Ut2k4

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 54
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Placebo

    If you don't like adrenaline, don't use it!



    When I did play 2003, I'd try to only play on servers that used the NoAdreneline mod, but then I just got bored with the game in general, so I went back to UT proper.



    Still love UT and my clan is doing well in the ladders so I'm happy.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by mattyj

    Cake, the UT port to OSX has been out for ages.



    Not true, mattyj

    The UT X preview was released back in April '02, but that was very buggy, never really ran properly and hasn't been updated since then.



    The last I've heard about UT X was back in May when it was reported that Ryan Gordon was taking over for development from Glenda Adams:

    Quote:

    Gordon told Smith that he plans to merge Westlake's code with his own efforts to get a true Mac OS X version of Unreal Tournament done. "... get it done, finished, and correct, not half-done experimental stuff," said Gordon.



  • Reply 22 of 54
    mattyjmattyj Posts: 898member
    Cake, it has a few long distance rendering problems, but that is it for me, nothing else is wrong IMO.
  • Reply 23 of 54
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
    It doesn't run properly for me.



    It runs flawlessly on my PC gaming rig and I play competitively so I can't let my team down simply because I'd prefer to play on my Mac.

    I've tried during scrims and PUGs and usually get some weird error which drops me from the server or caused me or restart the app.



    I can't risk problems with my Mac when we have an official match.

    I'm hoping that the real version of UT (not a preview version) will allow me to mothball my PC.
  • Reply 24 of 54
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Yeah UT2K3 really does suck with game play and weapons, though it does look better. I'm hoping they learned from their mistakes. It's possible. I just wonder how crappy the fps on my weak little 12" PowerBook is going to be! Does Panther speed up games, like UT2K3?
  • Reply 25 of 54
    ebbyebby Posts: 3,110member
    Wow. I am surprised there is so much negitivity towards UT2k3. I thought it was a "Everyone loves it" kinda game. I do.



    Aquatic- I didn't notice any FPS increase when I installed Panther, but there was a update released last month that did increase to the FPS.



    Cake- I assume you are talking about 2k3? I also have a big crashing problem. Mine usually happens when I have too many Maps or Mods installed. LAN gamed rarely work for me but internet games do.



    I kinda wish there was a way to install only the maps you want from inside UT2K3. That way you can preview what maps you want and uninstall them on-the-spot. No more writing down the maps you don't like. Also I have like 2GB of Maps and extras!



    Ooh! while I'm thinking of it. Is there a program to move the Maps/Mods that are downloaded from net games into their appropriate folders in the Unreal folder. I HATE searching for and renaming all those cache files by hand! There are PC programs that can do that but are there any for Mac? It should be pretty simple to make, but I suck at C++.
  • Reply 26 of 54
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ebby





    Cake- I assume you are talking about 2k3? I also have a big crashing problem. Mine usually happens when I have too many Maps or Mods installed. LAN gamed rarely work for me but internet games do.



    Ooh! while I'm thinking of it. Is there a program to move the Maps/Mods that are downloaded from net games into their appropriate folders in the Unreal folder.




    Nope, I was talking about the original UT using the preview release for OS X.

    UT2003 just doesn't do it for me and I won't be playing 2004 either. If anything, I'll find a copy of Unreal II and get the XMP mod.

    If you have a PC and like the Unreal franchise you must try the demo. It's super fun!



    Try CacheOut for managing your Cache Folder under OS X.
  • Reply 27 of 54
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    UT is for muscle-bound, steroid-ingesting sissies with smelly feet and little dongs. Real men play 1940's style.... MOHAA, baby!



  • Reply 28 of 54
    Moogs
  • Reply 29 of 54
    keshkesh Posts: 621member
    Tried the 2k3 demo. Hated the models, the guns, the feel of the game... I hear they're fixing a few of the things I hated in 2k4, but I don't know if I'll be picking it up.
  • Reply 30 of 54
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    i agree with Moogs... WW2 mods and games are just the BEST.



    Nonetheless, between UT and UT2k3, UT is still better game play.



    If only Newell would stop being such a fvcking @ss and just ALLOW for someone to FINISH porting HalfLife to MacOS, we'd all be happier and Newell woul'd stop getting so much bad karma from hundreds of thousands of people everyday.



    I'm glad his precious code got "stolen" for HL2. Serves him right.
  • Reply 31 of 54
    Quote:

    Now, UT 2003 was ten times worse than the original UT.



    Can I have an Amen?



    Quake 3.5. That's what Unreal 2003 felt like to me. Grunt penis envy.



    Great graphics and...what happened to the gameplay?





    The 'feel' (Mac OS vs Windows OS people take note!) of the game was lost.

    The 'head chopper' gone.

    The playability seemed to go adrift.

    The weapons lost some snap or 'kick'. No sniper rifle. Flak cannon not the same. Something missing.

    Lacklustre level design. No where near the inspiration of the original which featured the superb 'train' level.

    No domination of 3 points. 2 points not as good.

    NO capture/attack the fortress. PANTS!

    Did I already say? 'No moving train level.'

    Levels sprawling/lacking focus.

    Quake-esque graphics. Diluting the 'commando' feel of the original.

    Adrenalin? Sucks.

    The spinning/jumping 'Thing on a Spring' Quake-ness. Blurgh.

    Quake 'skidding sprite' syndrome. Characters doing bounce off wall and cartwheels in mid-air. There's a...

    Superman complex in the game. Making it hard to kill players off. (maybe I'm not as good as I think i'm not...)

    Rocket launcher. Absolutely inferior in feel, kick, power and explosion graphic to the original. (And one less missile...you could store and load off four in the original...) The target system seems cocked up.

    The gameplay seems 'stubby'. Squat to ground.

    The gameplay lacks the 'finess' and 'elegance' of the original.



    I don't know why they don't just stick better graphics on the original engine...or something.



    Somewhere along the line they decided to be Quake 3.5.



    A shame. Though I do like the inclusion of vehicles and the return of capture the fortress...I'm guessing we're stuck with the new 'physics engine'. I'll check it out...but I'd rather they spend more time putting the 'feel' factor back in.



    It's hard to explain. But it's definitely lost something as anybody who's played both can attest to.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 32 of 54
    I discovered the other day that UT (classic) runs much better in classic under Panther than it did under Jaguar: gone is the weird triangle cut-out at the top right of the screen, gone is the bizarrely f**ked gamma, gone are the remarkable jerkiness and pathetic framerates ? its very playable (indeed, I proceeded to gone online and only get moderately thrashed by the hardcore UT dudes who are still clinging on for dear life).



    One fewer reasons to boot into OS9 (in fact, no reasons left at all!)



    Having said that, I'm still really looking forward to Ryan Gordon's UTPG port... it promises to be yummy.
  • Reply 33 of 54
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Does anyone know anything about software rendering? I have the standard single 1.8 G5, and do you think that I'll be able to expect better game speeds with software rendering, versus using my Geforce FX5200?
  • Reply 34 of 54
    Just out of interest, why would you want/have to?



    I would think not, software rendering usually carries a hefty performance hit, although games such as Total Annihilation are effectively software rendered and they run well.
  • Reply 35 of 54
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mattyj

    Just out of interest, why would you want/have to?



    I would think not, software rendering usually carries a hefty performance hit, although games such as Total Annihilation are effectively software rendered and they run well.




    Well, the included Geforce FX with 64 MB VRAM isn't exactly a graphics monster, but the G5 is a really fast proccessor, and it will be optimized for the G5.
  • Reply 36 of 54
    mattyjmattyj Posts: 898member
    So in effect what you are saying is that you're wondering if performance would be better if you used only the processor and not the processor and the graphics card?



    Erm, no... lol
  • Reply 37 of 54
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Any of you yahoos want to start a MOHAA smack-FU clan for AI?



    We can call it



    <CSBDC>



    Clean Smelling, Big Dong Crew



  • Reply 38 of 54
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mattyj

    So in effect what you are saying is that you're wondering if performance would be better if you used only the processor and not the processor and the graphics card?



    Erm, no... lol




    Oh, I see...so my processor is actually being fully utilized when I play UT? (I don't know much about how your computer functions when you game)
  • Reply 39 of 54
    any of you guys that didn't like ut2003 and have the game, PM me if your interested in selling the game. I admit that ut was a better game but 2003 is still fun to me.
  • Reply 40 of 54
    mattyjmattyj Posts: 898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Placebo

    Oh, I see...so my processor is actually being fully utilized when I play UT? (I don't know much about how your computer functions when you game)



    Not neccessarily. It's just that not using your graphics card will result in a loss on performance, not gain. The G5 has practically no optimised applications for it yet, and I doubt any game patches will address this.



    Basicially, using both your processor and graphics card will result is the best performance. UT2003 will be using every bit of your system it can at the same time, if you use software rendering UT2003 will have less to use for performance at its disposal.
Sign In or Register to comment.