• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

UT2003 Your impressions

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Thread Title : UT2003 Your impressions

Originally posted by: TourGuide
So much of what people are saying here is a matter of personal taste.
Click to expand...

Duh? 🙂

Good : Graphics are pretty, dying looks cool

Bad : Can't put my finger on it, but I'd rather play any varient of the Quake engines. Ut03 has no "feel" to it. I've tried to get into it 4 times and nothing... well, it's always good to have another benchmark application.
 
Originally posted by: scottrico
Completely disapointed!
Dont get me wrong, ut was one of my favorite games.

I am running it on a p4 1.8 @ 2200 and ATI 9700 4X-16X and it looks sweet .
But it is a bit on the cartoonish side and the maps were boring and small. The free army game looks better.

I like BF 1942 allot better.

UT2003 is more for kids, it take no skill to play.
I was going to pick this game up but now I am going to pass.

I hope unreal champ for xbox does not play this bad.
peace
Click to expand...

I can't stand the cartoonish players and gore in Q3A. That is one thing that separated UT from the Quake3. I know these types of game aren't "realistic" anyway, but more realistic looking models and gore sure makes the game more appealing to me. I too am disappointed that UT2003 looks more like Quake3 in the regard that is is kind of cartoonish. It's not as bad as Q3A, but not as good as UT. It's somewhere in between.

I agree with those of you who don't like the lightening gun (replacement of the sniper rifle). It's retarded and annoying. You have to wait for the thing to charge up after every shot. Why did they do that? Was the semi-automatic sniper RIFLE giving people too much of an advantage?

Another thing I don't like is the link gun (pulse rifle). It's fine when you have it, but when someone is shooting you with it, using the repeating pulses not the solid beam, you can't see where the hell they are to shoot back. Stupid.

All that said, it's still fun as hell to play. Bombing run is fantastic. I'm gonna buy it.

Here's what I don't understand. In the benchmark, wich runs everything in "highest" detail, the botmatch average at 1024x768x32 was 45 fps on my GF4 Ti4400 overclocked to Ti4600 specs. Yet when I play game in "normal" detail, I get about the same average (using stat fps command). I don't get it. Does that mean when I get the full version, 1024x768x32 on higher detail settings will be unplayable? (I consider anything under 30 fps unplayable) That will suck. I mean, the graphics look great even on "normal" but it sucks to think that my "high end" video card is already unable to play it in high detail.

Oh yeah, and I hope they have the left hand weapon option in the full version.
 
If people are wondering why changing the resolution of the game doesn't really reflect a lot of changes in the performance, there are two factors:

1. The game is heavily CPU limited. All benchmarks show this. My brother is running an Athlon 1.4ghz (100fsb), with a TI4200 and my Athlon 1.53 with Ti500 will beat him in benches.

2. The textures in the demo aren't the full set of textures in the real game. The real game's textures are LARGE (some over 100 megs). Place those textures in place of the existing textures and the game has a different look when it comes to benchmarking.

vash
 
Heres my opinion:

The good stuff:
At least twice the graphic UT has
Weapons are better(but not alot has changed)
Models look great
There should be some weather effects in the fullversion(rain,snow,ect) on some maps which is a change
Much better gib system

Cons(IMO):
Don't like the maps as much as UT(Ive seen most of them because I was at a dudes place who has the leaked fullversion)
They needed to change the weapons more and add new ones(and more of them)
I don't like the model designs I mean the models are good I just don't like players in a mech type costume they looks to big and fat
Gib system needs alot of work which maybe fixed in the fullversion
Thats all I have to complain about which maybe fixed in the fullversion

Heres some stuff some may not know about:
swirling rockets which is killer looking(most don't know this but you can hold secondary fire down on the rocket launcher and while charging up your 3 rockets hold primary fire)

When you get 100 adrenalin:
Speed:forward,forward,forward,forward
Berserk:forward,forward,back,back
Invisible:left,left,right,right(tricky to do)
boost(fills energy):back,back,back,back


 
Well, I can start by saying, I was in the Q3 camp back in the days of Q3 vs UT.
Or rather, I was in the Quake1 camp, but it was getting a little lonely, so I joined the Q3 camp due to lack of anything better 😉

I always felt UT has a very cartoonish look compared to Quake3, granted, Q3's models were a bit "out there" in many cases, such as Bones or Orb, but on a whole, UT seemed very cartoonish compared to Q3.
UT2003 picks up where UT left and is even more cartoonish, more like something I'd expect on a gamecube or something.

The weapons... well haven't played enough to get used to them, but they do seem kinda boring, they all look too... well cartoonish, kinda like the Super Soaker water rifles I always wanted when I was a kid.
Models, same thing, they look like action figures or something.

Now, the most important part, gameplay.
Well, this is one area that I never expected UT2003 to be great in, since Im more of a hardcore deathmatcher, and I like speed, lots of it.
That's why I prefer Quake1 to Quake3, Q3 to UT, and that's why UT2003's gameplay is a little boring to me.
But for those that enjoy more refined modes of play, such as assault, etc, I expect UT2003 will not disapoint.

All in all, it's not a bad game, it's just not for me.
 
I played it for the first time for about 3 hours last night, and I had a lot of fun, but I can see how it can get boring quickly. I was playing at a small lan of 3 people, and it was fun for a bit, then i got bored a little later. I'd play again 🙂 The graphics areabsolutely stunning. it is at the very least a very very pretty game!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top