• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

What will be THE next BIG multiplayer FPS?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CP5670

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2004
4,905
250
126
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: CP5670
I spent thousands of hours with UT99 many years ago, mostly CTF and domination, but I haven't played it all since 2001. Is there still significant activity on it?
Yes and no. It's impossible to find a populated public DOMination server now, which is very, very sad.

Populated CTF servers are still around, but many of them are instagib, sniper, or modded. There are still a couple populated regular weapons CTF servers around, however, but they run at higher speeds.

In North America, try the FOCR server:

FOCR 125 speed regular weapons: 66.151.7.44

It's 125 speed regular weapons CTF.

Now...that having been said...much of the regular weapons CTF action is at PUG matches. These are spontaneously-organized clan-match style Pick Up Games and they are a tremendous amount of fun. It's real UT CTF the way it was meant to be played! Players on a five-man team have assigned positions and try to use team work and voice comm.

To get involved in the PUG match scene, you need to know how to use IRC (Internet Relay Chat) and Teamspeak2 (a free download -- http://www.GoTeamspeak.com )

In a given IRC channel, people sign up to play in the next match by typing .join. A program called the Pugbot (the Abot in this case) keeps track of the number of people who have signed up to play and when it gets to 10, two people become captains and draft the other 8 players in a 1-2-2-2-1 order with the first captain having the first pick and the second captain having the next two picks, etc., with the first captain getting stuck with the last pick. Then they all hop on Teamspeak, join their team's channel, and then hop on the server to play a best of three maps match.

Come give it a try sometime:

Server: irc.GameRadius.net (home of the North American UT99 CTF community)

Channels:

#speedpug (reg weapons, 125 speed)

and

#mlut (reg weapons, 100 speed, need to be logged in to the IRC server, has a higher skill level)
Cool, thanks for the information. I might drop in at some point if I have time, although I need to find my old UT CDs (not sure exactly where they are at this point :p).
 

math20

Member
Apr 28, 2007
190
0
0
I am playing the crysis beta and loving it, but that is the only one I have tried out of those so far and I have been following crysis for quite some time, I may be a bit biased :)

I think ut3 looks great, but I will have to wait and see how all of the games shape up.
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,015
3,815
136
Originally posted by: dighn
I think UT3 will be the biggest if only because of its name. I'm not counting on Crysis being great in terms of gameplay. TF2 is probably my favorite out of those four, but I see it as sort of a niche franchise. QW I don't know.. feels like the UT3 name is bigger.
I stopped liking UT after UT2003. Well, I still like the original UT best.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,429
20
81

The good news is that UT3 is supposed to feel a whole lot more like UT99, but we'll just have to wait for the demo and see.
 

TehMac

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2006
9,979
3
71
I'm hoping none of the above:

TF2, want to buy it, but I'm hoping Frontlines Fuel of War takes off, because that looks like a really sick game. Same goes to Armed Assault 2 or Operation Flashpoint 2, where they make it an intense experience, but more accessible to people who want more military but less arcade and less HARDCORE than say Armed Assault or OF1.
 

n7

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2004
21,303
3
81
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

The good news is that UT3 is supposed to feel a whole lot more like UT99, but we'll just have to wait for the demo and see.
Only you crazy 99 players feel that's "good" news :p

I like UT2k4's movement style just fine, though it should be a little faster.
What's bad about UT2k4 isn't movement, it's the overpowered hitscan & far too large maps or far too small playerscale...
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
0
76
Originally posted by: n7
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

The good news is that UT3 is supposed to feel a whole lot more like UT99, but we'll just have to wait for the demo and see.
Only you crazy 99 players feel that's "good" news :p

I like UT2k4's movement style just fine, though it should be a little faster.
What's bad about UT2k4 isn't movement, it's the overpowered hitscan & far too large maps or far too small playerscale...
I always thought UT99 was better balanced as well. The weapons were more powerful and the movement slower. It felt like there was more deliberate skill involved...one well placed rocket to the face would kill someone.

UT2003/4 was much faster, the weapons much weaker, the players thinner, and with the double jump/dodge it usually just became a frantic mess that you could barely keep track of wtf was going on. It took two rockets to down someone that was flying around you like a jackrabbit...just too insane.

I'm all for them going back to the original formula.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,429
20
81
The reason why there is so much emphasis on hitscan in UT 2004 is partially because of the movement. When people are flying around through the air you're probably not going to hit them with flak or rocket splash damage. Instead your best bet is a hitscan weapon. Also, it didn't help that the secondary shock ball moved more slowly and that the shock combo was watered down.

In contrast, UT99 was a less hitscan dependent and the primary weapon of clanners was the shock rifle (for it's shock combo--not primary). This gave players who didn't have amazing quick aim a chance to hold their own. The shock combo is about predicting other people's movements and also about strategically placing and timing your combos. The pulse secondary was also very worthwhile.

My personal theory is that UT 2004's emphasis on hitscan is one of the big reasons why the public CTF servers are empty today and one of the reasons why Bombing Run didn't take off. In contrast, the UT99 public CTF servers were well-populated until through the end of 2003, if memory serves me correct. Overall, even today you'll find more UT99 CTF action than UT 2004 CTF action, especially for PUG matches.

I'm hoping that UT3 proves to be the return to prominence of no-vehicles CTF. UT99 CTF rocked! (I'm also hoping for an excellent Classic Domination mod.)

 

fierydemise

Platinum Member
Apr 16, 2005
2,056
2
81
I see Crysis as a primarily single player experience, an awesome SP game but theres no way it will be a challenge in the MP category. Quake Wars is a good game but as a top series its time has passed, it will likely do well but nowhere near as well as UT3 or TF2. Between TF2 and UT3 it'll be close, TF2 is an awesome game, it has great art direction, atmosphere and its just a blast to play however 6 maps will likely be a problem for longterm MP success, especially since the UT series generally has offered a lot of maps. The only thing that I could see sinking UT3 is if Conquest sucks, if it is well executed enough to excuse the lack of onslaught or assault then UT3 will be a huge success, if not then it will likely be a lot less of a successful (although still very successful) until some modders add those modes back in.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
0
0
It seems to me that people, longterm, prefer games without vehicles. In games like BF1942 the mad dash for a tank or plane at each spawn gets kind of old and you start to wonder why you can't just play the game. Whereas something like Counter-Strike is so enduring because each round is a fresh start on equal footing.....nobody is gonna be waiting for you to spawn with a tank barrel aimed at you and no tweaker bastard is gonna outrace you to the last plane and leave you running across a huge map or firing a rocket launcher at a tank parked on a maintenance spot.
 

coreyb

Platinum Member
Aug 12, 2007
2,437
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
It seems to me that people, longterm, prefer games without vehicles. In games like BF1942 the mad dash for a tank or plane at each spawn gets kind of old and you start to wonder why you can't just play the game. Whereas something like Counter-Strike is so enduring because each round is a fresh start on equal footing.....nobody is gonna be waiting for you to spawn with a tank barrel aimed at you and no tweaker bastard is gonna outrace you to the last plane and leave you running across a huge map or firing a rocket launcher at a tank parked on a maintenance spot.

^^
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,429
20
81
Originally posted by: fierydemiseThe only thing that I could see sinking UT3 is if Conquest sucks, if it is well executed enough to excuse the lack of onslaught or assault then UT3 will be a huge success, if not then it will likely be a lot less of a successful (although still very successful) until some modders add those modes back in.
FYI, the game will not be called Conquest, instead it's going to be called Warfare. They didn't include one with the Demo so we don't know how it will do, but supposedly mappers will be able to make almost-pure Onslaught maps and we know that that was a hit in UT 2004.

I think UT3 will be a hit because the game play feels like an almost bona-fide UT99-2. In other words--expect the return of no-vehicles regular weapons CTF to public servers. Most of the people in the UT99 community who tried the Demo are psyched for the release of the full game (albeit with a much improved server browser and user interface).

I doubt that UT3 will beat the Half-Life mods. I don't understand it, but for some reason the Counterstrike type games have ruled the online world. I never played Counterstrike, so maybe I have no idea WTF I'm talking about or missing.

 

omber

Member
Oct 17, 2007
126
0
71
_ opinioin based on Demos, except where TF2 is concerned _

UT3: Big name to it, based on demo its the same chaotic fun fast paced combat that the series is known for so a good formula enhanced in every way.
QW: Feels like playing a Battlefield game with objectives rather then control points..
Crysis: Because the best eye Candy is only for DX10 users I do not think we'll see as much of this game online, but who knows.
TF2: Very fun, it will be a solid title online probably the next thing after UT3
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Well, i go against the grane in saying what QW is more fun then TF2. I have both and got board with TF2 rather quickly.

QW- Yes, it's BF style but with objectives, but it has a hell of a lot more depth to it then BF2 does and i happen to love(d) BF2. Just going around randomly shooting people isn't very helpful for your team unless you're in a building, much better to pick the role and deployable(if aviable) to best suit the current combat conditions (ex- do they have air superority/launching artillery/making a frontal assualt, you defending or attacking, terrain). If you stick with one class you're bound to do well for a short time, but then you'll end up either getting rapped or have nothing to do. It has a bit of a steep learning curve to learn all the neat and useful things so you're no longer "newbie of the battle", so while your a newbie (or you just suck) expect to get WTFPWND. It does have flaws such as bad vechile movement (rather jerky and i'm not a fan of how the aircraft flies) and everyone moves a bit to fast also giving a feel of jerkiness.

TF2- Wicket game, as long as you love just scoring kills. It has simple objective such as CTF (capture the enemy intelligence), very good choice in unit selection, eye candy and well made maps. But there isn't much under the surface.

(btw, i have counter strike, but i only play the zombie mods these days)
 

Superrock

Senior member
Oct 28, 2000
467
1
0
Originally posted by: BD2003

UT2003/4 was much faster, the weapons much weaker, the players thinner, and with the double jump/dodge it usually just became a frantic mess that you could barely keep track of wtf was going on. It took two rockets to down someone that was flying around you like a jackrabbit...just too insane.

I'm all for them going back to the original formula.
I agree. UT 2003 was a tad too chatoic for me. I miss the older UT instagib CTF maps. It seems like no ones plays UT anymore.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
I was a big fan of UT99 despite never playing it online (because I only had dial-up back then). I only ever played by myself with bots or through lan with a friend.

I hated UT2003's gameplay. I tried the demo of 2004 and thought it was too much like 2003. I've played the demo of UT3 several times now and I like it. Feels a good bit more like the original UT.
 

thegimp03

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2004
7,426
2
81
I can't wait for UT3, probably will be my next big multiplayer game as I loved UT99 and Quake 3. I played UT2k4 for awhile too, but mostly because I loved the Onslaught mode (although I heard they're getting rid of that mode in UT3, there's supposedly another mode coming out that's similar to Onslaught with the powernodes and everything).

I'll play Crysis for some single player fun and eye candy, but if the multiplayer is anything like what FarCry was, I won't go online with it at all.

As for anything else that's coming out I might try out COD4 because it looked kind of interesting.
 

MrUniq

Senior member
Mar 26, 2006
307
0
0
Team fortress is a mod turned company mandated mod that has a following partly on hype b/c of is abscense and part on loyalty. Unreal Tournament is an establishment and brand much like Quake. There is a difference.
 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,540
16
0
Gears of Wars isn't a FPS. Besides that it's a year old console port, even if it was originally meant to be a PC game until Microsoft intervened.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Fanatical Meat PC Games 3
Similar threads
Civ 6 Multiplayer

ASK THE COMMUNITY