I'd like to understand what could "substitute" UT?

Sir_Brizz said:

That's a load of crap.

I don't like Crysis at all, it's the same as Far Cry with better graphics and poorer performance.

Click to expand...

Crysis has the suit powers which are excactly like the adrenaline system in UT (but with a constant auto-recharge for all players).
Armor=Booster
Strenth=Beserk
Stealth=Invisibility
Speed=Speed

They did a very good implementation of UT's idea. It completely changes the gameplay from FAR-CRY. You can run-and-gun if you want but you can also:
1. Play predator Go Invisible, then grab enemies by the neck
2. Use strength and become the super accurate sniper
3. Use speed/stealth and go guerilla on the enemy
4. Punch through the ceilling/gun the enemy/jump away to safety
5. any crazy combination of the above

You have mentioned CRYSIS=FAR-CRY a million times on this forum and you are wrong. I do understand that you work here, hence the bias, but COME-ON!

P.S. (off-topic)
I think a modified Adren system where it constantly recharges for all players, should have been the standard implementation in UT

UT3 owns all other UT and fps' , i just try to ignore all the missing and broken features and the fcked up ui and lack of options.

...havent played UT since UT2003 came out and havent played 2k4 since ut3 came out, yasee i live for today and hope burns eternal.

For anyone who still wants to play UT2003/4, there's still plenty of servers and players out there. There's lots of UT2004 1v1 and TAM servers, there's a Purgatory-style TDM server up called the Fragatory (72.5.250.231:7777), and you can even join #ut2kx (irc.gameradius.org) for UT2003 games. While FragBU apparently had trouble getting players last night, the Fragatory had no issues filling up.

UT2004 may have gameplay issues but at least it works and has people playing.

Sir_Brizz said:

Oh, sorry, I forgot that everyone wants the same games regurgitated with slightly better graphics and much lower performance on modern machines!

Click to expand...

Sounds like you're talking about UT3... a game with zero innovation and is actually a step backwards in many ways. Except for graphics, of course.

Crysis built on Far Cry's gameplay in a relatively creative way and also includes a Warfare-style multiplayer mode that is better than UT3's ridiculous orbfest. Just because you don't like a game doesn't mean that everyone else's point is invalid. Looks like Brizz Logic™ is still running rampant.

Wipe the bias from your eyes, please. It's making you look retarded.

UnrealGrrl said:

UT3 owns all other UT and fps' , i just try to ignore all the missing and broken features and the fcked up ui and lack of options.

Click to expand...

How does it own ALL other shooters? I don't get that ... have you actually played any of the following or are you just basing this on some past games or what people are saying about other games or what? You even note that UT3 has missing features and lots of bugs and a messy UI so what am I missing? I happen to think that it has the potential to be better than UT2K4 but atm its not. If you took UT2K4 and made it graphically equal to UT3 which game do you think would have more people playing it (nothing else changes just the graphics)? Do you really think that the movement and weapon changes would be enough or even the new Necris vehicles because I sure don't.

So compare UT3 with the following:

- Bioshock
- GRAW 2
- F.E.A.R. (Original PC version)
- Crysis
- STALKER
- Dark Sector
- Uncharted
- R6V2
- CoD4

As much as I like playing UT3 (it is like the Windows Solitaire of shooters imo) I can't agree that it owns any of these richer more complete shooters. To me it is pretty hard to take a twitch shooter that is arena based and mainly multiplayer focused and put it up against shooters that have a solid SP campaign ... these are two very different genres and imo UT3 serves a different purpose than the above story based shooters. Even the "campaign" in UT3 cannot really be directly compared to the campaigns in the above games ... I don't even need to explain why. I just think for what it is UT3 is a good solid game that can be lots of fun, and it really doesn't have any competition that you can directly compare it to (maybe TF2 to an extent).

Now the thing that takes UT3, indeed all UT games, to another level is the ability to mod the game and create tons of content for it that is really good. In that respect I would agree that UT3 owns all other shooters, with the exception of the more moddable UT2K4. But the base game itself nah ... its good but doesn't blow the titles I mentioned out the water. I happen to think Halo 3 is a technically better and far more polished product than UT3 (there were really no major bugs for the campaign) and four person co-op rocks but I know the amount of irrational hatred that exists towards the game so I left it off the list.

Edit: And you know I am NOT trying to pick any kind of fight with you my ex-team mate but I really want to know how you arrived at your conclusion. I'm really curious why you feel that UT3 is head and shoulders above other shooters.

Anuban said:

- R6V2

Click to expand...

I wonder how this game is in that list

To add my crappy contribution to this topic, for me nothing could "substitute" UT. I can get similar experiences in the fun department with games like COD4.
Oh, I have substituted UT3 and UT2004 with UT1!

Erosion said:

I wonder how this game is in that list

Click to expand...

Granted you have to like playing tactical shooters to appreciate this game more than the other shooters (GRAW 2 is also like this) it is still a ton of fun imo. The first one was more difficult but it is also a classic. The only real issue is the poor use of UE3 as far as the graphics go. The texturing especially needs some work and the character models could also be better. Still as far as gameplay goes it sure is fun.

Quake Live



Anyways I pretty much agree with everything in this thread expect for what Brizz is saying.

Erosion said:

Oh, I have substituted UT3 and UT2004 with UT1!

Click to expand...

Yeah, right now I'm not playing any multi games like another guy said and I don't even feel like a gamer anymore like even another guy said but I'm considering putting UT99 to the test of time. I just wish it would get a better graphics upgrade. :\

I'm not too sure what Quake Live is but if it's Quake3 with a graphics upgrade and a bunch of tweaks then that will become my multi game for years to come, if that doesn't work out then I could either try UT99, maybe Red Faction (I always loved that gameplay 2nd to UT's) and if not those I'm screwed.

Anuban said:

- Bioshock
- F.E.A.R. (Original PC version)
- STALKER

Click to expand...

These titles failed when it came to multiplayer in my opinion.

SleepyHe4d said:

Yeah, right now I'm not playing any multi games like another guy said and I don't even feel like a gamer anymore like even another guy said but I'm considering putting UT99 to the test of time. I just wish it would get a better graphics upgrade. :\

Click to expand...

http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=176064

Vitamin-Carrot said:

These titles failed when it came to multiplayer in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I think not having multiplayer and failing in multiplayer are different... and I heard the FEAR multiplayer was quite good. Though I'm not sure about that one.

NeoNite said:

http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=176064

Click to expand...

Ah yeah, I know about that pack but I meant a full upgrade, like high res models too. Are they working on that or is that included now? Would be nice.

SleepyHe4d said:

Are they working on that or is that included now? Would be nice.

Click to expand...

The pack containing all kind of awesome lighting/fire/particle emitters/etc effects is still in the works.
For now you can enjoy the new S3TC textures ;-)

Vitamin-Carrot said:

These titles failed when it came to multiplayer in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Bioshock doesn't have a multiplayer component so what are you talking about it fails? That was NEVER something that was even considered for Bioshock. Also you seem to have missed the point of my post. You should read it again and see if you get it.

As for Crysis ... well not only do I think it is an excellent game with tons of ways to play (so much more creative and open then any UE3 shooter game on the market save maybe Bioshock or Mass Effect if you want to include RPGs) but so do the vast majority of the critics and an overwhelming amount of gamers based on both sales and user scores ... Crysis has remained in the top 10 on Gamespots forums since before it was released. Sales of over a million copies is damn good for any game but especially for a PC shooter. UT3 won't even come close to that number on the PC ... it doesn't matter how many other UT games they try to bundle it with to make it less expensive.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/931665.asp

So when I see that 38 recognized reviewers have given the game 90 or higher and not one single score out of 56 is less than an 80 I already know that other people who say it is isn't a good game are just pissed that Crysis kicked UT3s teeth in (and yes these two were the two most anticipated PC shooters of the year and one did well on that Platform and one did fair ... some would say it did poorly in comparison). And also folks who say it is nothing special and then say that UT3 is the greatest thing since sliced bread (or is better than Crysis) obviously don't know what they can do or maybe they don't know how to play this game in a creative way.

I'll say it again when you can jump over an approaching vehicle turn around and shoot the gas tank causing the vehicle to explode, run up at super speed to a remaining soldier grab him and use him as a meat shield and then toss him into several other soldiers knocking them down and as they are down or attempting to get up you kill them all, then turn invisible and take out some more dudes who are coming in to help their downed comrades, you have one helluva game.

So you can listen to folks who don't know what they are talking about and are obvious fanboys or you can listen to 54 other people many who get paid money and are considered professionals in their field. Me I will listen to myself and then seriously consider a consensus vote. Why would I bother to pay any attention to any malcontent who is spouting off just to hear him/herself talk? Especially in this instance ... no way.

As far as ANYONE who actually believes that this is the same as FarCry but just with better graphics .. WTH ... that is the most outrageous pile of crap I have heard when it comes to this game ... the only thing and I repeat ONLY thing this has in common with FarCry is the island location and the open wide nature of the game. What else does it have in common with FarCry I would love to know ... let's compare:

- In Farcry you play a dude who is basically some regular joe ... in Crysis you are part of an elite paramilitary squad with the coolest special ops suit ever made

- Farcry you fight some mercenaries and some genetically created monsters ... Crysis you fight against Korean soldiers and aliens

- None of the weapons you saw in Farcry make an appearance in Crysis

Sorry but I don't see how Crysis is the same game at all. If location is going to be the only thing that is really stupid ... how many games in general have an island or tropical location ... plenty. But none of them pull it off as well as Crysis does ... Uncharted is the closest yet but it still pales in comparison to Crysis maxed out even with no AA ... and I mean on either DX9 or DX10. And as far as performance goes I laugh when people want to compare this with Farcry on that front and say its worse when relatively they Crysis is actually better at least on High settings in DX9 mode. When Farcry first came out it was a punisher on PCs and to run it at max with smooth frames took the best GPU at the time as well as a powerful CPU. As long as you have good components Crysis runs fine ... it doesn't need to get 60 fps ... the way the game is designed 30fps is fine and actually I get in the 40s in many areas.

Edit: And when you compare Crysis to CoD4 PC it stacks up damn well ... actually it gets more 90 and above scores and has way more reviews of it overall.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/939217.asp

Sir_Brizz said:

The only thing "creative" about Crysis in any way is punching cars across the map. the multiplayer feels like a terrible clone of Battlefield. And the only additions Crysis made to the gameplay, as I stated before, were the equivalent of adding a few magic spells would be to any typical FPS.

I didn't say his point was invalid, I said to use a more widely accepted good game like CoD4 to make his point.

Read my posts, please. Your continuing inability to do so makes you look retarded as well

Click to expand...

We are getting off topic & thread highjackyy but let me add this:
CoD4 is a generic "get guns that shoot bullets and aim" FPS. Crysis gameplay adds something further (the suit)

The magic powers you tossed twice in the discussion have proven to be a difficult gameplay mechanic for FPSs (see Shadowrun's fate)

UT has always stood above (in my opinion) the rest of the FPSs in terms of gameplay "possibilities". UT3 cut down a few from UT2004. And I fear that UT3 may be the last of its kind :-(

Sir_Brizz said:

...it's clear that the game only exists to look good.

Click to expand...

Again, how is that different from UT3? Considering Crysis has more players you could easily say it's UT3 that's at fault for being nothing but a trophy-game engine seller.

At least with Crysis the players are getting weekly updates from the developers and can even chat with them on IRC easily. If UT3 is such a "players" game why is no one playing it and why is the game so hard to play (given its issues and GameSpy and whatnot)? D:

Shadowrun was a lousy game that had basically zero content and average graphics at best. Comparing that game in anyway to Crysis or suggesting that Crysis didn't turn out as well as that crappy game is insanity. I had that game for the 360 for about two weeks before I traded it in towards something better.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/933049.asp

I think this says it all.

Anuban said:

Bioshock doesn't have a multiplayer component so what are you talking about it fails? That was NEVER something that was even considered for Bioshock. Also you seem to have missed the point of my post. You should read it again and see if you get it.

Click to expand...

Time to make yourself a cup of tea. It was a matter of opinion Bioshock while a good story line the gameplay left me wanting.