Ported to the big three
by
Kethinov
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I must say I'm enjoying this growing trend. As someone who owns a computer with Windows on it, another computer with Linux on it, and is soon buying an iBook, it's nice seeing that every day they get better and better at playing together.
-- You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
The Mac platform now has the hardware (ok, we're waiting on 256MB GPUs) and the software to be a happy place. I first started using a Mac during the 10.1 (.2 if I remember correctly) days, and back then it was a 733Mhz PowerMac or a 500MHz Powerbook (again memory being stretched). A couple of years later it's Dual 2GHz G5 and 1.25GHz G4 Powerbook (for me anyway - there's a 1.33GHz available). OS X 10.3 is also light years ahead of 10.1 in stability and features (I'm not sure I could live happily without Expose anymore...F9 and F11 are that useful)
If that's not improvement, then I don't know what is...
Thanks Ryan @ Icculus!
by
msimm
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Thanks to Epic for supporting the port and a HUGE thanks to Ryan @ Icculus for keeping Linux gaming a really, really good thing.
-- Quack, quack.
does it work with video != nVidia?
by
beegle
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Does the linux version actually work on video cards that don't have the proprietary nVidia drivers?
UT2k3 relied on some X extensions that weren't available from XFree86. If you didn't have either one of the expensive versions of X or an nVidia card with the closed-source kernel module, you were out of luck.
-- --
Mirror
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A mirror for the Mac version:
http://www.scifience.net/ut2004/mac/
They charge $1 to cover bandwidth costs, but I found that it was worth it (I got 1500 KB/s).
Addons not compatible, if history is any indicator
by
IAmRenegadeX
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Being able to run UT2K4 on more than just Windows is nice, but I suspect the non-Windows ports will be vulnerable to the same issues faced with UT (1999) -- incompatibility with certain mutators and "add-on" server packages...
...arguably the most important of which was "UTPure", an anti-cheat mechanism.
Does anyone know if that were a big issue with UT2K3?
From a dual 1.8 G5 user
by
DanSolo
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I must say, I was impressed last night as I hosted a listen server with 14 bots and a friend (who was on a PC). Nice smooth framerate, no noticable CPU lag, and the netcode seems to be pretty damn solid.
Looking forward to the retail version, and many hours of cross-platform goodness. My PC friends might actually like me again.
Re:Give it up for Assault!
by
eidolons
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
This is a boon for many reasons, but it'll prove to be an economical choice to have availability on multiplte platforms.
Assault mode is back. Onslaught mode, simliar to capture-the-way-point like in Battlefield 1942 and Day of Defeat (HL mod) is addictive as caramal-covered crack bon-bons.
The weapons are already ridiculously balanced in the demo. The mini-gun is like the original UT. The gameplay feels like the original UT, and even the theme music is similar.
I love it.
Re:This is not right
by
wax66
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Sadly, there are still very few games for Linux and Mac, and even worse, some of the games that get ported to Mac, that are important to me, aren't compatible with the Windows versions (read: Everquest). Even when they are compatible in the network code, they're often gimped or less feature-filled for Linux and Mac (read: tools for NWN, bad server code for Q3 and UT for the Mac, which I personally beta tested and filed many bugs on that exact topic). In the real game world right now, for most games, the best solution is to run Win98Lite for playing games, and Linux or FreeBSD for serving them.
-- This is not the signature you are looking for...
Now I just need to figure out why my server won't get a matchid. (well it gets 0) Setup all the port directs and still it fails. I can connect just fine, but it wont show on the master lists.
I also noticed that in CTF in 2k3 I thought it used to direct you to the flag(or the goal if you had the flag), now it just directs you to the blue/rd points no matter what.
Linux & Mac Users vs Windows Users?
by
MMaestro
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Will I begin to see Linux & Mac clans forming solely to fight it out with Windows clans?
Re:Linux games
by
grocer
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
meh, Terminator:Skynet (1996) from Bethesda had vehicles, mouse look, real 3d, and all that jazz...it just never took off...although I still have fond memories of that game and playing as a Terminator ruled...especially in Deathmatch...
Honor whom honor due
by
Qbertino
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
A friend got me hooked into this multiplayer capture the flag (ctf) fps thing a few years ago with Unreal Tournament Game of the year edition. By then it was 2 years old, had a rock solid Linux client and was de-facto bug free, due to a persistent update policy. It was the most popular multiplayer online game with something like 80 000 player online at a time. I had to pratice 3-4 weeks to actually survive longer than 30 seconds in the public servers but it got me hooked. I have come to think of UT and its follow ups as the classic FPS game. The follow ups are of equal rank in quality and gameplay. It's fast, it's fun and - hence the name - doesn't take realisim to serious to get boring. The weapons are cool, the maps and the modding community are amongst the best and it is a very complex and demanding game at high skill levels (exept for deathmatch and TeamDeathmatch maybe). On top of that the Unreal team has allways gone lengths to deliver a reference grade quality Linux client, which is a very honorable thing, imho. They deserve your money. If you've ever though of getting a FPS for inbetween or just to chek out the genre, I can warmly recommend UT. You won't be dissapointed.
-- We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Re:Valve take note
by
GeckoX
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
That's great, but do you really think that you are enough to sway valve into spending large amounts of resources, time and money for a very small number of sales?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for making games available on as many platforms as possible. And it's really nice to see that we're starting to see not just Win/Mac OR Win/Linux but rather Win/Mac/Linux in the few cases that do go to the extra work, which should start tipping the balance and making it financially reasonable to do the extra work.
However, concidering the strains Valve is currently under, I'd rather see them stay focused and still exist next year as opposed to blowing a ton of cash just to appease you and a few others, and ending up folding because of it.
It'll come, I'm quite sure of it...I'm sure we can all see the sun rising on the horizon now.
As an aside, if you're going to read the reviews and buy the single best FPS (Assuming you wait until HL2 is actually released), how could you possibly choose a basically multiplayer only 4th time rehash over a game that looks to be somewhat revolutionary in many aspects?
Not that UT4 is no good, by any means, but it does only represent incremental improvements over what they have done before.
Really, I don't think you're being honest with yourself. As I see it, you have absolutely no reason to mention HL2 in your post as you've essentially already decided that you will only be purchasing a single FPS this year that must run on Linux.
>I dont think you can pull people out of their vehicles like in GTA3 though...
It's just one mutator away.
-- :w!
Re:This is not right
by
nathanh
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Sadly, there are still very few games for Linux and Mac,
Even worse, the very few games there are have fallen badly into disrepair.
I bought pretty much every game released by Hyperion, Loki, Sirtech and Vicarious. Nearly 2 dozen titles. Half of them don't work on a modern (Debian/unstable) x86 installation. I found 5 of the Loki games were ported to PPC; only 1 of those still works (Heroes 3). This isn't a Linux specific problem. The few DOS games I own (eg, X-Wing) don't work on any modern Microsoft platform.
To contrast, the open-source commercial games (Doom, Quake, Quake2, Starcon2) work flawlessly on all the Linux platforms I've tried. Just goes to show that with enough interest, any game can stay ported to the latest platform, but you need source code!
For Linux gaming I've decided to giveup on closed source. Either the game comes with source - I'll still pay for it - or I'll just stick with what I've got. The open source games aren't very good (with a few notable exceptions like nethack) but I refuse to purchase another closed source game that lasts less than a year before bit-rotting.
PS: I actually get a fair bit of mileage out of emulators (eg, dosbox). But I know that won't appeal to most gamers.
Slashdot Mirror
I must say I'm enjoying this growing trend. As someone who owns a computer with Windows on it, another computer with Linux on it, and is soon buying an iBook, it's nice seeing that every day they get better and better at playing together.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
If that's not improvement, then I don't know what is...
The Mothership
Thanks to Epic for supporting the port and a HUGE thanks to Ryan @ Icculus for keeping Linux gaming a really, really good thing.
Quack, quack.
Does the linux version actually work on video cards that don't have the proprietary nVidia drivers?
UT2k3 relied on some X extensions that weren't available from XFree86. If you didn't have either one of the expensive versions of X or an nVidia card with the closed-source kernel module, you were out of luck.
--
A mirror for the Mac version:
http://www.scifience.net/ut2004/mac/
They charge $1 to cover bandwidth costs, but I found that it was worth it (I got 1500 KB/s).
Being able to run UT2K4 on more than just Windows is nice, but I suspect the non-Windows ports will be vulnerable to the same issues faced with UT (1999) -- incompatibility with certain mutators and "add-on" server packages...
...arguably the most important of which was "UTPure", an anti-cheat mechanism.
Does anyone know if that were a big issue with UT2K3?
Looking forward to the retail version, and many hours of cross-platform goodness. My PC friends might actually like me again.
Assault mode is back. Onslaught mode, simliar to capture-the-way-point like in Battlefield 1942 and Day of Defeat (HL mod) is addictive as caramal-covered crack bon-bons.
The weapons are already ridiculously balanced in the demo. The mini-gun is like the original UT. The gameplay feels like the original UT, and even the theme music is similar.
I love it.
Sadly, there are still very few games for Linux and Mac, and even worse, some of the games that get ported to Mac, that are important to me, aren't compatible with the Windows versions (read: Everquest). Even when they are compatible in the network code, they're often gimped or less feature-filled for Linux and Mac (read: tools for NWN, bad server code for Q3 and UT for the Mac, which I personally beta tested and filed many bugs on that exact topic).
In the real game world right now, for most games, the best solution is to run Win98Lite for playing games, and Linux or FreeBSD for serving them.
This is not the signature you are looking for...
Now I just need to figure out why my server won't get a matchid. (well it gets 0) Setup all the port directs and still it fails. I can connect just fine, but it wont show on the master lists. I also noticed that in CTF in 2k3 I thought it used to direct you to the flag(or the goal if you had the flag), now it just directs you to the blue/rd points no matter what.
Will I begin to see Linux & Mac clans forming solely to fight it out with Windows clans?
meh, Terminator:Skynet (1996) from Bethesda had vehicles, mouse look, real 3d, and all that jazz...it just never took off...although I still have fond memories of that game and playing as a Terminator ruled...especially in Deathmatch...
A friend got me hooked into this multiplayer capture the flag (ctf) fps thing a few years ago with Unreal Tournament Game of the year edition. By then it was 2 years old, had a rock solid Linux client and was de-facto bug free, due to a persistent update policy. It was the most popular multiplayer online game with something like 80 000 player online at a time.
I had to pratice 3-4 weeks to actually survive longer than 30 seconds in the public servers but it got me hooked.
I have come to think of UT and its follow ups as the classic FPS game. The follow ups are of equal rank in quality and gameplay. It's fast, it's fun and - hence the name - doesn't take realisim to serious to get boring. The weapons are cool, the maps and the modding community are amongst the best and it is a very complex and demanding game at high skill levels (exept for deathmatch and TeamDeathmatch maybe).
On top of that the Unreal team has allways gone lengths to deliver a reference grade quality Linux client, which is a very honorable thing, imho. They deserve your money.
If you've ever though of getting a FPS for inbetween or just to chek out the genre, I can warmly recommend UT. You won't be dissapointed.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
That's great, but do you really think that you are enough to sway valve into spending large amounts of resources, time and money for a very small number of sales?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for making games available on as many platforms as possible. And it's really nice to see that we're starting to see not just Win/Mac OR Win/Linux but rather Win/Mac/Linux in the few cases that do go to the extra work, which should start tipping the balance and making it financially reasonable to do the extra work.
However, concidering the strains Valve is currently under, I'd rather see them stay focused and still exist next year as opposed to blowing a ton of cash just to appease you and a few others, and ending up folding because of it.
It'll come, I'm quite sure of it...I'm sure we can all see the sun rising on the horizon now.
As an aside, if you're going to read the reviews and buy the single best FPS (Assuming you wait until HL2 is actually released), how could you possibly choose a basically multiplayer only 4th time rehash over a game that looks to be somewhat revolutionary in many aspects?
Not that UT4 is no good, by any means, but it does only represent incremental improvements over what they have done before.
Really, I don't think you're being honest with yourself. As I see it, you have absolutely no reason to mention HL2 in your post as you've essentially already decided that you will only be purchasing a single FPS this year that must run on Linux.
No Comment.
>I dont think you can pull people out of their vehicles like in GTA3 though...
It's just one mutator away.
Even worse, the very few games there are have fallen badly into disrepair.
I bought pretty much every game released by Hyperion, Loki, Sirtech and Vicarious. Nearly 2 dozen titles. Half of them don't work on a modern (Debian/unstable) x86 installation. I found 5 of the Loki games were ported to PPC; only 1 of those still works (Heroes 3). This isn't a Linux specific problem. The few DOS games I own (eg, X-Wing) don't work on any modern Microsoft platform.
To contrast, the open-source commercial games (Doom, Quake, Quake2, Starcon2) work flawlessly on all the Linux platforms I've tried. Just goes to show that with enough interest, any game can stay ported to the latest platform, but you need source code!
For Linux gaming I've decided to giveup on closed source. Either the game comes with source - I'll still pay for it - or I'll just stick with what I've got. The open source games aren't very good (with a few notable exceptions like nethack) but I refuse to purchase another closed source game that lasts less than a year before bit-rotting.
PS: I actually get a fair bit of mileage out of emulators (eg, dosbox). But I know that won't appeal to most gamers.