CPL Snubs UT2004

  • 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.
hal

hal

Dictator
Staff member
Nov 24, 1998
21,409
19
38
55
------->
www.beyondunreal.com
In one of those moments where you have to just shake your head, the CyberAthlete Professional League in their 2005 World Tour announcement this evening has passed over Unreal Tournament 2004 in favor of...

Painkiller.

I think the pic to the right (taken from this CPL forum thread) sums it up quite nicely!
 
Nemephosis

Nemephosis

Earning my Infrequent Flier miles
Aug 10, 2000
7,711
3
38
Great idea. Pass over a game with thousands of players and servers, in favour of a game with..... LESS than three dozen total players AND servers.

I guess they're too f*cking lazy to do any real work and so wanted to support the game out there that had the least workload attached.

Then again the IRC channel is set up on Gamesurge so lazinness and half-assing shouldn't be a surprise. They're already on a half-ass IRC network.
 
E

eggboy

Guest
Painkiller was ok I played the demo which is fun, much like old skool doom. Too bad the demo kept crashing before I could finish it..... I thinking of picking up a copy that copy for $10 I saw at the local budget software bin LOL.

OK CPL seem resonable so there must be a good reason but I cant seem to see it. Seriously, does anyone have any idea why they choose a buggy piece of **** that no one plays, over UT2004? please post!
 
spineblaZe

spineblaZe

VFX Extraordinaire
Apr 8, 2003
2,423
0
0
44
MN
Visit site
Dual post. ;)

As far as Painkiller goes, I know it pissed a lot of people off, but I like the choice. It has a very solid multiplayer that really rewards skilled play. Picking a less played game will also mean better and more entertaining matches, since there are few "pros" that play it. (hell, nobody plays it because the netcode is so bad:biggrin2: ) LAN play is fine though, so it will be an interesting tour.


Now, I realize the CPL's intentions were probably based on money and not the reasons I mentioned. I have no doubt they struck a potentially lucrative business with Painkiller's publisher and developers.
 
JaFO

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
Perhaps the fact that it kind of looks like Quake 1 and has nothing except DM made them pick it ?
I mean ... what 'pro' would want to play something like ONS with teh vehicles and superweapons like the leviathan ?
I mean ... imagine having to play something that requires a real brain for strategies and tactics instead of mere powerup-timing and old-skool DM (tm). ;)
 
CountBloody

CountBloody

The Undead Spider Whore
Aug 13, 2004
62
0
0
52
Well I just checked a thread about this on the Atari Forums. Man... there are some morons there that think it's all Epic's problem that UT2004 is not in the CPL.

To me it's about the money. And the CPL, saying "PK got chosen because their developers want to make their game LAST and be competetive. Unlike Epic, who would rather add gametypes and please the pub newbies." That to me is BS, UT2004 will LAST, is competetive, & please the pub newbies(plus l337).

Here's a thought maybe all the people that made the CPL, are all the noods that we see playing UT2004 online, that cry like babies because when they lose.
 
Last edited:
Mia'cova

Mia'cova

Oldskool Lurker
Jan 29, 2001
88
0
0
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Alright, I'm shocked. I really don't understand this decision but I think I've just lost some respect for the CPL... That pic really does sum it up. Sheesh... What were they thinking?
 
DavidM

DavidM

Designer
Oct 28, 1999
724
0
0
42
www.muenni.ch
lol i find it funny...
UT is anything but hardcore today, it turned into a noobish spam game.
have a look at the official maps ;)
Only 2% of all maps they ever make play good, and the good ones prolly just are good by chance.... -_-



"lets brag with what the engine can do, the gameplay will have to work somehow"......
no it doesn't!
 
Mia'cova

Mia'cova

Oldskool Lurker
Jan 29, 2001
88
0
0
Vancouver, BC, Canada
David, isn't that sort of like saying football isn't hardcore because most of the people that play it suck? The 1vs1 crowd still puts the same kind of thought into their game as they have with any other solid shooter. The core strategies are the same. Even if you can knock off a little health with spam, that alone will never get you a win. Things are still as it they've always been, practice practice practice.
 
KDR_11k

KDR_11k

[make art]
Jun 27, 2001
248
0
0
39
Peine, Niedersachsen, Germany, Earth, Sol System,
members.tripod.de
It doesn't matter that Painkiller has little outside of deathmatch, this is for 1-on-1 only. At first they wanted Doom 3 but since id didn't want to give them money for "promoting" (or as id probably put it, "commercially exploiting") their game. I think the CPL spouted some bull**** about "low player limits", which makes absolutely no sense considering they wanted it for 1-on-1s. Anyway, this goes to the highest bidder and somehow I think having all those "pros" learn a completely new game for the CPL makes it more interesting. Also,. PK is good for Quake-style multiplayer (I could have sworn one of the demo maps was inspired by a Q1DM map), I mean, hell, it has as keybind for "rocketjump"!
 
JaFO

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
... I mean, hell, it has as keybind for "rocketjump"!
Click to expand...
hey ... perhaps that is the true reason.
The CPL and 'pros' can't handle a game that doesn't have a needlessly complex config-script-feature. ;)

Or could it be that Epic wants to 'force' the 'competitive' lan-parties to play the game with all eye-candy enabled and the pc's at the CPL can't handle that kind of stuff ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom