Is Xbox360 and the PC version

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:16 am

Going to have network sharing so that there are more servers and people to play against?

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:18 am

If they wont allow it is it going to be "Cracked" like the dreamcast version? Anyone know anything about it or hear anything on the rumou rmill?

Post by **Foo** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:19 am

It went badly wrong with Quake 3 and the Dreamcast version.

But critically, it didn't go wrong on any technical level, it's just that hooking up PC FPS gamers and console FPS gamers is not a pretty sight.

I applaud id for taking the first steps with console/PC interaction online, but doing so with the one genre that's completely different on PC and console was a mistake.

Post by **dzjepp** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:20 am

I remember jumping on the DC servers once in a while to get my fix of severely crushing the foolz that played it.

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:24 am

Foo wrote:It went badly wrong with Quake 3 and the Dreamcast version.

But critically, it didn't go wrong on any technical level, it's just that hooking up PC FPS gamers and console FPS gamers is not a pretty sight.

I applaud id for taking the first steps with console/PC interaction online, but doing so with the one genre that's completely different on PC and console was a mistake.

two words..... Halo 2

well one word and a number

Halo 2 players on Xbox were far superior than PC players of Halo and in a match up on either game (If halo 2 was ever released for PC) would totally have taken the PC players any day of the week.

As far as Quake 4 and network crossing. Regardless of whether they allow it. Someone is going to crack it (although saying that they might not since the game is not NEARLY as popular as Q3 *may chang ein time*)

And I dont know why you are applauding id. They did everything they could to stop Q3 cross network. In fact Todd was so pissed off he came on here and started spiting his dummy out all over the place.......

So back to original point. Anyone actually heard any rumours as to whether this is going to happen or not?

Post by **_borsdy** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:24 am

riddla wrote:Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?

I was just going to say that. There's also no plans of updates for the xbox from what I read in a review somewheres.

edit: http://pc.ign.com/articles/658/658263p3.html[quote]Too bad for the 360 guys that no downloadable content is planned.[/quote]

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:25 am

riddla wrote:If they do interact, mouse and keyboard takes the game always. Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?

.... mouse and keyboard will be released for xbox 360.... you are aware of this right ?

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:28 am

_borsdy wrote:
riddla wrote:Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?
I was just going to say that. There's also no plans of updates for the xbox from what I read in a review somewheres.

Xbox version will be play tested more and will probably be version 1.16n or equivalent........

And regardless PC version will sooner or later have a backwards patch switcher allowing you to move between different versions so thats pretty much a moot point.

Post by **Rogue** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:29 am

riddla wrote:If they do interact, mouse and keyboard takes the game always. Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?

Xbox release patches via live.

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:32 am

Rogue wrote:
riddla wrote:If they do interact, mouse and keyboard takes the game always. Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?
Xbox release patches via live.

He means where will you put the patches if you buy the HD-less version of Xbox360

He doesnt seem to realise that the game will be patched for the people who have HD-version of Xbox360

As well as new maps/mods and all the rest of it.

Post by **Bdw3** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:33 am

Rogue wrote:
riddla wrote:If they do interact, mouse and keyboard takes the game always. Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?
Xbox release patches via live.

But where will they be saved on the cheapo version of the 360 once downloaded?

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:35 am

Bdw3 wrote:
Rogue wrote:
riddla wrote:If they do interact, mouse and keyboard takes the game always. Also, I wonder how people with the lesser xbox 360 bundles sans-HD will be able to play when PC patches are released?
Xbox release patches via live.
But where will they be saved on the cheapo version of the 360 once downloaded?

...... cheapo version will not be able to download it.... pretty simple.

Doesnt mean that upgrading of the game by means of patches and new maps and mods wont be supported. Just means the HD-less people wont be able to play certain games.

Happened with Halo 2 and the map pack that was available. The in game browser only searches for games and maps according to the version you have.

Post by **Bdw3** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:36 am

indeed. :icon14:

Post by **Foo** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:45 am

[FTF]Pyro wrote:two words..... Halo 2

well one word and a number

Halo 2 players on Xbox were far superior than PC players of Halo and in a match up on either game (If halo 2 was ever released for PC) would totally have taken the PC players any day of the week.

It's hard to see what you mean here. Are you suggesting that if Halo 2 was out on the PC and XBOX, and that both could network together, that PC players with their mouse + keyboard would find themselves dominated by XBOX players on the joypad? This is what I think you're saying, and apart from not agreeing, it's purely hypothetical and hence isn't a counterexample by definition.

And I dont know why you are applauding id. They did everything they could to stop Q3 cross network. In fact Todd was so pissed off he came on here and started spiting his dummy out all over the place.......

I dont follow. id released the DC mappack, right? Mebbe I have it backwards, but my understanding was that id published the kid neccesary to allow users to play DC players.

Post by **FragZilla!** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:14 am

[FTF]Pyro wrote:{SNIP}
And regardless PC version will sooner or later have a backwards patch switcher allowing you to move between different versions so thats pretty much a moot point.

YES! That's the only thing that really pisses me off with Steam* for Valve games.

Trying to play a match with a new day-old forced patch sucks major butt.

*I do like Steam auto-patching quite a bit, and most everything else for that matter, but the fact that using previous patch versions isn't available has caused major problems with our LAN events...ie: Something has changed that effects gameplay quite a bit.

Post by **FragZilla!** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:30 am

[FTF]Pyro wrote:{SNIP}
And I dont know why you are applauding id. They did everything they could to stop Q3 cross network. In fact Todd was so pissed off he came on here and started spiting his dummy out all over the place.......
{SNIP}

It's cruel to the console players, that's one of the big issues. It can easily cast a "this game is fuxored online" shadow over the console players experience and make people dislike the product.

Console players develop a very different style of playing games than the extremely diverse ways that PC players do.

On top of that, PC gamers can aim up someone's nostril without much trouble whereas console players have difficulty even seeing a nostril at a distance.

And yes, there are plenty of PC FPS players with sub-standard hardware, but console gamers end up with ~4 year old hardware that they can't do anything about. PC gamers can always throw what was a $400 video card a year ago into their PC's for $100 or less.

/And, no, I'm not an iD fanboy in the slightest. I've been majorly pissed of at John Camrack about many aspects of Quake3...especially the skill-curve flattening. It was one of the major avoidable errors that cost iD the crown of being the King of online FPS gaming.

Post by **Oeloe** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:54 am

FragZilla! wrote:/And, no, I'm not an iD fanboy in the slightest. I've been majorly pissed of at John Camrack about many aspects of Quake3...especially the skill-curve flattening. It was one of the major avoidable errors that cost iD the crown of being the King of online FPS gaming.

So you are a Quake 2 fanboy? Tim Willits stated a while ago that Q3 was iD's biggest failure because of (1) the system requirements, and (2) the steep skill curve that made it nearly unplayable for casual gamers.

Post by **^misantropia^** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:15 am

Oeloe: Q3A FFA, where a herd of MG cessing newbies can take down even the greatest, most tanked up pro player.

Post by **FragZilla!** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:51 pm

Oeloe wrote:
FragZilla! wrote:/And, no, I'm not an iD fanboy in the slightest. I've been majorly pissed of at John Camrack about many aspects of Quake3...especially the skill-curve flattening. It was one of the major avoidable errors that cost iD the crown of being the King of online FPS gaming.
So you are a Quake 2 fanboy? Tim Willits stated a while ago that Q3 was iD's biggest failure because of (1) the system requirements, and (2) the steep skill curve that made it nearly unplayable for casual gamers.

It's impossible to have an objective perspective when the person is part of the game creation process. It wasn't system requirements. Quake 1 was much more tough on computers of it's day. In fact, the first 3d card for consumers was just hitting the shelves when Quake 1 was released and they weren't widely available and cheap for quite a while.

Quake 3 was a game that catered to new & casual players. That's what iD wanted, an arcade game where people could start getting kills rather quickly instead of them taking the punishment and working on their own skills.

Contrast that to what happened when new players showed up on Quake1 & 2 servers. They were owned by the players who had spent a lot of time working on their skills. Skill-building (item collection in other games) is a large part of what often keeps a player interested in a game instead of ditching it after a few months. Without the skill-building, the game can become very boring because there isn't any reward except for the kills themselves.

Just because Tim Willits (or anyone else) says something doesn't mean that it's automatically true.

Post by **jester!** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:32 pm

Oeloe wrote:
FragZilla! wrote:/And, no, I'm not an iD fanboy in the slightest. I've been majorly pissed of at John Camrack about many aspects of Quake3...especially the skill-curve flattening. It was one of the major avoidable errors that cost iD the crown of being the King of online FPS gaming.
So you are a Quake 2 fanboy? Tim Willits stated a while ago that Q3 was iD's biggest failure because of (1) the system requirements, and (2) the steep skill curve that made it nearly unplayable for casual gamers.

Shit if thats true then no wonder Q4 isnt being as well accepted.

Easy to learn, difficult to master, would go a long way to establishing some longevity to this game...

Post by **MKJ** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:06 pm

jester! wrote:
Oeloe wrote:
FragZilla! wrote:/And, no, I'm not an iD fanboy in the slightest. I've been majorly pissed of at John Camrack about many aspects of Quake3...especially the skill-curve flattening. It was one of the major avoidable errors that cost iD the crown of being the King of online FPS gaming.
So you are a Quake 2 fanboy? Tim Willits stated a while ago that Q3 was iD's biggest failure because of (1) the system requirements, and (2) the steep skill curve that made it nearly unplayable for casual gamers.

Easy to learn, difficult to master, would go a long way to establishing some longevity to this game...

thats where bots come in. so the noobs can practice offline to their own leisure instead of trying to practice online and get the shit beaten out of them

Post by **FragZilla!** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:18 pm

MKJ wrote:
jester! wrote:
Oeloe wrote:Easy to learn, difficult to master, would go a long way to establishing some longevity to this game...
thats where bots come in. so the noobs can practice offline to their own leisure instead of trying to practice online and get the shit beaten out of them

The bots don't accomlish that purpose to much of an extent.

The problem with learning to beat bots is that the person ends up learning how to outwit a bot...and those bots are much less intelligent and creative than a very small child is.

Bots are great for reflex training. Developing good skills, especially strategies for different situations and maps is best learned by playing with other humans.

Post by **[FTF]Pyro** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:42 am

Foo wrote:
[FTF]Pyro wrote:two words..... Halo 2

well one word and a number

Halo 2 players on Xbox were far superior than PC players of Halo and in a match up on either game (If halo 2 was ever released for PC) would totally have taken the PC players any day of the week.
It's hard to see what you mean here. Are you suggesting that if Halo 2 was out on the PC and XBOX, and that both could network together, that PC players with their mouse + keyboard would find themselves dominated by XBOX players on the joypad? This is what I think you're saying, and apart from not agreeing, it's purely hypothetical and hence isn't a counterexample by definition.

Meh..... hypothetical but considering that I have both halo on pc and xbox and halo 2 on xbox I would say that xboxers would be more than able to hold any ground against pc players. Reason being that the type of game offered by halo is not that of quake 3 or unreal. Its not as fast. Plus driving any of the vehicles is far easier using a joypad....

And I dont know why you are applauding id. They did everything they could to stop Q3 cross network. In fact Todd was so pissed off he came on here and started spiting his dummy out all over the place.......
I dont follow. id released the DC mappack, right? Mebbe I have it backwards, but my understanding was that id published the kid neccesary to allow users to play DC players

Its my understanding.... neh recolection that the DC map pack was introduced to allow PC players to play DC maps not to allow cross network linkage. In fact I remember having an arguement with Todd and him saying to me that it was "a legal Grey area that he didnt want to discuss" when I put it to him that if I owned both the PC version and the DC version then what was to stop me downgrading my PC version to 1.16n uploading the DC map pack, renaming the maps to coincide with the DC map names and playing on the SEGA network, his reply was "Its the same arguement thats playing plagueing software companies for years with regards to illegally copying files.... blah blah blah" and that he didnt want to discuss it.

At which point half the people on here went over to 1.16n destroyed the DC'ers online then we came offline and took down the SEGAFORUMS Quake board.......

.

Post by **DooMer** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:50 am

lol, those fucking DC players. I had 2 installs of quake just so I could put those bastards in their place.

Post by **Foo** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:53 am

Worked badly against this community in the long term, though.

Is Xbox360 and the PC version

Should there be network linkage

Is Xbox360 and the PC version