wow wing commander?

That game was awsome back in the day.

I didn't know that dosbox could run it.


I liked UT's dodge and double jump stuff, makes matches more intense if you play against people that can really utilize them.

I've just bought ' blake stone aliens of gold' from a boot fair for ?1. anyone know what this is? looks like wolf engine.

the kangroo aliens already say "you be dead"

I Like them all UT 99 is still cool for it's myriad of Mods

Ut 2003 is Cool for all Of it's weirdness

Ut 2004 is Very Cool as Onslaught Rules, Especially now with the MSU Bonus Pack as i Luv <3 the Cicada assualt Craft

But Quake 3 and Generations will always keep me coming back as i'm a true slippy  

and will be ever since Quake world  

Which is why i love Generations the Most, as the Slipgate Class has truely brought back the coolness and accuracy of Quake

Long live Generations and it's possible sequels  

thanks. as soon as i get the time on a non-XP comp I'll try it.

I played ut for over 3 years when it first came out in a number of clans and some lan competitions.  It was a great game that was totally different to q3 relying more on tactics/movement than pure aim/ping. It was fresh and exciting and had a charm that still pulls people in now online with virtually the same number of people playing it online as ut2004.

To me ut2003 put a lot of people off the ut franchise for good and onto other games. The movement was heavier and clunky and the weapons redesigned to make them less "spammy" but  it ended up playing like a bad quake 3 mod with good graphics. ut2004 tried to get more players back with old ut style gameplay types/weapons/feel etc which shows how badly people wanted a game more akin to the original.

This is imo but I feel a number of people shared this view as illustrated by how badly ut2003 did online and how ut2004 is not taken as seriously  as a tournament game e.g. cpl/no of clan ladders etc. Here is a typical quote from ataris own forums where many people feel the same way:

"Yeah, funny that, when ever a thread comes up about UT99 it gets closed, what,, doesn't epic/atari like the fact that UT99 is still popular, or is it that they just can't reproduce the best game ever made"

I gotta say i agree as well

both UT2003 & UT2004

are games where the graphics, seem to have been more important than the gameplay

plus less and less decent mods are being made for ut2003 /4 as most prefer fast matched deathmatches and ctf

which can't be found anywhere but quake 3

and what the hell happened to the preposed weapons factory for ut2003 as i love weapons factory

but they canned it at the last minute

it's just not far i tell you

as for atari / epic they really don't like the fans of the original keep bringing up what a seriously better game ut99 was, as it's just like having to admit that graphics arn't everything

i still play ut99 and all the mods it has

and although weapons factory ut only made a beta 1.07 it was in many ways a better version than the quake 3 one

(ducks to avoid knives, bombs, grenades and whatever else can be thrown)

as q3wf has serious flaws

for defensive classes such as the gunner and engineer q3 is too fast an engine to go with the slowness need for such a class

all in all wf would suit ut2004, so come guys somebody must know somebody that wan't to start it again

 

I think the biggest difference in between UT2004 and UT99 in terms of damage is that UT99 had a "game style" setting that tweaked the damage and movement scales. At base value, most of the weapons were pretty weak, rockets only did 70 damage, but in the "hardcore" setting, which almost everyone played on, rocket damage was upped all the way to 120. Then you go to UT2004, and rockets only do 90 damage, with no "style" setting to up the damage.

The frustrating thing is if you mention rockets doing 100 damage on a UT2004 forum, most people are like "what? that would make it too easy to get cheap kills". If you ask me, leaving a  player with 10 health left is just annoying. In heated FFA games, I find often I make a nice direct hit shot with the RL, only to have the guy survive by a thread and get finished off by some n00b spaming assault rifle fire while I'm loading the next round. Why should the spamming n00b get the kill when I did all the work?

Certainly preventing things from getting too friendly to 1-shot-kills is a valid concern, but I think nerfing the weapons is a bad way to do that. I think that instead, providing more armor or health vials works better, that way players have to work for their protection, and it contributes to the overall system of rescource control. Also, spawning players with extra health that counted down in Q3 wasn't too bad because it was only temporary, even though having to rail people twice when they spawn in your way was annoying.

The other nice thing about using '100 damage' as the base value for all single-shot weapons is it provides a guidline for damage. In UT2004, even among the single shot weapons, damage values are very arbitrary. Grenades and lightning (rail equivalent) only do 70 damage, then rockets do 90, then for some reason flak does about 110, and the biorifle, if you charge it up all the way, does 200 . Generally, I think it's best to unify things by making damage values consistent from weapon to weapon and then adjusting things like reload time, etc instead to make up the difference. Otherwise, things have a tendency to feel inconsistent and random.