Page 2 of 3

Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 7:45 pm
by Foo
fuck off odium

Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:43 pm
by inolen
This is made by the same people who did Q3F and ET, they know how to make a class based game.. Also, I played it at E3, and it was in fact the shit. And Riddla, there isn't a big enough rolleyes for the "doom3 engine is a turd" comment.

Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:02 pm
by Foo
inolen wrote:This is made by the same people who did Q3F and ET, they know how to make a class based game.. Also, I played it at E3, and it was in fact the shit. And Riddla, there isn't a big enough rolleyes for the "doom3 engine is a turd" comment.
TBH that seemed a pretty strong point.

The Dynamic light system in the game sucked all the horsepower away from improvements in other areas and resulted in games that didn't look particularly hot next to their peers, were limited to being quite dingy in atmosphere, and bore a distinct lack of robustness and flexibility in the very area it was focusing, the lighting.

Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:28 pm
by inolen
Foo wrote:
inolen wrote:This is made by the same people who did Q3F and ET, they know how to make a class based game.. Also, I played it at E3, and it was in fact the shit. And Riddla, there isn't a big enough rolleyes for the "doom3 engine is a turd" comment.
TBH that seemed a pretty strong point.

The Dynamic light system in the game sucked all the horsepower away from improvements in other areas and resulted in games that didn't look particularly hot next to their peers, were limited to being quite dingy in atmosphere, and bore a distinct lack of robustness and flexibility in the very area it was focusing, the lighting.
You're focusing your attention on a single aspect of how they used the engine for Doom3.

Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 11:14 pm
by Foo
inolen wrote:You're focusing your attention on a single aspect of how they used the engine for Doom3.
I guess, but I tend to look at things in terms of what it's meant to the end games and how it stands amongs its peers. On a technical level I'm ignorant of the inner workings of the engine itself. But I think the only meaningful gauge of an engine's value is what it can be used for, and the D3 engine looks to be a one-trick pony that ended up not even doing particularly well at the one thing it was attempting.

D3 ended up dingy, flat, and IMO not that good looking or high performance. Q4 ended up comparable to D3 in terms of performance and looks.

From a modding perspective, taking the editor into the game itself feels like a complete hackjob, and only really served to retard the progress already made with the map editors back into the dark ages.

In terms of flexibility, the outdoor areas in Q4/D3 looked like utter shit.

For ET... I'll wait and see what they've managed to do before judging but my general opinion of the D3 engine is already fairly well formed. A lot of the talk given in interviews about QW's outdoor lighting and the terrain systems/methods all seem to be politely saying 'we found a way around all the limitations of this engine'. So the jury's out.

Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:02 am
by Kaz
o'dium wrote:same people that did RtCW MP
That was Nerve. :]

Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:27 am
by Don Carlos
He means ET i think ;)

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:32 am
by Vanilla
The game will suck. I had high hopes for this until I saw some moving footage. Nothing will come close to the immortal Q3 in terms of feeling or hardcore-ness, no matter how pretty.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:22 pm
by Deji
This isn't supposed to be like Q3, it's supposed to be like ET. I think it'll do just fine in that respect.

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:10 pm
by Zombie13
That's like saying I'm not buying this game cause it plays nothing like Black and White 2!

Z

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 3:01 pm
by 4days
Zombie13 wrote:That's like saying I'm not buying this game cause it plays nothing like Black and White 2!

Z
wait, you mean it doesn't?

*scratches etqw from amazon wishlist*

Re: Reasons to not early adopt this game

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:12 pm
by squeaky
riddla wrote:1. Doom 3 sucked ass.
2. Quake 4 sucked ass.
3. Carmack doesnt give a fuck about anything but making toy rockets now.
4. id no longer communicates with the community like it once did; now we're all just dollar signs.
5. You cant polish a turd of a game engine.

feel free to continue...

why the fuck are you still a mod of the quake4 forum if you think the game is shit? who needs a stoopid cunt like you makin threads of woe about id games, then moddin a forum you could give 2 fucks about. have you always been a fuckin retard? im tellin you bro, you're the only turd here. you should flush yourself right away.

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:05 am
by Foo
I like this thread cause it's a good lightning rod for the negative speculation.

Re: Reasons to not early adopt this game

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 12:01 pm
by niko
riddla wrote:1. Doom 3 sucked ass.
2. Quake 4 sucked ass.
3. Carmack doesnt give a fuck about anything but making toy rockets now.
4. id no longer communicates with the community like it once did; now we're all just dollar signs.
5. You cant polish a turd of a game engine.

feel free to continue...
well...
you can't calculate things like that,
your lightmotive is 'everything sucks'.. ccc
take a prozac?? :p

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 12:04 pm
by niko
btw ET:QW looookss and sounds (by ideas) really good,..
i don't like tf/cs-style games but this is the one game with wich i'll give that genre a try

Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 9:18 pm
by Whiskey 7
phantasmagoria wrote:doom3 and quake4 were ok, but they weren't really 'fun'. I think quakewars will break this


:icon14:

I do really hope so phantasmagoria :icon17:

Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 12:19 am
by iluvquake4
We're all going to buy it anyhow. Why fight the inevitable?

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:05 pm
by Wils
I'm not going to buy it.

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:19 pm
by iluvquake4
Wils,

I run a free service to server admins for url redirection:
http://turkeyfiles.escapedturkey.net/

Any idea how big the average custom map for ET:QW will be?

Thank you. :)

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:28 pm
by Wils
Couldn't give you an average for something like that. An unrealistic minimum size (map using an existing megatexture with no custom textures) would probably be about 25mb in a compressed pk4.

A badly packed fully custom map with all the bells and whistles could potentially be anything upwards of 500mb, but I would imagine a map like that would have to be what is technically termed 'a bit fucking good' to be worth the download/hosting.

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:38 pm
by iluvquake4
I set the system to allow up to 500mb filesize uploads, if it needs even more I can raise it higher. The machine is 100mbit unmetered, so bandwidth up/down is not a concern.

My second question is what style will the url redirect use?

The latest Quake 4 patch made it so you only have to use an asterick to get all redirect to work properly:

net_serverdownload "2"
net_serverDlBaseURL "http://q4files.escapedturkey.net/quake4/pk4s/"
net_serverDlTable "*"

Before with net_serverDlTable (such as still is the case with Doom 3) you had to specify each file:

et_serverdownload "2"
net_serverDlBaseURL "http://turkeyfiles.escapedturkey.net/doom3/"
net_serverDlTable "base/filename,pk4;base/filename.pk4;base/filename.pk4"

Thank you. :)

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:20 pm
by Foo
When odium uses 'we' and 'us' he's referring to 'idiots', of which he is a member and has tenure.

Nothing to do with Us.

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:22 pm
by zombieflute
I personaly did not like the "Doom 3 engine" in doom 3 or Q4...i was hoping for a Uber Q4 crazy Engine...for quake...i personaly...would have rather played Q4 in the Q3 engine...

Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:47 am
by gravedigga
reasons to adopt this game
fuck bf
this is the original

hmmm

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:53 am
by raptorxd
well seeming im a huge fan of thr id company an i v played doom an quake since i was 3 i say that in my the rock doom 3 defintly dous not suck in the least or quake 4 :rtcw: