QuakeWars release date ?

Z

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
11,308
Originally when QuakeWars was first officially announced almost two years ago at the 2005 E3, it said coming 2006, well that has come and gone, and it is already 2007, so I am hoping the game is due out any month soon ? Or are they waiting for the ATI card to introduce it on ??
 
I keep hearing/reading March or April. I don't think they are waiting on ATi. Probably just lots of play testing and balancing. Hopefully any 7800/X1800 and up will run the game flawlessly.
 
heh any old system will run it flawlessly, its based on doom3 engine. march 30th has been the reported date for a while, it just has not been confirmed by splash damage or id.
 
I've heard 2 different dates:

June 5th, 2007 according to ebgames.com
February 23rd, 2007 according to Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.com (USA) does not give a release date.
 
I heard Februrary 30th was going to be the release date
:confused:


[F]old|[H]ard
 
I would think that end of Feb early March sounds about right ? They wanted out before Christmas but couldnt rush the game, so needed just alittle more time to finish ?
 
fazzman said:
heh any old system will run it flawlessly, its based on doom3 engine.
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean much. Not all incarnations of the Doom3 engine are created equal. Quake Wars probably has a larger scale, more effects, and a higher level of detail in the textures, models, shader effects etc. than anything the engine has done before (or so I've gathered from all the hype... to be honest I don't know if I've even seen a screenshot yet).

If you're still not satisfied with that explaination, go and see how well Call of Duty 2 runs on a TNT2... It's only using the Quake3 engine, after all :D .
 
Zorachus said:
Originally when QuakeWars was first officially announced almost two years ago at the 2005 E3, it said coming 2006, well that has come and gone, and it is already 2007, so I am hoping the game is due out any month soon ? Or are they waiting for the ATI card to introduce it on ??
Click to expand...
am i missing something?what does ATI have to do with ID?ive never seem any conection betwen the 2 companies until now.
 
The thing you have to realize about shipping dates posted on these various companies' web sites, is that they are almost always pure fantasy. I expect that some of these guys have software that requires a ship date in order to put the title into their database, so they just make something up and there you go.

It isn't until the publishers announce a ship date that they have any kind of accuracy.
 
Mark_Warner said:
It isn't until the publishers announce a ship date that they have any kind of accuracy.
Click to expand...

Yeah and by "any kind of accuracy" he means that you'll be lucky if it's in the same year :D

The next time I hear an estimated release date from Valve im going to add 48 years to it to make it more accurate.

Seriously though, developers have a hard enough time getting accurate release dates, much less people who are simply selling the game, just pure guess work.
 
LuminaryJanitor said:
That doesn't mean much. Not all incarnations of the Doom3 engine are created equal. Quake Wars probably has a larger scale, more effects, and a higher level of detail in the textures, models, shader effects etc. than anything the engine has done before (or so I've gathered from all the hype... to be honest I don't know if I've even seen a screenshot yet).

If you're still not satisfied with that explaination, go and see how well Call of Duty 2 runs on a TNT2... It's only using the Quake3 engine, after all :D .
Click to expand...

I was basically going to say the exact same thing. :D
 
Who ever thinks QuakeWars will run as smooth as Doom]l[ does on their system needs a wake up call, I am sorry to say.

Just like Quake3 orginal game ran great two years later, but that same engine used on newer titles was much harder on hardware, like Call Of Duty required a much better system than Quake3. So I expect QuakeWars to be a pretty intesne game to run, I mean yeah D3 can be run at 2560x1600 today easily, but go outdoors in those Doom]l[ maps and it is a slide show, with all the bumped mapped rocks/terrain.
 
here is whats going on guys. Quake wars will come out around the same time ut2007 comes out. which i think will be like june....and ut2007 will crush it. rip quake :-P

and i love the video for quake wars. looks just like battlefied 2 with a quake twist
 
Ron1jed said:
here is whats going on guys. Quake wars will come out around the same time ut2007 comes out. which i think will be like june....and ut2007 will crush it. rip quake :-P

and i love the video for quake wars. looks just like battlefied 2 with a quake twist
Click to expand...


First off is there any truth to this, or just your opinion ? And second UT2007 will blow just like the other series except the first UT99 when CTF was still alive and well. Onsluaght was a good try at a BetaField type game mode, but blew for being too arcadey and for the kid's, and the community died off pretty quick for UT2004.

Now QuakeWars looks to be done right aka more like BetaField and JointOp's, and less like the arcade UnrealTournament, at least I hope to God it is. I would love to be proven wrong about UT2007 and hope it is a Sci/Fi version of Joint Op's with the Unreal3 engine, but everyone has wet dream every now and then that dont come true :)

And as to release dates know one knows for sure, but I would bet they both come out before Summer for sure, with QuakeWars being furst like March, with all the media about the game since QuakeCon, it seems like they should be close to done, where as UT2007 has NOT shown anything really yet, no in game videos, no LAN events to show off UT2007Onslaught like QuakeCon does, which lead;s me to believe it is further away ?
 
Ron1jed said:
and i love the video for quake wars. looks just like battlefied 2 with a quake twist
Click to expand...
Trust me, it's not. It's Wolf ET with a Quake twist, and some pretty big terrain that doesn't fade away into a fog :)
 
I don't understand why so many people compare Battlefield 2/2142 with QuakeWars. They are completely differnt games. QuakeWars, just like Wolf:ET, is objective based... Nothing like Battlefield.
 
Zorachus said:
First off is there any truth to this, or just your opinion?
Click to expand...
I really doubt he's played either of them, so I'd say it's nothing but dogma.

Zorachus said:
And second UT2007 will blow just like the other series except the first UT99...
Click to expand...
And funnily enough, so is this... :rolleyes:
 
Oompa said:
I don't understand why so many people compare Battlefield 2/2142 with QuakeWars. They are completely differnt games. QuakeWars, just like Wolf:ET, is objective based... Nothing like Battlefield.
Click to expand...


I just want a game that is more like BetaField or better like JointOp's and NOT like UT2004Onslught which was way too kiddy/arcade for my Brother's and I
 
Xipher said:
Trust me, it's not. It's Wolf ET with a Quake twist, and some pretty big terrain that doesn't fade away into a fog :)
Click to expand...
which makes us old wolf/wolf ET players happy :D
 
Mark_Warner said:
I believe that is a play on words asserting that Battlefield 2 and/or 2142 is of beta quality.
Click to expand...

Of course it is :p , just being silly, and also a little disapointed in the quality of those games, they could be much more fun if done with a little higher quality, and here is hoping QuakeWars with idSoftware behind it, will be an A grade title :)
 
Mark_Warner said:
I believe that is a play on words asserting that Battlefield 2 and/or 2142 is of beta quality.
Click to expand...

I figured it was some lame attempt at wit, but he was so persistant with it I was starting to think it was some new game I missed.

Betafield, Gametrapazoid, M$..... I can't keep up with all you crazy kids.
 
Oompa said:
I don't understand why so many people compare Battlefield 2/2142 with QuakeWars. They are completely differnt games. QuakeWars, just like Wolf:ET, is objective based... Nothing like Battlefield.
Click to expand...

So taking and holding control points is not an objective?

So assaulting and/or defending consoles and reactors in 2142 isn't an objective?

BF2 is entirely objective based, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from.
 
Mark_Warner said:
I believe that is a play on words asserting that Battlefield 2 and/or 2142 is of beta quality.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that... I thought BF2 was pretty damn stable since the demo and unpatched release...

They did screw it up with the initial patch, creating the memory leak, but before that I was playing for hours with absolutely no issues.

Haven't played the game in months, so I can't say if the overall quality has gone up or down.
 
eastvillager said:
So taking and holding control points is not an objective?

So assaulting and/or defending consoles and reactors in 2142 isn't an objective?

BF2 is entirely objective based, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from.
Click to expand...

I agree, the concept of BetaField series is a good idea for a shooter, two team's, with objective gameplay, and vehicles. I just dont think EA does it right with their series, Joint Op's was much better but not popular, and UT2004Onslaught was a joke, I mean they tried a little bit for this type of gameplay, but to me Onslaught felt like a grade school arcade version of the BattleField series, could have been so much cooler if done more realistic, and would have been more popular too.

So here is hoping that QuakeWars is more realistic than Onslaught, on par with the feel of BattleField2 just Sci/Fi setting, and better game engine. Also I hope UT2007Onslaught or Warfare I think it will be named is more like BattleField2 gameplay than UT2004 ?
 
eastvillager said:
So taking and holding control points is not an objective?

So assaulting and/or defending consoles and reactors in 2142 isn't an objective?

BF2 is entirely objective based, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from.
Click to expand...

No, the way BF2 does it it's not an objective it's just a capture and hold scenario. With Quake Wars you do a specific task to complete the objective, and then move forward. It's a bit more linear but it means one objective determines your ability to move onto the next, unlike BF2 where all you do is try and capture and hold any site you can.
 
Zorachus said:
and UT2004Onslaught was a joke, I mean they tried a little bit for this type of gameplay, but to me Onslaught felt like a grade school arcade version of the BattleField series, could have been so much cooler if done more realistic, and would have been more popular too.

So here is hoping that QuakeWars is more realistic than Onslaught, on par with the feel of BattleField2 just Sci/Fi setting, and better game engine. Also I hope UT2007Onslaught or Warfare I think it will be named is more like BattleField2 gameplay than UT2004 ?
Click to expand...

Umm, *why* would you want UT to be more "realistic" (which is purely subjective, most CS/BF games aren't realistic at all.... they just have random aim generators, slower movement, and less hit points... that doesn't make them realistic). "Realistic" games are a dime a dozen these days, they are EVERYWHERE. UT is one of the last few games these days where the movement and aiming skill of the player is all that matters. UT isn't any more arcadey than BF, it just requires much more skill, it caters to a group of players who simply have more skill than most ppl.

In the end, it all just boils down to the fact that not *every* game has to have characters who are annoyingly slow, with horrible aim, and not many hit points. Some games are about pure adrenaline, and that is what Unreal/Quake are all about.
 
Xipher said:
No, the way BF2 does it it's not an objective it's just a capture and hold scenario. With Quake Wars you do a specific task to complete the objective, and then move forward. It's a bit more linear but it means one objective determines your ability to move onto the next, unlike BF2 where all you do is try and capture and hold any site you can.
Click to expand...

Well technically that's still an objective. Pretty much every game we play is "objective based". The objective in Quake 3 DM is to kill as many people as often as possible.

He's just arguing semantics with you.
 
Zorachus said:
I agree, the concept of BetaField series is a good idea for a shooter, two team's, with objective gameplay, and vehicles. I just dont think EA does it right with their series, Joint Op's was much better but not popular, and UT2004Onslaught was a joke, I mean they tried a little bit for this type of gameplay, but to me Onslaught felt like a grade school arcade version of the BattleField series, could have been so much cooler if done more realistic, and would have been more popular too.

So here is hoping that QuakeWars is more realistic than Onslaught, on par with the feel of BattleField2 just Sci/Fi setting, and better game engine. Also I hope UT2007Onslaught or Warfare I think it will be named is more like BattleField2 gameplay than UT2004 ?
Click to expand...

Onsalught was the most fun i had in UT2k4. Can't wait till UT2k7
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
Umm, *why* would you want UT to be more "realistic" (which is purely subjective, most CS/BF games aren't realistic at all.... they just have random aim generators, slower movement, and less hit points... that doesn't make them realistic). "Realistic" games are a dime a dozen these days, they are EVERYWHERE. UT is one of the last few games these days where the movement and aiming skill of the player is all that matters. UT isn't any more arcadey than BF, it just requires much more skill, it caters to a group of players who simply have more skill than most ppl.

In the end, it all just boils down to the fact that not *every* game has to have characters who are annoyingly slow, with horrible aim, and not many hit points. Some games are about pure adrenaline, and that is what Unreal/Quake are all about.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it requires MORE skill as such, just a differen't kind of skill.

There's very little tactics involved in games like the UT series but lots of twitch aiming and good combat skills.

Games like BF2 are more about tactics, working as a squad you become more powerfull than the sum of your squadmembers, keeping each other alive etc. Tactics and teamplay are paramount. The overall battlefield layout and commander type position are also important factors.

Realistic games are certainly not dime a dozen, if you look at the high realism end of the scale theres actually very few, most people consider CS:S and such like "realism" games but they're not. Go play somethnig like Red Orchestra and you'll realise exactly how far some games take the realism idea.
 
eastvillager said:
So taking and holding control points is not an objective?

So assaulting and/or defending consoles and reactors in 2142 isn't an objective?

BF2 is entirely objective based, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from.
Click to expand...
Not the same thing. Quakewars is more of an A then B then C deal. First you have to do A, then B, then you can do C. You can't sneak around and go accomplish one task without doing the ones ahead of it first. It focuses the combat on ONE front. I don't know how into Battlefield you are, but if you ever heard of the Supply Line feature that was supposed to be in BF2/2142, it's like that. You can only accomplish one at a time.

*Whoops just realized someone already responded to you. Oh well :p
 
I cannot wait for this game. Every bit of news I read about it, every new screenshot, I get more excited. They better not let me down.

Checking out the screenshots over at Gamespy, it's looking like they're creating a good mix of vehicle based combat and up close and personal infantry combat. Looking at the shots you see plenty of wide open areas, but also alleyways, sewer systems, and warehouses that should keep the infantry combat in the spotlight. I'm just hoping it's not a "run to the nearest vehicle, drive or fly to identical control point #1,234, fight, die, repeat" like UT2004's Onslaught and Battlefield. From what they've said and what I've watched it looks like they're really trying to mix things up and keep the fights changing dynamically.
 
Frosteh said:
I wouldn't say it requires MORE skill as such, just a differen't kind of skill.

There's very little tactics involved in games like the UT series but lots of twitch aiming and good combat skills.

Games like BF2 are more about tactics, working as a squad you become more powerfull than the sum of your squadmembers, keeping each other alive etc. Tactics and teamplay are paramount. The overall battlefield layout and commander type position are also important factors.

Realistic games are certainly not dime a dozen, if you look at the high realism end of the scale theres actually very few, most people consider CS:S and such like "realism" games but they're not. Go play somethnig like Red Orchestra and you'll realise exactly how far some games take the realism idea.
Click to expand...


Thank ya , CS:S is NOT a realistic game by any means, it is just team deathmatch like Quake3, I mean come one what's up with all the head shos from a mile away in CS:S :rolleyes: And where is the scope on all th weapons ?

And BF2 is much more realistic than CS:S, yeah it is not GhostRecon1, but it feels more real with the squad mates, and aiming, I just hope that QuakeWars is more like this than UT2004Onslaught, and I hope UT2007 is more like BF2 as well
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
Umm, *why* would you want UT to be more "realistic" (which is purely subjective, most CS/BF games aren't realistic at all.... they just have random aim generators, slower movement, and less hit points... that doesn't make them realistic). "Realistic" games are a dime a dozen these days, they are EVERYWHERE. UT is one of the last few games these days where the movement and aiming skill of the player is all that matters. UT isn't any more arcadey than BF, it just requires much more skill, it caters to a group of players who simply have more skill than most ppl.

In the end, it all just boils down to the fact that not *every* game has to have characters who are annoyingly slow, with horrible aim, and not many hit points. Some games are about pure adrenaline, and that is what Unreal/Quake are all about.
Click to expand...

I wish more people realized this.
 
quake wars can not get here soon enough.... i want a demo and i want it now
 
Also one thing at QW is while it is objective-based (raise bridge,move vehical across) these are the global objectives, you actually get real-time generated personal missions (to increase yr EX points)

http://www.myspace.com/splash_damage
watch the 2nd vid on that page.
I was excited abt this game, but after seeing that!!!, I even have some BF2142 players really interested... the game just has to get here
 
This is the third time today i see you saying this, ive seen you bumping up 2 old threads about this as well.. lordshado
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top