc.

[edit1]
what about GOTY editions and normal ut versions?

does it matter in maps or not?

[edit2]

what about music??
 
Last edited:

KarlMarx

New Member
Oct 4, 2003
47
0
0
Parser said:
Ok, well I've got the player attributes done according to UT1's "Classic" speed settings. Classic running speed, swimming speed, no more multijumping or dodgejumping, just dodging. UT1's jump height value (only 20 less than UT2003's, but hey)...

Have I missed anything? I'm going to start on the pickups and weapons next.

Sounds like some great progress, Parser!

I hope eveyone interested (here, on INA and elsewhere) can begin to consolidate their work in a single project to prevent duplication. A number of individual mutators already exist for a ripper, sniper rifle, UT translocator, etc. It seems to me the challenge is to collect and improve these individual efforts, to take the next step in terms of modelling UT physics, and to bring them all together in a coherent mod pack of sorts which can approximate UT classic game play as much as possible. Of course not everyone will see the value in doing this. But I think enough people would like to see UT gameplay incorporated into the more advanced technology (graphics, netcode, anti-cheat, etc.) of UT2k3/4 that it's worth trying.

HS Spot on INA has offered web space and a forum (bb.ourtime.us) to coordinate these efforts. They are trying to test axis movement/scale and perspective right now. I don't know if this emering project needs a single 'home' but it would at least be good to get peeps interested here in contact with the others working towards the same goal.
 
Last edited:

Radiosity

Minty Fresh!
Jan 3, 2003
2,217
0
0
46
UK
www.radiant-studios.net
@ Hunter - Don't worry too much about pathnoding, as I mentioned above you can simply port the paths from UT to UT2003. It's best to set up Jump spots etc yourself though as UT uses them for a number of different things that UT2003 now has proper actors for.

@ Parser - I can do the music easily enough, I use Modplug to grab the umx then just convert to ogg. And I do have the bandwidth to upload stuff like that :)

@ KarlMarx - Hi and welcome to BuF :D