E3 Quakewars thoughts

Q

qbert3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
1,143
Who played it and what did you think?

I played it for the half hour on the alien side.. not sure what they called them but anyways I loved it and im really looking forward to its release. I thought they did an excellent job on the vehicles. I have a strong feeling it will top BF2 with no problems.

Im not sure if headshots really matter in the game or not.. i tried aiming at the head but it seemed to take the same damage as shooting at the chest. I know its that way in the wolfenstein version of enemy territory (was hoping theyd change that).

im not gonna say that its better then counterstrike because it feels very different.
 
Brucelee said:
I think it's cool even thought they did copy BF2 2142 on the mechs.
Click to expand...

Think its the other way around ;) This game has been in production way longer than BF2142.

I wish I could of played it at E3!!! Was there any news of a demo this summer before it gets released in the fall?
 
Brucelee said:
I think it's cool even thought they did copy BF2 2142 on the mechs.
Click to expand...
I think quake wars was announced before BF2142... :rolleyes: About a year earlier, right?

Edit: LOL, someone beat me.. :p
 
I didnt hear any news about a demo but it would be pretty sweet to see how everyones systems handle it.
 
Quick question for you people who were lucky enough to play it. Since its on the Doom 3 engine and is multiplayer, does it suffer the infamous Doom 3 multiplayer lag? Quake 4 multi, improved on this lag I heard, but its still there. Is the netcode finally worked out in Quake Wars, where we dont have this lag anymore?
 
I don't think they are even using any thing even similar in netcode. Last I understood they talked about doing a sort of LOD in netcode, where the closer to some one you get, the more info about them is transmited, when your upclose it will give details about ammo and plenty of events, but if you barely see a spec of them, it won't even tell you their orientation, simply location.
 
HurtMeP1nty007 said:
Quake wars aka my new reason to not see the sun.
Click to expand...
I think I played the orignal Enemy Territory for about 2 years, but we don't get much sun where I live anyways.
 
im ok with my 7800gt for a bit. I gotta some how save money for a ps3....some how..
 
jester1176 said:
i just dont like the small(er) scale of the maps. max 12 on 12 gameplay? meh.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about, they announced earlier that 64+ servers would be available.
 
"The sun is overrated anyways. So are women."
LOL
you must be hanging around the wrong women my fine friend
 
i was told that they'd have max support for 24 players @ E3 by one of the marketing peeps working the booth.
 
jester1176 said:
i was told that they'd have max support for 24 players @ E3 by one of the marketing peeps working the booth.
Click to expand...
As a looomg time E3 attendee, the PR hacks in the booths frequently know precisely fuck all about the titles on display.
 
The T-man said:
"The sun is overrated anyways. So are women."
LOL
you must be hanging around the wrong women my fine friend
Click to expand...
I was just at "South Beach" and I can tell you that the Sun + Women is God's gift to man.

Still time for Quake Wars though :p
 
if they plan to take out bf2 they better have a damn good number of players live on one server.

I usually dont like it when it gets too crowded..just seems too random and unteam like.
 
I've never been a big fan of multiplayer games... Waaaaayy too many 15 year olds 'foolishness' and immatureness in my opinion, not to mention some lamoid hacking and shooting through walls... I stopped playing when Quake 2 made it insanely popular years ago. Since then it has all been about stellar single player..

But I tell you this, Quake Wars could be the game that actually gets me on a server and some headphones..and for me that's saying something.
 
jester1176 said:
i was told that they'd have max support for 24 players @ E3 by one of the marketing peeps working the booth.
Click to expand...

This is a quote from the front page of planetquake4.net
Enemy Territory at E3
Posted by Prognar on Friday, May 12 2006 @ 03:27:07 CDT (433 reads)
Here I am at E3 2006. Activision has a 24 person LAN set up where people can choose to be Strogg of Global Defense Force in a match of Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. I had the chance to talk with Edward "Bongoboy" Stern of Splash Damage about the game. Gameplay seems to work well in a 6v6 setting on the current maps, 4v4 being a bit too small. There will be no cap on the number of clients for a server from the engine, so in theory, we could see 200v200 matches. Tools for mapping and modding Enemy Territory will either ship with the game or be released on the internet when it comes out. Expected release date is within 2006, but the id mentality of "when it's done" seems to be congruent with Splash Damage.

As for QuakeCon, expect some news in a week on QuakeCon.org.
Click to expand...

I know the guys that run the site, they are fairly trust worthy.
 
ok, sure. you can run 200x200 people on a map. but what are the maps built for? what are people mostly going to be playing? no one wants to play 50x50 on a map that's built for 12x12.
 
Don't forget, they are including (or going to release soon after) the mapping tools, which means community maps could be much larger then the ones it ships with.
 
Dark Prodigy said:
I've never been a big fan of multiplayer games... Waaaaayy too many 15 year olds 'foolishness' and immatureness in my opinion, not to mention some lamoid hacking and shooting through walls... I stopped playing when Quake 2 made it insanely popular years ago. Since then it has all been about stellar single player..

But I tell you this, Quake Wars could be the game that actually gets me on a server and some headphones..and for me that's saying something.
Click to expand...

QFT. I usually avoid multiplayer like the plague, but this game is oh so tempting just based on what i've heard about the gameplay.
 
Question: Will you be able to auto download maps when connecting to a server? The BF series does not have this feature and it really limits the mapping community.
 
The main concern I have about teh game, and the main reason I didn't like ET, is the damage to players still low, in the sense that it takes a lot of shots to just take someone down?
 
very informative and he used the word NERF and NOOBify, lol, he explained not only is the netcode fixed or different i forget, but no probs there, and there will be a frontline so ur not searching for fights, and on the other hand ppl who have specific roles like building a bridge etc... will do just that and know where the front line is to engage in battle etc... i really think this game is gonna SHINE, they have outdone themselves, and as far as BF2142, LMAO, i dont think its going to do too well.just looks like a mech, and they havent provided enough info to interest me, that i think they need to still fix up BF2, as far as BF2 and quakewars head to head, i dont think they should be compared both different and both PWNzor!

heres a direct link, check out the interview one at bottom, thats the one i referred to.
http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=1981

i love that site! www.gametrailers.com FTW!
 
Stiler said:
The main concern I have about teh game, and the main reason I didn't like ET, is the damage to players still low, in the sense that it takes a lot of shots to just take someone down?
Click to expand...

Either you weren't very good at the game, you aren't very accurate, or you were playing on some lame mod because I can take down medics in 3-5 shots easily.
 
deathBOB said:
Question: Will you be able to auto download maps when connecting to a server? The BF series does not have this feature and it really limits the mapping community.
Click to expand...

That and the fact that EA wont allow custom maps to run on stat enabled servers.

Im so sick of vanilla bf2 maps.
 
qbert3 said:
Im not sure if headshots really matter in the game or not.. i tried aiming at the head but it seemed to take the same damage as shooting at the chest. I know its that way in the wolfenstein version of enemy territory (was hoping theyd change that)
Click to expand...

I don't think so.
I know in ET a headshot from scoped rifles is instant death.
 
recursive said:
Either you weren't very good at the game, you aren't very accurate, or you were playing on some lame mod because I can take down medics in 3-5 shots easily.
Click to expand...

Yea......five shots to take someone down is a lot to me.

That's why I prefer games like Operation flashpoint/Red orchestra, realistic damage.

Espically when you're using a rifle and such like I used in W:ET.

I prefer damage in my fps games to be more realistic then rewarding the "spray and pray" type of players where those with the fastest trigger fingers/smg's overpower those that prefer to use better aim + rifles and such. Even BF2's damage model is better imo.
 
Stereophile said:
I don't think so.
I know in ET a headshot from scoped rifles is instant death.
Click to expand...

I thought the scopped rifile (not the FG-42 the true sniper rifle, FG-42 was slightly less damage) did 100 damage to the head, which was not enough to kill most people in a single shot. (body shots were 50-60 damage I think).
ET diffinately had head shots, but the variance in health often meant you could hit the other guy in the head and still lose the fight. Those 156hp + adreneline medics were something else in an SMG fight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top