UT2004: Best Multiplayer 2004

[hal]

Unreal Tournament 2004 takes home the Best Multiplayer Game award in IGN's Best of 2004 Awards, beating out the likes of Half-Life 2, Far Cry, Tribes: Vengeance, and DOOM 3. Read up and see why it was chosen. (Thanks, rajput_warrior)

Almost every sector of PC gaming showed that it is still the forefront of technology and innovation... All of these winners are very deserving of their awards. It was a tough field this year so to come out on top means it had to be excellent and in some cases, near perfect.

[Shrimp]

Woohoo

And as I like to say these days: Unreal for teh_win!

[Burning Fish]

Well deserved! Congrats Epic!

I guess it helps to have former employees who worked on UT2003-4 to be staff members of Gamespy(and IGN), because otherwise UT2004 would not even be a nominee. Pretty funny though , but it doesn't say much for gamespy's credibility, especially when you consider that UT2004 has mostly bots online and gamespy counts them in their statistics, making it seem like the game has lots of players when the opposite is true . It's an ok game but it is not multiplayer game of the year, nor should it even be considered a nominee for game of the year.

[hal]

Originally Posted by BoDuke

I guess it helps to have former employees who worked on UT2003-4 to be staff members of Gamespy(and IGN), because otherwise UT2004 would not even be a nominee. Pretty funny though , but it doesn't say much for gamespy's credibility, especially when you consider that UT2004 has mostly bots online and gamespy counts them in their statistics, making it seem like the game has lots of players when the opposite is true . It's an ok game but it is not multiplayer game of the year, nor should it even be considered a nominee for game of the year.

So.... who are these "staff members"?

And my understanding about bots is that Gamespy only counts bots on servers where there is at least one human player.

You sound like you have an agenda, mr. guest.

Originally Posted by BoDuke

I guess it helps to have former employees who worked on UT2003-4 to be staff members of Gamespy(and IGN), because otherwise UT2004 would not even be a nominee. Pretty funny though , but it doesn't say much for gamespy's credibility, especially when you consider that UT2004 has mostly bots online and gamespy counts them in their statistics, making it seem like the game has lots of players when the opposite is true . It's an ok game but it is not multiplayer game of the year, nor should it even be considered a nominee for game of the year.

If you don't think it to be one of the games of the year then why are you posting on an unrea related news sites where i would say 90% of the news is regarding UT2004 user made mods/maps etc. The only reason to visit this site (really) is to find out about what awesome free stuff you can download, and if you don't like the game that much why come here because you obviously don't want the free content? Moron.

[naliking]

Originally Posted by sp lit

if you don't like the game that much why come here because you obviously don't want the free content? Moron.

Wow. Unreal fanboys attacking someone who does not share their views. But he is probably representative of the majority of gamers.

Originally Posted by hal

And my understanding about bots is that Gamespy only counts bots on servers where there is at least one human player.

That's true and that can very easily create a situation where bots outnumber players 3 to 1. I don't want to sound like a broken record but I can definitely confirm that UT2004 often has far more bots online than players. UT99 and its mods, often has more players than UT2004. UT2004 usually has under 2000 players and sits in 10th-15th place, yet Gamespy often shows it in 2nd, 3rd and 4th place with over 6000 players. If you want stats that are more reliable try www.csports.net which claims to removes some of the bots.

I don't trust sites like Gamespot or Gamespy etc... when it comes to reviews or awards because they are not consistent and seem to be swayed by game publishers incentives. Halo2 is a perfect example of this

Popularity is no indication of quality, but when you consider that CounterStrike Source has over 30,000 players sometimes, and has only been out a couple months....That game (which is Half-Life2's mp) should at least get a nomination for multiplayer .
Instead we have Gamespy which is finally admitting that UT2003 was dissappointing yet somehow UT2004 which is 90% exactly the same as UT2003, is now a contender for Game of the Year even though it has had a huge drop off in player numbers in less than 6 months! Does not seem plausible....

[Euphoric Beaver]

Originally Posted by Burning Fish

Well deserved! Congrats Epic!

The best game won.

Nice work epic,u guys totally derserve it! keep it up

Thanks!

[KDR_11k]

Was there even any serious competition?

[rajput_warrior]

well done epic, u deserve, flak cannon rules

[NitrousUser]

HL2 and Doom3's standalone multiplayers are jokes anyway, ut always had it.

[naliking]

Originally Posted by hal

Okay, let's look at CSports numbers. Right this moment, UT2004 is number 12 with UT at number 14. More important is the Names in 31 Days column, showing UT2004 in the number 10 spot and UT in the number 11 spot.

You simply can't compare games like Counter Strike to the Unreal series. It doesn't compete for the same type of player. They are only similar in that they are multiplayer first person shooters.

Now let's look at poor HL2 (yes, it DOES have a mp game that is NOT CS). It sits in 13th place, yet it was just released. How about Counter Strike Source... which is shown as a subsidiary of CS? Well, the new software is being played 4 or 5 times LESS than it's older sibling. Why do you think that is? Hardly sounds like it's overwhelmingly better in any way than UT2004.

Instead of getting in a pissing match between UT and UT2004... why can't we all just enjoy whatever we enjoy and stfu? Where is the joy in coming to an Unreal series site and bashing the newest game in the series because you happen to like the older one better?

I loved UT. I love this game. They are different and I am ok with that. So are an equal or greater number of Unreal fans. Let's end this e-penis contest between the two games because it's just tiresome.

Ok ,but remember Csports does not eliminate all bots and Csports separates UT99 from its mod tactical ops. With tactical Ops UT99 very often has more players

As for CounterStrike Source ,well let's just agree that it is the fastet growing First Person Shooter in history. Over 30,000 players on at one time in less than 2 months. That is remarkable. I doubt it will surpass the original CounterStrike because Valve will be releasing Team Fortress2 in a month or two and then probably release CounterStrike2 a year later. Otherwise CounterStrike Source would definitely surpass CounterStrike within 1 year, and this proves that system requirements are not the reason why UT2004 has done poorly in attracting players.

ISraphel, I'm not trolling. I responded to this thread because someone made a valid claim questioning the suspect nature of UT2004 being nominated for game of the year/multiplayer of the year, and he was attacked by Unreal Fanboys who apparently don't see the absurdity of this nomination

[Euphoric Beaver]

Originally Posted by naliking

Ok ,but remember Csports does not eliminate all bots and Csports separates UT99 from its mod tactical ops. With tactical Ops UT99 very often has more players

How do you know it doesn't eliminate all bots?

Btw Tactical Ops is a stand alone game not a mod hence separated with good reason, so with this in mind UT2k4 very often has more players then UT.

[Israphel]

Naliking..can you (or your friend who has a suspiciously similar writing style to you) tell me why UT2004 should not have been nominated.

The fact that you don't like it isn't reason enough.

You love Csports right? So lets have a look at Csports. Now right now, at this moment, UT2k4 is the most popular game online of any released in 2004. Your beloved HL2 (which I own, and it's a damn fine game I accept), is less popular online that UT2k4. CS is a mod that comes with HL, so you can include that in HL2 if you want to stretch your point...but even so..looking at all the games that were released this year, almost none of them are more popular than than UT2k4. Doom3, Star Wars Battlefront, Tribes Vengeance etc etc.

Taking that into account, only a blind man with a passionate hatred for UT2k4 and some personal bias against it because he prefers the original UT, would say that it doesn't deserve a nomination.

I don't find it strange at all that it won multiplayer of the year...as I've said above, it's certainly the most popular stand alone online game released this year. CS is a mod.

As for game of the year, in terms of single player, then I accept that HL2 had by far the best single player of any game I've seen, and technically, pushed back the limits of video games. But personally, no matter how good a single player game is, I rarely play it through more than twice, and HL2s multi-player, you have to admit, is a one trick pony. Like many people, I judge how good a game is by how long I play it and how much fun I get out of it...And on this criteria, UT2k4 is more enjoyable than HL2 (which I rarely play anymore)
However, I accept that many people are into counter terrorism type games, thus the popularity online of CS. Personally, I don't like it.

You seem to obssessed with telling everyone how much of a failure UT2k4 is...I wonder how you define success. The games I mentioned above that came out this year have all been less successful than UT2004...so by your standards, apart from HL2, there hasn't been a successful game released this year.

You harp on about how UT has more players than UT2k4..whcich it actually doesn't according to your stats again, but neglect to mention that for most MP games (MoH, CoD, BF, CS, HL, Tribes) this almost ALWAYS happens..the originals are more popular than the sequals. In that light, UT2k4, along with Quake, is exceptional in that its later version is played more than it's original. Yet you still seem determined to label it a flop.

And when these things are pointed out to you by hal, you suddenly start to criticise the very same stats that you previously held up to prove your point. Strange no?

No doubt you'll reply and call me a fan boy...a word you so love to use. U think you define a fan boy as someone who likes a game and is willing to say so. Personally, my definition of a fan by (in the derogatory way you seem to use it) is of someone who is blind to everything else except the game he loves, and will even go onto the sites of other games that he doesn't like to tell people that they are wrong in not liking the game that they are so passionate about.

Ask me about HL2 and I'll tell you its awesome.
Ask me if its the best SP game I've ever seen, and I'll say yes.
Ask me if I play it as much as UT, I'll say no.
Tell people that it is better than UT and come onto a UT gamers site saying UT shouldn't be nominated for best game of the year with no real statisical proof, only your own personal opinion (not even backed up by the very stats you seem so keen to shove down everyone's throat), and I'll tell you that i think you are wrong.

And I guess this makes me a fanboy.

Find a game you like, and go an play it. Let other people play the games they like, and leave them alone. is that really so difficult for you? What is your agenda?

[naliking]

Originally Posted by Israphel

.....

I just checked Csports.net and UT99 + tactical Ops, has more players than UT2004 with all its mods.
There are a couple of FPS that came out in 2004 that have more players than UT2004 such as Battlefield Vietnam and Call Of Duty United Offensive. If you go by popularity UT2004 is probably dwarfed by single player games if you believe the NPD sales figures. Half-Life 2's multiplayer is counterStrike Source because that is what shipped with the game - not HL2DM. Valve is busy finishing up their multiplayer game Team Fortress2 so why would they waist time on a Half-Life2 multiplayer which might hurt their sales of their multiplayer focused game? CounterStrike Source is the 2nd most played First person shooter on the net, for better or for worse.

You claim I'm trolling when I point out facts. You don't seem to have a problem when people make false claims as to UT2004's greatness, but when someone points out the facts they are labeled as trolls. If someone makes a false claim, would you rather see it accepted as truth because it makes the game look good? Pretty much every negative post I have made about UT200* has been in response to false claims made about the game. That is NOT trolling. That is called responding and setting the record straight

Ironically you cannot call me a UT hater since I like UT99 . If people don't want me posting here, then they should not make false claims about the game. It's bad enough that Gamespy shows UT2004 in 4th place when it should be in 12th.

UT2004 is not game of the year material because A)It has a horrible single player campaign if you can even call it that. B) Graphics are average, C)Gameplay is not fun if you judge it by the huge massess of people that have abandoned the game in such a short amount of time. D) 90% of UT2004 is exactly like UT2003 which was a flop. E) UT2004's newest game mode is just a variation of game modes done in other games. E) UT2004 is populated mostly by bots and for an online game that is a disaster. F) There are games more deserving to be nominated as game of the Year. Perhaps the argument can be made it deserved a multiplayer of the Year nomination since very few good multiplayer games were released, however it is not multiplayer of the year.

Ciced, a while back someone who worked a Csport said they were still working on weeding out all the bots and if you check the gametypes by breakdown often the number of players are less when you total the players by gametype category, plus you can count them by hand...

[Euphoric Beaver]

Originally Posted by naliking

I just checked Csports.net and UT99 + tactical Ops, has more players than UT2004 with all its mods.

I just checked Csports.net and UT99 with all its mods, has less players than UT2004 with all its mods.

[Israphel]

sub·jec·tive    P   Pronunciation Key  (sb-jktv)adj.

1. b)
Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. (source)

UT2004 is not game of the year material because A)It has a horrible...

=subjective

B) Graphics are average,

=subjective

C)Gameplay is not fun..

=subjective

D) 90% of UT2004 is exactly like UT2003

=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

E) UT2004's newest game mode is just a variation of game modes done in other games.

=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!

E) UT2004 is populated mostly by bots and for an online game that is a disaster.

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....

F) There are games more deserving to be nominated as game of the Year.

=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.

however it is not multiplayer of the year.

=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.

Ironically you cannot call me a UT hater since I like UT99

The ability to read is an incredibly useful thing, what I actually said was:

only a blind man with a passionate hatred for UT2k4 and some personal bias against it because he prefers the original UT

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.

You claim I'm trolling when I point out facts.

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:

That is called responding and setting the record straight

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

[Twisted Metal]

Originally Posted by naliking

Valve will be releasing Team Fortress2 in a month or two

lol where do you get your information from, that is completely bogus. They still have to finish Day of Defeat, a mod that thousands of us paid for and still don't have.

[naliking]

Originally Posted by Israphel

Subjective

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.

Originally Posted by Israphel

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.

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 are

Originally Posted by Israphel

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.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Israphel

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

If they were subtanceless you would not have replied in the first place .