CoD4 is getting the sh*t pirated out of it, yet it consistently makes the top-selling lists. Piracy didn't kill UT3. UT3 killed UT3.
I'd post links of proof, but I don't think hal would like that.
QFT!
CoD4 is getting the sh*t pirated out of it, yet it consistently makes the top-selling lists. Piracy didn't kill UT3. UT3 killed UT3.
I'd post links of proof, but I don't think hal would like that.
Numbers for Februarys best selling games is out ... or rather what were the top 20 games to be clear ... once again our beloved UT3 missed the cut. I wonder if piracy is part of the reason. Thoughts on this?
http://firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=20044
[SAS]Solid Snake;2101737 said:Those extra steps can get really frustrating, especially when the game is dependent on other services being online, for most people. In fact, I wrote UWindow2 to also bypass the GameSpy online verification (unless of course, you want to play online). I know there is also offline verification, but UT3 doesn't give you the option as it tries to log in online by default.
Uhm...no. Better graphics than anyone else sure was an asset to PC gaming, but it never was crucial to it.Well I can't understand bitching at the high system requirement of games like Crysis, like that guy obviously did. It's only one game, it's not like it's the only option available for pc gamers. So what if the 15% of the market actually get a game, sometimes, that will push their PC a bit and look fantastic and make the best looking console games look like dog barf? Because that's exactly what kept the PC gaming market alive for all these years. PC gaming needs to continue if gaming in general is to advance, the current console makers don't know jack about updating their hardware, all they know is to give as much money as possible to PC hardware makers to adapt their stuff to a console environment. Everybody knows Crysis wouldn't look half this good, had they scaled it for lower end systems. Worse is that many people who complain about crysis, actually can run it very well and just whine for the fun of it.
Article said:So we return the favor - we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry.
I'm not denying that, Anuban. There were a a lot of people looking forward to see UE3. But there are also a lot of people who are unable to play UT3 because of it's huge system requirements. And I think the latter group of "lots of people" quite outshines the first.^^^ I would have to disagree with those statements. ... I think a lot of people were looking forward to seeing UT3 on the Unreal Engine 3. The lighting engine and physics engine alone were enough reasons for tons of people to really get excited about ... plus when it was originally announced there was going to be Conquest which definitely needed a new engine since it was going to be very large environments. People wanted better looking, more detailed character models, weapon models and vehicles (bump mapping being something else modders were looking forward to as well) again UE3 delivers this. So yeah I know for myself I did want the visual enhancements that the new engine brings.
-environments that "can be as wide as 2 or 3 onslaught maps": scrapped (in fact, most maps are smaller than their onslaught counterparts)