Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UT2003 Gone Gold, Ships with Linux Support

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the unix-heads-like-games-too dept.

SiW writes "This announcement should be music to a Linux gamer's ears: Unreal Tournament 2003 has just gone gold, and supports Linux (client and server) out of the box!" It's not often that I get to play a new game without rebooting. I'm really looking forward to this.

40 of 340 comments (clear)

  1. let's hope... by sheean.nl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    let's hope that this will hapen more often, one of the most frequently heard arguments for not running Linux is: "but, I can't play my games on it"...

    --

    If at first you don't succeed, then sky diving definitely isn't for you.
  2. Unreal... by Traser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Kudos for the unreal team - it's about time more software was released first run with linux/bsd support.

    --
    Insanity is contagious. - Yossarian
    1. Re:Unreal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. Now lets all do our part and buy it.

  3. Maybe you should try the demo first? by Phosphor3k · · Score: 4, Informative

    Instead of just buying it because it supports linux? The linux and windows demos can be found here.

  4. Linux support.. by Manes · · Score: 4, Informative

    is great and all, especially since they bundle it with the game. (unlike q3, which required getting a different box, which was impossible to get here in norway)

    Too bad the game feels like a UT expansion pack though - after 10 minutes you forget the fancy new graphichs and physics models, and you realize that not only are almost all the weapons exactly the same, you still got the same voice taunts, the same feel, the same sounds and the same game.

    1. Re:Linux support.. by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 3, Informative

      Eh? If you read the UT2003 forums, the biggest complaint is that it doesn't feel like UT anymore. Just because there are skin deep similarities doesn't mean it's not a very different beast.

    2. Re:Linux support.. by rhakka · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. Every hit I've seen has some kind of effect, ranging from covering your target in electricty to blood sprays, sparks, or the "green glow" when you cover them with link gun secondary

      2. Laggy? 90% of the demo servers are some yahoo hosting a 20 person non dedicated game on his home cable connection. Find a good server (search by ping, lower is better for those who dont' know) and look for player max counts of 14 or less if you want to be pretty sure the game is going to be smooth. Also, avoid anything called "Another UT2003 server", as whoever is running it is so clueless they couldn't even change the default name of the server, and it will most likely suck.

      3. Very different then UT, but still also the same.. just like a good sequel should be. The new movement tricks and faster weapon speed alone drastically change combat, the weapons are weaker on the whole (until you get good with them, instead of just being able to kill kill kill with no ability), game moves faster, and adrenaline replaces most of the powerups. Just like UT?

      Also, just a personal note, Bombing Run is a wildly good, fast paced, sports like game. You owe it to yourself to give it a shot. Even if every other game mode were utter crap, it would be worth checking out simply for that one gametype. Picture rugby with guns and you've got the basic idea.

  5. I wonder who will actually use it. by Vinum · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You know what would be funny? If UT actually put some code in there to send statistics back to its HQ to see how many people actually ran a copy of it on Linux. And no... 50 people replying to this post saying they will does not count as part of statistics :P

    Even more importantly, if those stats could be found from certain slashdot admin. :) I always thought it would be funny if slashdot put peoples USER-AGENT header next to their posts too...

    1. Re:I wonder who will actually use it. by TheLinuxWarrior · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The registration tool will probably tell them which version you installed. (If you register the game that is)

      To me, it doesn't matter if I actually use it or not.

      I've never played UT before, but I am impressed enough that they shipped a native linux client and server that I will buy the game. If for no other reason than to support future gaming on linux.

      I'll also be emailing them and letting them know that their support of linux was a factor in my purchasing decision.

  6. Just what we need... by roalt · · Score: 5, Funny
    UT2003 is a 3 CD set. Of course you know it's a huge game with a ton of content (over 35 levels), great characters, awesome gametypes, incredible AI, cool mutators, etc. But there's also some great tools including the following:

    (...)

    2. The Karma Authoring Tool (KAT) that allows you to set up character joint constraints for use with MathEngine's Karma real-time physics system which is incorporated into UT2003. (...)

    It already costs me a day-job just to keep my slashdot-Karma positive, I think I'll give up op Unreal tournament for now....
  7. great for linux gaming by jonsen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that this is great for linux gaming. I'm sure that other gaming companies is going to follow, and maybe this is going to be a common trend in gaming. If it is, I think linux's popularity is going to rise even more. Maybe we can finally microwave our win cd's now...

  8. I wonder if user bitching caused this? by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was a little pissed off when I heard that they were not going to do Linux support right off the bat. I couldn't understand why they wouldn't at least put up the binaries on FTP/WWW and let the geeks download it after they bought the Windows version...

    I like this idea a lot better though :) We don't have to have a poor showing on the shelves (yes, we will) and we still get the binaries out of the box.

    I don't play games on my computer, but I think that this is the best way to go. Just bundle both in the same box and forget about it.

    Thanks for letting me rant my hangover off.

    1. Re:I wonder if user bitching caused this? by jvmatthe · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's my impression that user bitching didn't have much to do with it. Epic has one person, Daniel Vogel, that is interested in seeing some Linux support and he contacted a notable Linux game coder, Ryan Gordon, about getting the client work done on Linux. My experience has been that Epic isn't nearly so pro-free-software as say Carmack but they do have a view of the world that isn't completely Windows-centric. Mostly Windows-centric? Of course...that's where a good portion of their profit sits, along with console ports, like the Xbox Unreal game slated for this winter and Unreal Tournament for PS2 at the launch of that console. But the recent comment by Mark Rein of Epic saying, in effect, "if we have a server port, we should also do a client port" is probably indicative of the positive attitude that Epic currently has about ports for other systems. And they haven't forgotten the Mac, and a port will be coming along for that platform as well. Epic wants everyone to buy the game and they've taken steps to make sure that every major platform has a port for people to buy.

      The community helping out and being supportive is probably more likely to get things to happen, rather than bitching.

      You can read a little more about how the UT2003 client came to be at LinuxGames.

      --
      Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
    2. Re:I wonder if user bitching caused this? by whovian · · Score: 5, Informative
      ...when I heard that they were not going to do Linux support right off the bat.

      I thought I had read that they weren't even planning Linux support at all, but seeing as how they needed OpenGL support en route to a Mac version, they decided it was convenient to produce a Linux version. After searching for the "official" statement, I found this post from the man himself Mark Rein:
      Here are the answers to some questions I've been asked:

      "Why did Epic waste time supporting Linux?" - it is NOT a waste of time. It is absolutely crucial to have Linux support for the server and seeing as we found a very competent programmer (Ryan C. Gordon) to take on the client side job we decided to go full steam ahead with the client as well. We were already going to have to do OpenGL support for the Mac version so it made sense. Linux support has not impacted the development of the core game in any way. There was never any specific plan to release a Linux client at the same time as the Windows client ships but the timing just worked out that way. I wish we had known earlier because I would have liked to indicate the game is Linux-compatible on the box like we did with the original UT. But at least we'll have the support in the game and that's what really counts.

      "I'm a Windows XP user - why should I care about whether there are Linux versions or not?" You should care because we estimate that about half the servers for UT are currently run under Linux. This is why I said it was "crucial" to have Linux support for UT2003 on the server side and personally I think that if we're taking advantage of an OS for the server then we should have a client implementation as well. I played UT2003 on a Linux system the other day and it rocked. It feels the same as the Windows version in terms of performance and robustness. Linux users will enjoy the game and all users (Windows/Mac/Linux) will enjoy having more servers to play on. Linux support in UT2003 is a win-win for everyone.

      Source: Infogrames Forums

      --
      To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  9. support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    just noted that UT2003 doesn't support Mac (as far as I could tell).
    Does this mean that Linux is now considered to be a more lucrative market than Mac, or is this just a show of support for Linux?

    UT original did run under mac, but it used an engine that was native to DirectX. Now that UT2 is more openGLish, cross platform would be much easier. Perhaps the portion of linux users that play UT is greater than that of mac?

    1. Re:support by Cyno01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yeah, i havn't seen a switch ad with some LAN d00d saying "I switched to mac because of the hundreds of thousands of neeto games out there for it"

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  10. Goatse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I want a skin in UT 2003 of the goatse guy with a Bill Gates head?

    Can somebody please make it for me?

  11. No gaming on Linux here by ekephart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know how most people set up their computers but I have one Windows (1.4ghz) machine and 3 Linux machines (600mhz, 350mhz, 166mhz). The Windows machine is the fastest of the 4 basically because most games are played in Windows and they need the speed.

    The limited number of people that just have a bunch of uber ninja boxen spells slow growth for the Linux gaming world.

    You can argue that people dedicated to Linux gaming are already using it. Well, yes, but where does it go from there? To attract new customers you have to provide something they desire at a reasonable cost. For me giving up Civ3, EQ or Warcraft3 isn't worth making the switch (yet).

    --
    sig
    1. Re:No gaming on Linux here by 13Echo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I use a 1400 MHz machine at home with 1024 MB of RAM, 3 hard drives, and a reasonably good videocard. I made the transition from Windows to Linux this year, and I was surprised to find that if you have the right hardware- there are games to be played. There are even plenty of good 3D games. My computer is by no means top-of-the-line anymore, but it will still run all current Linux games at good speeds. I'll be upgrading the machine by sometime early next year. I take Linux gaming pretty seriously as a hobby. The platform works great for that stuff, it just needs a bit more of a boost from the game companies.

      That said, I understand what you mean about giving up on your favorite games. Giving up on MOH:AA was one of the biggest decisions that almost made me not want to switch completely, but the benefits have outweighed that single game for me.

  12. Register IT! by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Remember, if you buy UT2003, and you are going to run it under Linux:

    SEND IN THOSE REGISTRATION CARDS!

    Make sure that when the vendor tallies the results that Linux is well-represented.

    Allow me to compare and contrast UT2003 with QuakeIII in this regard:


    • QIII: Windows shipped first. Linux shipped later. Justification: "We need to be able to track the Linux shipments."
      Result: hard-core games bought Windows version, waited to download Linux version.

    • UT2003: Both versions are in the box.
      Result: Hard-core gamers can get whatever version they choose to run now.

    --
    www.eFax.com are spammers
    1. Re:Register IT! by Ramses0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also, buy it from TuxGames ... they report all sales to the manufacturers as "Linux Sales" so that's one less thing to worry about. Actually, I've been having pretty good luck with a few titles under WineX (found some cheap games and they work really well under WineX). It might be nice if TuxGames stocked some of the older game titles which are 4 or 5 supported by WineX (ie: Baldurs Gate 1, Black & White, etc) and then reported those sales as Linux sales. (are you listening Michael?)

      Heresy, heresy! I hear the cry. But these older games are never going to be native ported to Linux. I'd be willing to pay $30 instead of $20 to buy them from a Linux store (this means $$ for TuxGames) where I knew that the game had a good chance of working (this means no stress for me) and that the manufacturer would know that people are using Linux to play their games (meaning that they'll consider it in the future).

      Only after the games have dropped in price to ~$20 in regular retail channels, though. Transgaming is making a big deal about how WineX supports WarCraft III really well out of the box. That *is* exciting, but I still have hope (actually, I don't) that Blizzard will port it to Linux. When WarCraft III is on the $19.99 shelf, I have no hope that it'll ever be ported to Linux, so at that point, I'd be willing to buy it from TuxGames.

      I don't remember who said it, but this is a case where we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

      --Robert

    2. Re:Register IT! by wowbagger · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ... release a good game with Linux support, and I'll buy it.


      And how will the marketroids know that you bought the game because it had Linux support? ESP?

      Or are you asking them to sell the Linux version of the game seperately from the Windows version? As I pointed out in my previous post, that won't work. Even if the games are released at the same time, a store only has so much stock they can afford to have. Given the choice of stocking a Linux version that will sell 2 copies, or stocking 2 more copies of the Windows version that are guaranteed to move, what do you think the shopkeep will do?

      And if the game has the Linux version in the same box as the Windows version, then the marketroids will have no idea you aren't another Windows user.

      Thank you for being a strawman I could knock down. It really helps me make my point.
      --
      www.eFax.com are spammers
  13. But what about dependencies ? by vluther · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I downloaded the demo in Linux, only to find out that the game will only work with Binary Nvidia drivers. I own a laptop, I can't just go around buying new video cards and putting them into this machine.. I really hope they will have removed the dependency on nvidia by then.

  14. Just what I want... by Telex4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Another Unreal game! I've mucked aroud with the demo, and it's not really markedly different from UT2 (except it runs natively on my machine). Same weapons, same taunts, same levels, and its all really boring.

    I mean, CTF... the classic CTF maps were back in Quake1/2 CTF and Team Fortress Classic (2fort being the best). The idea of them is to divide the level up into areas which you can defend in different ways, giving the game some tactical depth. The level with the demo is just one big open space full of spikes, with two little rooms at each end Boo. Dull. And the lightning gun is horrid... I suppose the idea is that the old sniper gun was untracreable, and therefore too good on open maps, but why not just give it tracer bullets? The lightening gun just feels, well, rubbish.

    On the plus side, it's nice to see they've used Loki's installer program (and update program) which work like a treat. Hopefully in the next releases they'll also know they'll be able to ship the UNIX versions in time, and so will write that it runs on various UNIX based OSs on the box. Oh and maybe they'll support more drivers than Nvidia :(

    1. Re:Just what I want... by fault0 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think the best thing about ut2k3 is the better physics than UT. Quaker's, like myself, have always felt restricted by UT's lack of strafe jumping. ut2k3 doesn't include strafe jumping, but it's dodge jumping is a bit more pronounced than the dodge jumping in UT. Also, it has a Quake2-like double jumping system. Also, wall jumps and lift jumps (which were found in UT), also seem more pronounced, especially with a faster than default game speed (110%), and a higher fov than normal (around 100 is best, imho).

  15. GREAT!!! by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 3, Funny
    So glad I just Switched(TM) so now I can play Unr... oh wait...

  16. OS X version: DECEMBER by blakespot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OS X version coming in December

    blakespot

    --
    -- Heisenberg may have slept here.
    iPod Hacks.com
  17. Re:Linux support??? by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 3

    This is why no gaming company wants to support linux

    This is very interesting. I remember everyone was bitching to RedHat, becouse there was software released "only for RedHat". It was easy to run it in Debian in Slackware. But people wrote "RedHat is bad". Now there is a game which work only with nVidia cards. It's impossible to run it on other cards. But noone is angry. Everyone is happy, becouse there is new game available for Linux. Even, if it's impossible to play.

    PS. I know DRI is talking to S3, and maybe UT team is going to create version with uncompressed textures, but it's impossible to play now

  18. Re:Linux support??? by jvmatthe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comparing UT2003 to RtCW is really poor. UT2003 really is pushing the system much harder than RtCW, simply in terms of the textures, polygons, and physics. To get the performance they needed for the textures they're using, Epic needed to use some texture compression and they chose the standard that's available by every major Windows drivers, S3TC/DXTC. This is available in NVIDIA's drivers, XiG's drivers, and PowerVR's drivers (although there are other issues with the PowerVR drivers). All of these already have a license for S3TC/DXTC in their Windows drivers and therefore can implement that in their closed Linux drivers.

    The DRI drivers, on the other hand, are by their nature open and getting a license is a much trickier proposition. Steps have been taken to work with the patent holders to get a license for an open implementation in DRI, and some of those steps are being taken by Daniel Vogel of Epic (see DRI mailing list in past two days for an email from Brian Paul about this). So even though the DRI drivers are currently crippled and unable to use the required technology, Epic hasn't given up and has been working to help the DRI team get what they need to support UT2003.

    Yes, only closed drivers currently work. The open solution is trying to move forward in a legal manner. Yet S3TC/DXTC is required because there isn't another solution. Epic is trying to help.

    Getting bent out of shape and spewing ill-informed vitriol as if they were all conspiring to screw you isn't going to help the situation.

    --
    Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
  19. Linux going mainstream by InodoroPereyra · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There is a quiet and steady trend for GNU/Linux to go mainstream. It is not happening at the exponentical rate some of us thought it would. But every little step helps. This is an egg and chicken problem and we all know it. If more people used Linux there would be more apps available, and the other way around. Whenever we achieve "critical mass" we are in :-)

    Things are happening. Governments considering/adopting open source solutions here and there. Mass media covering Linux/Open Source every now and then. The world's biggest computer chain selling computers with Linux preinstalled online for now. Not to mention the impressive inroads in the server market.

    Now imagine all these win* gamers opening their UT boxes to find a "linux version" in there. They won't give a damn, but deep in their minds they will start to get to the idea that Linux is there, that it exists, that it is as "normal" as "win*".

    One more step. Many Thanks to the UT team !

    1. Re:Linux going mainstream by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course you're not wrong in these beliefs... But just to play devil's advocate for a minute, the fact that UT2003 has a Linux version in the box doesn't seem *that* significant to me.

      Honestly, about the only mainstream games that have had Linux support have been 1st. person shooters with Quake or UT type engines. (I guess "The Sims" was a notable exception to the rule.) If they didn't release a Linux client for UT2003, I'd say that would be more of a "big step backwards" than anything else. I mean, you'd have to ask if Linux support has really backslid so far that there's not even interest in porting the latest 1st. person shooter to it anymore?

      I mean, let's see here: Kingpin, Descent, Quake 1,2 and 3, Soldier of Fortune, the last version of UT, Tribes .... if all those ran as Linux clients, why is it a huge leap to think the new UT wouldn't also do so?

    2. Re:Linux going mainstream by krmt · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I mean, let's see here: Kingpin, Descent, Quake 1,2 and 3, Soldier of Fortune, the last version of UT, Tribes .... if all those ran as Linux clients, why is it a huge leap to think the new UT wouldn't also do so?
      Because, like he said, UT2003 comes with it in the exact same box. None of these games did. The only example that you could even use the same files for was Q3, and even that didn't come in the same box. You had to know about it and go download it.

      Having right there alongside it means that suddenly Linux is much more valid. It's not something you have to go out of your way to download and know about, it's right there for you. It's not in some separate section of the store either, right next to the keyboard extension cables, it's in the box at the front of the store underneath the giant poster. It's not a huge leap that UT2003 has a linux client, it is a huge leap that it's right there alongside the windows client out of the box. NWN was supposed to have this too, but backed out. It's a very important step.
      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

  20. Re:UnrealEd...fixed? Better? by ab0b · · Score: 5, Informative

    UnrealEd has not been ported to linux, and as of now there is no plan to do so. There was some discussion on the mailing list of a community developed port of the Editor, however this was more or less ruled out. Basically they are concerned about releasing documentation on the engine libraries, which change often and would "open up a ton of cheats we couldn't detect" (Ryan C Gordon).

    --
    ____
    to asdf and beyond!!
  21. Re:Linux support??? by dinivin · · Score: 3, Insightful


    WTF? Epic spent a good deal of time getting this game up and running under Linux and all you can do is bitch!

    You should be thankful that they've done what they have. It is not up to Epic to make the game playable on every Linux system. It is up the video card manufacturers to make sure their cards can support the latest games.

    Dinivin

  22. Re:got counter-strike? by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 4, Funny

    played the demo for a bit, graphics are nice, went back to the old favorite. i may eat my words by next month, but this ain't no counter-strike killer.

    Of course it isn't, you can not kill that which is already dead.

    --
    Hate me!
  23. Re:Under linux only if you have a Nvidia card.. by Time+Doctor · · Score: 4, Informative

    ATi is patching their newer radeon drivers, and will support S3TC some time in the future!

    --
    Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
  24. No one is going to get this, methinks by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, all of us with hardware capable of running this.

    I can't figure out why people are so obsessed with *new* games. Do games suddenly suck because they're a year old? I like my Linux box because I *don't* have to constantly upgrade it to keep it nice and usable. I have an old PII and a Matrox G450 that work nicely in Linux, but would never be able to play this at a reasonable clip.

    Let's work this out:

    a) People that dual-boot. They can already play this in Windows. Little reason to use Linux to play UT2003.
    b) People that don't dual-boot -- are they going to upgrade their graphics card and processor to play a single game? Plus, most of them already can live without games pretty well, or else they wouldn't be using Linux in the first place, so there's a significant cost to doing lots of hardware changes for one game.

    Now, don't get me wrong. I bought Quake 3, Alpha Centauri, and Jagged Alliance II for Linux. But those *run* reasonably on computers not built for gaming. UT2003? Riiight...

    Ah, well. I'm sure others won't agree. However, IIRC, SimCity 3k and Alpha Centauri were Loki's biggest sellers...

    Now, I don't mean "retro" games like Asteroids. I mean, what about Close Combat? Command & Conquer? Fallout (okay, this *does* work in WINE, so less draw)? What's wrong with porting these? Does the port cost so blinking much to do that it's not worth it?

    (Exile III did get ported, which was great, but the widget set used was absolutely unbearable. Try it and see what I mean.)

    --
    May we never see th
    1. Re:No one is going to get this, methinks by Planesdragon · · Score: 3, Informative


      Now, don't get me wrong. I bought Quake 3, Alpha Centauri, and Jagged Alliance II for Linux. But those *run* reasonably on computers not built for gaming. UT2003? Riiight...

      I have a Duron 700 with 128 MB of RAM and a Geforce 2MX. By all accounts, I'm actually below the required stats for the game. But the demo runs just as well as the original Unreal...

      If you're running Q3 at an average rate, you can probably run UT2003.

  25. Re:nVidia-only-Linux-support by Time+Doctor · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's up to the vendors to support the Savage Texture Compression. ATi will probably be fixing their radeon drivers themselves.

    --
    Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
  26. Or the American Football mode! by wackybrit · · Score: 3, Funny

    Picture rugby with guns and you've got the basic idea.

    Rugby is a good comparison. If it was to be like American Football, whenever a player dropped the ball, you'd have to stop the game and cut for an ad break for 5 minutes.

    --
    mogorific carpentry experiments