Amazing UT3 Videos - PC Gaming's finest! Enjoy!

Over 50 minutes of UT3 multiplayer goodness. This is my personal favorite as far as Multiplayer shooters are concerned, and should easily take the crown this year. Check out the videos all embedded in Flash for your convenience!.

This game is the reason why I love using mouse/keyboar for FPS's, enjoy!!

http://planetunreal.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Articles.Detail&id=111

Too crazy for me.Koalakommander

lol I agree. ut 3 players are professionals. kept on getting raped in team deathmatch and deathmatch.

Too crazy for me.Koalakommander

nice blog btw, i agree with many of your points ;)

[QUOTE="Koalakommander"]Too crazy for me.ff7isnumbaone

lol I agree. ut 3 players are professionals. kept on getting raped in team deathmatch and deathmatch.

Over 50 minutes of UT3 multiplayer goodness. This is my personal favorite as far as Multiplayer shooters are concerned, and should easily take the crown this year. Check out the videos all embedded in Flash for your convenience!.

This game is the reason why I love using mouse/keyboar for FPS's, enjoy!!

http://planetunreal.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Articles.Detail&id=111

mismajor99

yeah.. my pc cant run it at 100%

but 85-90% is good enough for me. :)

Look at how advanced that is compared to console games:oBig_Gamer_Al

don't be such a silly goose :P

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

Zeliard9

Counter-Strike slow paced :lol:

Halo is slow - CS is not.

But UT is faster than both -- you're right

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

Koalakommander

Counter-Strike slow paced :lol:

Halo is slow - CS is not.

But UT is faster than both -- you're right

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

Koalakommander

Counter-Strike slow paced :lol:

Halo is slow - CS is not.

But UT is faster than both -- you're right

CS is definitely slow-paced, especially compared to the likes of UT and Quake. And that's with or without bunnyhopping.

[QUOTE="Koalakommander"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

FrozenLiquid

Counter-Strike slow paced :lol:

Halo is slow - CS is not.

But UT is faster than both -- you're right

Well when I think of CS i think of twitch shooting -- which I associate with fast paced games.

Every PC shooter has some twitch shooting. Unlike with analogue sticks, you don't have to wait 2 seconds just for your reticle to be placed on someone.Olidsc

Well in Halo you can also move your guy around with no accuracy penalty. So it kind of balances out. When I'm sniping I move around to adjust my aiming.

Also, it's not all twitch aiming. I mean, there are also some hitscan weapons and stuff that requires some pretty precise targetting, not just fast reflexes. And probably what I like most about games like Quake and UT is that good movement is just as important and critical as good aim. You basically need both or you'll get roasted by the more experienced players.

I don't like it in games where I feel constricted in my movement. That's probably why I like TF2 so much, and more than Counterstrike. It doesn't feel slow-paced at all, even though it's far from deathmatch and contains a strategic, team-based element. It's hard to find that balance, but TF2 did it.

Why show matchs with so little players ... its not a damn console game!

Makes it look like a snorefest.

Also, it's not all twitch aiming. I mean, there are also some hitscan weapons and stuff that requires some pretty precise targetting, not just fast reflexes. And probably what I like most about games like Quake and UT is that good movement is just as important and critical as good aim. You basically need both or you'll get roasted by the more experienced players.

I don't like it in games where I feel constricted in my movement. That's probably why I like TF2 so much, and more than Counterstrike. It doesn't feel slow-paced at all, even though it's far from deathmatch and contains a strategic, team-based element. It's hard to find that balance, but TF2 did it.

Zeliard9

Indeed, QuakeWorld & Quake 3 are the best "arcade" FPS games there is. There's nothing better as playing TDM, 1v1 in QW and CTF in Quake 3. Quake 4 is kind of messed up by the Doom 3 engine and it's restrictions, the latest patch fixed a lot (it took them 2 years lol), but Quake 3 is still the bomb for me. I like UT games, but I just play them for fun, while I played Q3 quite a bit on the competitive level.

The demo of UT4 is once again fun, but I'm really waiting for Quake Zero (original id Software free/downloadable Quake 3 clone) and Quake 5, which were both announced at the QuakeCon this year.

As for CS, thats really not a game for me, I like Rainbow Six 1, 2, 3, where you actually play tactical and SWAT4, but in CS I just feel that the gameplay is a mix of both those worlds, some "Quake" and some "Rainbow Six" and this just doesn't work for me. And the new Team Fortress I haven't tried yet, looks fun, but I doubt I'll stick.

Why show matchs with so little players ... its not a damn console game!

Makes it look like a snorefest.

Meu2k7

Contray to popular belief, UT/Quake games suck when there's tooooo many players, especially if it's TDM/CTF. On Onslaught you might wanna have 30 players or more, if the map is big enough, then again, Onslaugt is not really popular amongs old UT99 players and those who play it, rarely play anything else, and those who don't, just rather play 1v1, CTF, TDM and there, everything above 5 versus 5 is just bad and has no point of playing (except 1v1 ofc).

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

Why show matchs with so little players ... its not a damn console game!

Makes it look like a snorefest.

F-Minus

Contray to popular belief, UT/Quake games suck when there's tooooo many players, especially if it's TDM/CTF. On Onslaught you might wanna have 30 players or more, if the map is big enough, then again, Onslaugt is not really popular amongs old UT99 players and those who play it, rarely play anything else, and those who don't, just rather play 1v1, CTF, TDM and there, everything above 5 versus 5 is just bad and has no point of playing (except 1v1 ofc).

Yea, but even on the WAR videos he had trouble finding players, those videos were a waste of time, there was more node repairing action than actual combat.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

Also, it's not all twitch aiming. I mean, there are also some hitscan weapons and stuff that requires some pretty precise targetting, not just fast reflexes. And probably what I like most about games like Quake and UT is that good movement is just as important and critical as good aim. You basically need both or you'll get roasted by the more experienced players.

I don't like it in games where I feel constricted in my movement. That's probably why I like TF2 so much, and more than Counterstrike. It doesn't feel slow-paced at all, even though it's far from deathmatch and contains a strategic, team-based element. It's hard to find that balance, but TF2 did it.

F-Minus

Indeed, QuakeWorld & Quake 3 are the best "arcade" FPS games there is. There's nothing better as playing TDM, 1v1 in QW and CTF in Quake 3. Quake 4 is kind of messed up by the Doom 3 engine and it's restrictions, the latest patch fixed a lot (it took them 2 years lol), but Quake 3 is still the bomb for me. I like UT games, but I just play them for fun, while I played Q3 quite a bit on the competitive level.

The demo of UT4 is once again fun, but I'm really waiting for Quake Zero (original id Software free/downloadable Quake 3 clone) and Quake 5, which were both announced at the QuakeCon this year.

As for CS, thats really not a game for me, I like Rainbow Six 1, 2, 3, where you actually play tactical and SWAT4, but in CS I just feel that the gameplay is a mix of both those worlds, some "Quake" and some "Rainbow Six" and this just doesn't work for me. And the new Team Fortress I haven't tried yet, looks fun, but I doubt I'll stick.

Ah, Quakeworld. Personally, QW (aka the tweaked multiplayer version of Quake 1) is easily the best multiplayer game I've ever played. Maybe even the best game, period. No FPS since it has been quite able to match its miraculous mix of speed and responsiveness, and excellent level design (who we have John Romero to thank for, before he ruined his rep). I miss QW and long for the day when we'll see another game like it. Even Q2 and Q3 were far inferior, IMO (even promode for Q3 wasn't really close).

meh demo was so boring to me..zero9167

True.

I prefered UT2004 ... its style and its play ... I hate the new art-style gears-like.... and I hate the way the game feels.. I never played UT99 .. im pretty much glad I didnt.

Unreal engine 3 is disgusting IMO... that and taking out onslought and making the game essentialy UT2K4 but less is... AA to me.

Demo kinda sucked aswell as everthing else... the CTF map made it so easy to camp and snipe half the other team away... really annoying IMO.

meh demo was so boring to me..zero9167

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

wisdomWarrior

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

[QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"]

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

sadikovic

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

I see where you are coming from but I here is the thing. When a reviewer gives a score to a game, it must be a score that is relative to the system that it is going to run it. So Halo 3 scoring 9.5 is a game rated on the 360. Which means that it is close to perfection for a 360 game. The same game on PC would be--should be, a heck of a lot less.

PS-plz don't tell me they scored the PC version of Halo3=9.5 If they did then they are obviously with some sort of thing going with MS. Someone has to pay the bills for a large website like Gamespot, and somehow, I don't think banner adds are going to do it, lol.

[QUOTE="sadikovic"][QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"]

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

wisdomWarrior

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

I see where you are coming from but I here is the thing. When a reviewer gives a score to a game, it must be a score that is relative to the system that it is going to run it. So Halo 3 scoring 9.5 is a game rated on the 360. Which means that it is close to perfection for a 360 game. The same game on PC would be--should be, a heck of a lot less.

PS-plz don't tell me they scored the PC version of Halo3=9.5 If they did then they are obviously with some sort of thing going with MS. Someone has to pay the bills for a large website like Gamespot, and somehow, I don't think banner adds are going to do it, lol.

If it came out the same time... yes it would get the same score.

I dont know where you got that "reviewer scrore games relative to the console" s***... as far as I remember every multiplat game has gotten the same exact score... COD4 9.0 every platform and many many more.

Halo the original was also AAA on PC and was released a YEAR later... the only problem with 2 was that it was Vista only and came out almsot 1.5 years after the XBOX version.

If halo 3 came out the same time for PC believe me it would get the same score and more praise with the graphics since you can turn AA and the resolution up.

[QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"][QUOTE="sadikovic"][QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"]

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

sadikovic

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

I see where you are coming from but I here is the thing. When a reviewer gives a score to a game, it must be a score that is relative to the system that it is going to run it. So Halo 3 scoring 9.5 is a game rated on the 360. Which means that it is close to perfection for a 360 game. The same game on PC would be--should be, a heck of a lot less.

PS-plz don't tell me they scored the PC version of Halo3=9.5 If they did then they are obviously with some sort of thing going with MS. Someone has to pay the bills for a large website like Gamespot, and somehow, I don't think banner adds are going to do it, lol.

If it came out the same time... yes it would get the same score.

I dont know where you got that "reviewer scrore games relative to the console" s***... as far as I remember every multiplat game has gotten the same exact score... COD4 9.0 every platform and many many more.

Halo the original was also AAA on PC and was released a YEAR later... the only problem with 2 was that it was Vista only and came out almsot 1.5 years after the XBOX version.

If halo 3 came out the same time for PC believe me it would get the same score and more praise with the graphics since you can turn AA and the resolution up.

Sorry yeah, I stand corrected. I was somehow confused.

Damnit, I need to think more before I post lol.

[QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"][QUOTE="sadikovic"][QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"]

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

sadikovic

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

I see where you are coming from but I here is the thing. When a reviewer gives a score to a game, it must be a score that is relative to the system that it is going to run it. So Halo 3 scoring 9.5 is a game rated on the 360. Which means that it is close to perfection for a 360 game. The same game on PC would be--should be, a heck of a lot less.

PS-plz don't tell me they scored the PC version of Halo3=9.5 If they did then they are obviously with some sort of thing going with MS. Someone has to pay the bills for a large website like Gamespot, and somehow, I don't think banner adds are going to do it, lol.

If it came out the same time... yes it would get the same score.

I dont know where you got that "reviewer scrore games relative to the console" s***... as far as I remember every multiplat game has gotten the same exact score... COD4 9.0 every platform and many many more.

Halo the original was also AAA on PC and was released a YEAR later... the only problem with 2 was that it was Vista only and came out almsot 1.5 years after the XBOX version.

If halo 3 came out the same time for PC believe me it would get the same score and more praise with the graphics since you can turn AA and the resolution up.

i dont think thats true... somebody find a multiplat which scored different for me realesed atthe same timelol.

Ah got the demo, so I get my fix for that.

ONe thing is for sure Masterful bots are defitnaly harder than UT04

[QUOTE="wisdomWarrior"]

UT3 is the TRUE Halo 3 Killer. Yep, it really is :D

sadikovic

UT2K4 >>>> UT3..... UT2K4 = 9.4..... Halo 3 = 9.5

Bringing me to the conclusion if the reviewer has any brain or knowlegde what so ever giving UT3 (a game esientialy UT2K4 but with less content) a higher score is a complete mokery of "sequals".

And...UT99 owns them all :)

I WANT ANOTHER COUNTER STRIKE

CS >>>>>>>>>> UT = quake

[QUOTE="Koalakommander"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

That's my kinda stuff. I'm a Quake and UT player. I adore the speed, to the extent that I have difficulty playing most other online multiplayer FPSs because I find them too slow-paced and/or cumbersome (Halo and Counterstrike being prime examples of this).

FrozenLiquid

Counter-Strike slow paced :lol:

Halo is slow - CS is not.

But UT is faster than both -- you're right

Ah, Quakeworld. Personally, QW (aka the tweaked multiplayer version of Quake 1) is easily the best multiplayer game I've ever played. Maybe even the best game, period. No FPS since it has been quite able to match its miraculous mix of speed and responsiveness, and excellent level design (who we have John Romero to thank for, before he ruined his rep). I miss QW and long for the day when we'll see another game like it. Even Q2 and Q3 were far inferior, IMO (even promode for Q3 wasn't really close).

Zeliard9

Ah, yes QW was all I played back in college (wow I feel a bit old, I remember it was a dos prompt where you had to install it as an addon too :P ), oh the memories, I'll agree 100%, there hasn't been an experience quite like QW since, yes, I know my nostalgia kicks in from time to time, but I had more fun playing QW than anything else, especially as an engi in in QTF. Used to go by the name phillyfragmaster, which nowadays I feel would be an insult to myself, since I'm not nearly as good online as I used to be. I hope I'm not the only one, while I'm not bad, the the name just doesn't fit when you're sitting at the bottom half of the leader board..hehe

BTW, a few non-pc gamers got into PC Gaming by playing QW and QTF back on my laptop in college. You know a game/mod is good when it draws you into a hobby, and QW was it.