Just watch it'll show up on OS X. Doom III is coming and that's their main competition. Besides they will license it and some one will port it. Also the article says they are uncertain not that they have made a decision not to.
Perhaps this would help some Mac users to wake up and realize OS 9 is DEAD ( RIP ) and migrate to X already.
Q3 can be tweaked further than UT if you use the console or mess in the .cfg file. There is just more speed to squeeze out of the game than there is in UT.
UT is more CPU intensive while Q3 is more video card intensive. It is easier to get Q3 into the triple digit framerates.
Q3 has a lot of good game balance things built in, such as re-spawning with 120 health instead of 100 so a single railgun or rocket launcher won't kill you once you re-appear, and there are many other little things like that which make a good balance deathmatch game.
I prefer the smaller deathmatch maps like in Q3. More non-stop action. Of course, I also tend to play on a LAN with 2-6 people. UT does seem designed more for larger games with 10+ people. Of course, I've been in some 20+ user games of Q3 as well. It does tend to get crowded then, but since I don't do it very often, I find it to be somewhat amusing.
Q3's weapons seem to mostly be designed so they are all useful, but in different situations. For example, the rocket launcher is not good in a wide open area because it is too slow and reloads slow, while the Plasma gun tends to do well in small crowded rooms, or if you are chasing somebody. In UT, I get more of a "bigger is better" impression. You can't dis the BFG, it's not nearly as broken as the redeemer, and it's on very few maps, and usually difficult to get.
UT lets you stack armor and health too high, unbalancing the game for the person who's been alive the longest. they can get such strong leads in health, armor, and weaponry that they can become very unfairly overpowered. Q3 does things to limit your health, armor, and ammo.
UT gives you a few character models with a bunch of skins each. Q3 gives you a bunch of models with a few skins each. This is important. It is easier to create a skin than a model. For people who want a custom character to use, UT is somewhat limiting, because you have to make a skin that fits to one of the few models available. Q3 has more models for you to choose from, so for somebody who wants to create a custom skin, there are more models for you to choose from to put that skin on, giving the artist more flexibility.
I like the physics of Q3 better, but that is more of an objective thing. Ditto on the graphics.
I do like the ability to drag and drop add-ons without having to use a UMOD installer or mess in files to use them.
Q3 has faster network code.
The Q3 console actually lets you do some really cool things. The UT console doesn't really do very much.
To it's credit, UT does have Assault which is a very fun way to play... if you can get 6-8 people for some player vs player team games. Domination is kinda fun too. The maps are interesting, in terms of setting/location, but I don't find many of them to be much fun. The bigger maps just seem kinda slow and dull, but again, this is playing on a lan with my friends. It's apparently designed for bigger amounts of people.
I do own both games and play them both, but I play Q3 much more. I do think UT 2003 should and will come to OS X sometime. I also don't think it would be a disaster if it didn't.
Deus Ex is a great game. The UT engine, however, is not why it's great. In fact, the developer wishes they used a different engine, because the engine's limitations limited what they could do with the game. Of course, there would also have been limitations to using the Q3 engine. Point here is that neither engine is perfect for everything.
[quote]Virtually any object can be used as a weapon or a distraction, with the intent of allowing the player to find his/her own solution to a given problem.<hr></blockquote>
Awesome! One of the things I always liked about DX was the interactivity, and how you could explore all around the maps, not just the places you were supposed to go.
Frankly, UT is a better game than Q3 just because of the gameplay. Q3 has far superior graphics IMHO, it's gorgeous to look at. Q3 has a silky smooth framerate even at the highest settings. UT runs quite fast too, but the graphics aren't quite as good. HOWEVER: it's almost twice as fun to play. I love UT and can play it for hours. I like Q3 a lot too, but after 15 minutes I get bored with it.
FWIW: Both games run at above 50 fps on my TiBook. I think that's a more than acceptable framerate. This is with high detail, 1024x768, etc. Q3 gets 60-80 though, UT gets 50-60. Not quite as smooth but still up there.
RtCW though... that game is my absolute favorite for single player and multiplayer. It simply kicks ass. Unfortunately it gets the worst frame rates of the three titles : 30-40 even at medium detail settings : but it's still playable and the gameplay is awesome. I love the multiplayer interaction required.
"Frankly, UT is a better game than Q3 just because of the gameplay."
Yep. No doubting Id's technical lead in some areas. But that technical lead didn't make Kweee a better game by any stretch.
Kweee never got beyond a 'good game demo' in my book.
"Q3 has far superior graphics IMHO, it's gorgeous to look at. Q3 has a silky smooth framerate even at the highest settings."
Gorgeous? I guess they did look that way when they first came out. But they seemed more repetitive than Tourney's to me. Fast? I guess. You can die very quickly. As for framerates in tripple numbers. Er...it plays too fast as it is...it's ridiculous. The way the characters move in the game is amateurish to me. They slip, skitter and scarper about. It's hilarious. Some of my favourite C64 games have sprites with better physics than this! More like the keystone cops...there's probably Kweee skins for that...
The characters in UT can move fast but they seem to do so more realistically. Not so fast you can't anticipate what they are going to do.
You kind of have to be a super FPS expert hardcore kind of thing with Kweee. It's a bit up it's own ass in that respect.
"UT runs quite fast too, but the graphics aren't quite as good."
Not quite. They don't have that lusty 'edge' to them but I like them better in terms of the level graphics. They have more variety for me. I like the weapons and the effects much better.
"HOWEVER: it's almost twice as fun to play."
Yep.
" I love UT and can play it for hours."
Yeah. I know what you mean. Had to stop when I saw flashing when I closed me eyes... (I was zooming around corridors when I closed me eyes...I guess I needed a break from it... The fortress and train levels. I played them like crazy. Brilliant design of levels there...and well paced. Almost thought they were impossible at one point. But hey...I'm by no means masterclass at this fps stuff...)
"I like Q3 a lot too, but after 15 minutes I get bored with it."
Yep. Seriously bored.
I played Quake III for about an hour. But I couldn't see what the fascination with it was. It looks good but it way too repetitive. The levels seemed gorgeous to look at but very hollow and none too atmospheric.
My pet hate being the 'spring' level. What were Id thinking...
Well, there's no accounting for taste, and many of my gripes with UT are about the engine itself, and it sounds like others agree about the technical superiority of the engine anyway.
I heard Deus Ex 2 was going to use one of the Thief engines, but I haven't really been following it too much lately. I guess I shouldn't be surprised if they decided to use an unreal-based engine again. May as well stick with it.
I do like the fact that Q3 engine uses OpenGL. It makes it more "mac-ish". Unreal has pretty much become an ally with Microsoft and the push to make DirectX better.
Comments
Perhaps this would help some Mac users to wake up and realize OS 9 is DEAD ( RIP ) and migrate to X already.
UT is more CPU intensive while Q3 is more video card intensive. It is easier to get Q3 into the triple digit framerates.
Q3 has a lot of good game balance things built in, such as re-spawning with 120 health instead of 100 so a single railgun or rocket launcher won't kill you once you re-appear, and there are many other little things like that which make a good balance deathmatch game.
I prefer the smaller deathmatch maps like in Q3. More non-stop action. Of course, I also tend to play on a LAN with 2-6 people. UT does seem designed more for larger games with 10+ people. Of course, I've been in some 20+ user games of Q3 as well. It does tend to get crowded then, but since I don't do it very often, I find it to be somewhat amusing.
Q3's weapons seem to mostly be designed so they are all useful, but in different situations. For example, the rocket launcher is not good in a wide open area because it is too slow and reloads slow, while the Plasma gun tends to do well in small crowded rooms, or if you are chasing somebody. In UT, I get more of a "bigger is better" impression. You can't dis the BFG, it's not nearly as broken as the redeemer, and it's on very few maps, and usually difficult to get.
UT lets you stack armor and health too high, unbalancing the game for the person who's been alive the longest. they can get such strong leads in health, armor, and weaponry that they can become very unfairly overpowered. Q3 does things to limit your health, armor, and ammo.
UT gives you a few character models with a bunch of skins each. Q3 gives you a bunch of models with a few skins each. This is important. It is easier to create a skin than a model. For people who want a custom character to use, UT is somewhat limiting, because you have to make a skin that fits to one of the few models available. Q3 has more models for you to choose from, so for somebody who wants to create a custom skin, there are more models for you to choose from to put that skin on, giving the artist more flexibility.
I like the physics of Q3 better, but that is more of an objective thing. Ditto on the graphics.
I do like the ability to drag and drop add-ons without having to use a UMOD installer or mess in files to use them.
Q3 has faster network code.
The Q3 console actually lets you do some really cool things. The UT console doesn't really do very much.
To it's credit, UT does have Assault which is a very fun way to play... if you can get 6-8 people for some player vs player team games. Domination is kinda fun too. The maps are interesting, in terms of setting/location, but I don't find many of them to be much fun. The bigger maps just seem kinda slow and dull, but again, this is playing on a lan with my friends. It's apparently designed for bigger amounts of people.
I do own both games and play them both, but I play Q3 much more. I do think UT 2003 should and will come to OS X sometime. I also don't think it would be a disaster if it didn't.
Deus Ex is a great game. The UT engine, however, is not why it's great. In fact, the developer wishes they used a different engine, because the engine's limitations limited what they could do with the game. Of course, there would also have been limitations to using the Q3 engine. Point here is that neither engine is perfect for everything.
DX2 probably will not use an unreal-based engine.
[ 08-08-2002: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</p>
<a href="http://www.planetdeusex.com/dx2/info/tech/"; target="_blank">http://www.planetdeusex.com/dx2/info/tech/</a>;
Here's a picture of the level editor they're using:
<a href="http://www.planetdeusex.com/images/image.asp?/dx2/files/screenshots/editor/dx2editor01.jpg"; target="_blank">Editor</a>
[ 08-08-2002: Message edited by: a2daj ]</p>
Awesome! One of the things I always liked about DX was the interactivity, and how you could explore all around the maps, not just the places you were supposed to go.
-Mike
FWIW: Both games run at above 50 fps on my TiBook. I think that's a more than acceptable framerate. This is with high detail, 1024x768, etc. Q3 gets 60-80 though, UT gets 50-60. Not quite as smooth but still up there.
RtCW though... that game is my absolute favorite for single player and multiplayer. It simply kicks ass. Unfortunately it gets the worst frame rates of the three titles : 30-40 even at medium detail settings : but it's still playable and the gameplay is awesome. I love the multiplayer interaction required.
stjobs
Yep. No doubting Id's technical lead in some areas. But that technical lead didn't make Kweee a better game by any stretch.
Kweee never got beyond a 'good game demo' in my book.
"Q3 has far superior graphics IMHO, it's gorgeous to look at. Q3 has a silky smooth framerate even at the highest settings."
Gorgeous? I guess they did look that way when they first came out. But they seemed more repetitive than Tourney's to me. Fast? I guess. You can die very quickly. As for framerates in tripple numbers. Er...it plays too fast as it is...it's ridiculous. The way the characters move in the game is amateurish to me. They slip, skitter and scarper about. It's hilarious. Some of my favourite C64 games have sprites with better physics than this! More like the keystone cops...there's probably Kweee skins for that...
The characters in UT can move fast but they seem to do so more realistically. Not so fast you can't anticipate what they are going to do.
You kind of have to be a super FPS expert hardcore kind of thing with Kweee. It's a bit up it's own ass in that respect.
"UT runs quite fast too, but the graphics aren't quite as good."
Not quite. They don't have that lusty 'edge' to them but I like them better in terms of the level graphics. They have more variety for me. I like the weapons and the effects much better.
"HOWEVER: it's almost twice as fun to play."
Yep.
" I love UT and can play it for hours."
Yeah. I know what you mean. Had to stop when I saw flashing when I closed me eyes... (I was zooming around corridors when I closed me eyes...I guess I needed a break from it... The fortress and train levels. I played them like crazy. Brilliant design of levels there...and well paced. Almost thought they were impossible at one point. But hey...I'm by no means masterclass at this fps stuff...)
"I like Q3 a lot too, but after 15 minutes I get bored with it."
Yep. Seriously bored.
I played Quake III for about an hour. But I couldn't see what the fascination with it was. It looks good but it way too repetitive. The levels seemed gorgeous to look at but very hollow and none too atmospheric.
My pet hate being the 'spring' level. What were Id thinking...
Bor-RING!
Lemon Bon Bon
I heard Deus Ex 2 was going to use one of the Thief engines, but I haven't really been following it too much lately. I guess I shouldn't be surprised if they decided to use an unreal-based engine again. May as well stick with it.
I do like the fact that Q3 engine uses OpenGL. It makes it more "mac-ish". Unreal has pretty much become an ally with Microsoft and the push to make DirectX better.
is it a fps?
is it comparable to UT?
will it be coming to OSX?
as far as this nno UT for macs... its good and bad.
Good, because I won't waste hours upon hours playing it.
Bad, because I won't waste hours upon hours playing it.