naliking said:
I just checked Csports.net and UT99 with all its mods, has less players than UT2004 with all its mods.
UT2004: Best Multiplayer 2004
- Thread starter hal
- Start date
-
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.
I just checked Csports.net and UT99 with all its mods, has less players than UT2004 with all its mods.
sub·jec·tive P Pronunciation Key (sb-jktv)adj.
1. b)
Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. (source)
According to Csports right now, UT2004 is the 10th most popular online game this month. MORE popular than BF:Vietnam by over 120 000 players. This makes it the most popular online game released in 2004, unless you want to include CS:Source, (actually a mod, but if you want to have it your way we'll include it), in which case it is the 2nd most popular game of the year. Pretty darn good for a game which you (*cough*) subjectively claimed is a flop. You mentioned CoD: United Offensive being a 2004 game that is more popular online than UT2k4, however you gave no evidence to show that more people are playing UO and not the original - Csports just lists Call Of Duty.
And by the way, when it was pointed out to you before in a previous thread that when looked at over the month, UT2k4 had very respectable figures, you said something really bizarre along the lines that you couldn't look at a games numbers over the month because many people might have played it that month, decided that they didn't like it and not played it again.
1) You could apply this to ANY game.
2) UT2k4's numbers have been steady long enough now month after month (at least 8 months after the release of the demo) to show that this is not true.
Another thing.
Not once in your post did you offer an explanation as to why you keep going on that UT is more popular than UT2k4 (which seems to have a lot of relevence to you), but didn't mention my point that MOST games sequals are less popular than there originals. I backed this up with (very kindly supplied by you) which showed that UT2k4 was exceptional in the respect that it was more popular than its predecessors. Again, for a game which you claim is a flop, that's good going. Is HL2 a flop because it has fewer players than HL? is CS: Source a flop because it has fewer players than CS? Is BF:Vietnam a flop cos because it has fewer players than BF.1942?
You get the picture I'm sure. The point being that you only apply your logic where it suits you, then ignore it when it contradicts you.
The only facts you have proved is that Gamespy gives a false representation of UT2k4s popularity, and that it is less popular than CS.
Not one single person has said that you are wrong in this, so when you say:
So don't kid yourself. You're not setting the record straight. You are just repeating the same thing, using facts that when looked at closely, show your argument to have no foundation, and merely based on your subjective opinion. It's called:
tro·lling V Pronunciation Key (tro-lin) Verb-gerund
1) a) Repeatedly being deliberately negative because you have some biased dislike of something and feel a need to demonstrate said dislike to people who don't concur with this opinion.
b) see also: Naliking
I know from previous experience that you will reply for sure, that your reply will contain exactly the same amount of substanceless nonsense that all your posts contain, and you'll kid yourself (because you're the only person who actually believes it) that you are setting the record straight. So do so, but rest assured, I won't be replying, as you pointed out once before, there are better things to do. I'm going to have an hour gaming, will it be HL2, CS, BF:1942 or MoH? You know the answer, the MP game of the year of course..the one with the flak cannon
1. b)
Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. (source)
=subjective
=subjective
=subjective
=subjective. Most people on these forums (myself included) didn't like UT2003, but many of them DO like UT04..which wouldn't make sense if they were exactly the same
=subjective. You've gone on about this before. Claimed that Onslaught rips off BF:1942. I guess you could make that claim if the rest of us had never played BF:1942 before, but most people have. I own it, have played it a lot, and for me it is nothing like Onslaught except for the fact that you have vehicles. Every aspect of gameplay feels different, but that's just my opinion, which, like YOUR opinion is (you guessed it) SUBJECTIVE!
Congratulations!!! That's not subjective. Thats just plain false. I play online a lot, and use the fliters to eliminate servers with bots. Now, if what you said is true, then I wouldn't be able to find any servers, but I have never once had a problem. Onslaught regularly has 60+ servers without bots. (and by the way, you said "E)" twice....
=subjective. again. That's your opinion. For reasons that I outlined above, I have a different opinion (do you see how easy this subjectivity is to get the hang of?) You've outlined all your reasons above, which as I've shown you are subjective...and therefore your opinion is no more valid than mine.
=subjective. this is according to you. But according to Gamespy it actually IS multiplayer of the year. You don't agree with it, that's just fine, take it up with Gamespy.
According to Csports right now, UT2004 is the 10th most popular online game this month. MORE popular than BF:Vietnam by over 120 000 players. This makes it the most popular online game released in 2004, unless you want to include CS:Source, (actually a mod, but if you want to have it your way we'll include it), in which case it is the 2nd most popular game of the year. Pretty darn good for a game which you (*cough*) subjectively claimed is a flop. You mentioned CoD: United Offensive being a 2004 game that is more popular online than UT2k4, however you gave no evidence to show that more people are playing UO and not the original - Csports just lists Call Of Duty.
And by the way, when it was pointed out to you before in a previous thread that when looked at over the month, UT2k4 had very respectable figures, you said something really bizarre along the lines that you couldn't look at a games numbers over the month because many people might have played it that month, decided that they didn't like it and not played it again.
1) You could apply this to ANY game.
2) UT2k4's numbers have been steady long enough now month after month (at least 8 months after the release of the demo) to show that this is not true.
Another thing.
The ability to read is an incredibly useful thing, what I actually said was:
I never said you hated UT, I said you hated UT2k4 because you prefered UT99. You really make it too easy for me..
Not once in your post did you offer an explanation as to why you keep going on that UT is more popular than UT2k4 (which seems to have a lot of relevence to you), but didn't mention my point that MOST games sequals are less popular than there originals. I backed this up with (very kindly supplied by you) which showed that UT2k4 was exceptional in the respect that it was more popular than its predecessors. Again, for a game which you claim is a flop, that's good going. Is HL2 a flop because it has fewer players than HL? is CS: Source a flop because it has fewer players than CS? Is BF:Vietnam a flop cos because it has fewer players than BF.1942?
You get the picture I'm sure. The point being that you only apply your logic where it suits you, then ignore it when it contradicts you.
I think we have establised the difference between fact and subjective opinions. The only "facts" you have presented have been from CSports. You used these facts to show that UT2k4 is not as popular as Gamespy claims it is. However, when those exact same facts that you presented can be equally argued to prove your opinion wrong..you call into question THE VERY SAME FACTS YOU USED TO PROVE YOUR ARGUMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Do you not see a blatant contradiction here?
The only facts you have proved is that Gamespy gives a false representation of UT2k4s popularity, and that it is less popular than CS.
Not one single person has said that you are wrong in this, so when you say:
You are wrong, because no-one has said anything that you have proved wrong...you've just offered subjective (I love that word almost as much as you love "fanboy") opinions.
So don't kid yourself. You're not setting the record straight. You are just repeating the same thing, using facts that when looked at closely, show your argument to have no foundation, and merely based on your subjective opinion. It's called:
tro·lling V Pronunciation Key (tro-lin) Verb-gerund
1) a) Repeatedly being deliberately negative because you have some biased dislike of something and feel a need to demonstrate said dislike to people who don't concur with this opinion.
b) see also: Naliking
I know from previous experience that you will reply for sure, that your reply will contain exactly the same amount of substanceless nonsense that all your posts contain, and you'll kid yourself (because you're the only person who actually believes it) that you are setting the record straight. So do so, but rest assured, I won't be replying, as you pointed out once before, there are better things to do. I'm going to have an hour gaming, will it be HL2, CS, BF:1942 or MoH? You know the answer, the MP game of the year of course..the one with the flak cannon
Saying whether a game deserves to be game of the year is subjective in nature but I gave you an opinion intermittently backed up with facts. You just have to learn how to interpret stats.Israphel said:
Your logic is flawed. If there are 1000 servers and 800 of them are all bots with 1 or 2 players on them then you will still see the other 200 servers which may not have bots at all, but that still does not negate the fact that the majority playing online is often still bots. Play UT2003 at 2AM EST and you will see just how many bots there really areIsraphel said:
You have to understand how Csports works, if you want to interpret the data properly. You already mentioned the argument I listed a while back which was that The amount of people who try a game to see if they like it could be huge, accounting for a huge number of unique aliases ; and Yes you are right in that it can apply to any game but when you combine that with UT2004 daily numbers, it clearly shows that most of the people who tried it did not like it enough to stick with the game for more than a very short amount of time.Israphel said:
Call of Duty United Offensive does have a lot more players than ut2k4 by the way. If you want "proof" just look at Gamespy's breakdown by clicking on COD. UT2004 is really an expansion of UT2003 and really is not a 2004 game at all and by that logic I could argue that it should be compared to all the other 2002 games.
There is no proof that most game sequels are less popular than their originals, especially for single-player games. There has not been enough MP game sequels yet to make that assumption. Halo2 will be more popular than Halo. UT99 was more popular than Unreal. Quake2 was more popular than Quake. Call Of Duty United Offensive is already often equal in numbers to Call Of Duty....CounterStrike Source could potentially be greater than CounterStrike, if Valve don't release another online game. UT2004 was not more popular than its predecessor UT99 if you are judging by player numbers online. UT99 at one time had almost 3 times the amount of players online than UT2004 currently has.
If they were subtanceless you would not have replied in the first placeIsraphel said:
.
But the problem is that you're basing your opinions on conjecture, not facts.naliking said:
Now wait a minute! Isn't that the same Gamespy you said you didn't trust a few posts back? Oh lordy lord...naliking said:
Last edited:
Keep on living in the past, naliking. No one is stopping you. But we'd all appreciate it if you didn't feel the need to run through the same tired arguments.
Different game - different time, dude. There's no guarantee that if Unreal Tournament were magically recreated and released right now that it would do any better than UT2004 is doing. In fact, I'd argue that it would do worse because it would lack vehicles, which is one of the big draws to first person shooters these days.
You simply can't compare the two games as they were released at totally different periods of time in gaming and gamers want completely different things these days.
I also find it really sad that you keep having to throw in Tactical Ops to skew your numbers.
Different game - different time, dude. There's no guarantee that if Unreal Tournament were magically recreated and released right now that it would do any better than UT2004 is doing. In fact, I'd argue that it would do worse because it would lack vehicles, which is one of the big draws to first person shooters these days.
You simply can't compare the two games as they were released at totally different periods of time in gaming and gamers want completely different things these days.
I also find it really sad that you keep having to throw in Tactical Ops to skew your numbers.
I gave facts. Csports even has an article about the large number of UT2004 players in the first few weeks the game and demo were out. Now contrast that with current numbers. I pointed you to a stat site, so do your research.Ciced said:
I have been told Call Of Duty does not support bots so Gamespy's numbers on games which do not count bots should be fairly accurate on some games which have few or no bots. I did however include the word "proof" in quotations to emphasize that I don't necessarily trust gamespy stats because of games such as UT2k4 which have an overwhelming amount of bots.Ciced said:
Fair enough, this will be my last post in this thread, unless someone says something outrageousHal said:
. However it's not about living in the past. People that are choosing UT99 over UT2k* are playing UT99 now and have pc's capable of handling Half-Life2, Far Cry and Doom3. Others just got fed up with the UT2k* and just left the scene altogether. So its not about nostalgia, its about quality and preference. UT99 can be compared to games coming out today because it's still being played quite a bit. If they added vehicles to UT99's atmosphere, then UT2004 would not have lost its UT99 supporters. Of course as time moves on the more outdated the gameplay of games like Quake3 and UT99 become, so change is definitely needed. A game like UT99 unchanged in 2006 would probably fail miserably, so a huge window of opportunity has been lost. Now most think of the UT2k* franchise as rather cheesy.Tactical Ops has to be included with UT99 because it had quite a large following before it went retail.
Last edited:
I don't think that a game that has more people playing it (UT2004) necessarily needs to apologize to the other (UT).
And no, if you were being intellectually honest, you would not include TacOps... because regardless of the platform that it uses... it does not play like UT, it does not look like UT, it does not feel like UT, and it most certainly... isn't UT. Using an unrelated mod to prop up those numbers is just wrong. As I look right now, TacOps is about one half of the counted number of players for UT. Say what you like, but your numbers just don't hold true to your argument.
But enough about the number of players... my point remains that you should play whatever game you like and not dwell on knocking the other one.
Now, I'll admit that UT2003 made a number of missteps and introduced too many new things too fast. The "fixes" that were made before release just exacerbated the problem. I'm not saying that the latter part of the series is without fault at all. I still love UT (though I could never go back) but I've moved on and found a whole lot to like about the new game. Maybe it doesn't suit you or your fellow UT devotees - but I'm okay with that and you should be too.
And no, if you were being intellectually honest, you would not include TacOps... because regardless of the platform that it uses... it does not play like UT, it does not look like UT, it does not feel like UT, and it most certainly... isn't UT. Using an unrelated mod to prop up those numbers is just wrong. As I look right now, TacOps is about one half of the counted number of players for UT. Say what you like, but your numbers just don't hold true to your argument.
But enough about the number of players... my point remains that you should play whatever game you like and not dwell on knocking the other one.
Now, I'll admit that UT2003 made a number of missteps and introduced too many new things too fast. The "fixes" that were made before release just exacerbated the problem. I'm not saying that the latter part of the series is without fault at all. I still love UT (though I could never go back) but I've moved on and found a whole lot to like about the new game. Maybe it doesn't suit you or your fellow UT devotees - but I'm okay with that and you should be too.