Make Something Unreal Gets Next Phase Winners

AskedRelic writes "The winners in Phase 3 of the previously mentioned 'Make Something Unreal' mod contest have been released. Big winners in this $1,000,000 prize pool Unreal modding contest include Red Orchestra for Best FPS Mod and Alien Swarm for Best Non-FPS Mod, as well as Clone Bandits for Best Vehicular Mod. Phase 4 entries close on August 20th, and the grand final entries, awarding $50,000 for the best overall mod, close October 1st." Do you think Unreal will continue to nurture the best/most modding talent, now that Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 mods are looming on the horizon?

Comments

It depends

[Myrmi]

The Ut2k4 engine is very versatile and easy to mod - as can be seen from the sheer quality and abundance of the mods that have been entered. With so many people who already have experience with the UT2k4 system, they may well stick to it if the Half Life 2 / Doom 3 engines are much more difficult to mod. The lower system requirements might be attractive, too.

That said, I'd love to see Natural Selection on Half Life 2.

No

[wviperw]

"Do you think Unreal will continue to nurture the best/most modding talent, now that Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 mods are looming on the horizon?"

Absolutely not. We have moved on to a new generation of engines, opening up vast new opportunities, and the UT2K4 engine is, for all intents and purposes, still back with the Q3 and original UT engines, IMO.

Re:No

[wviperw]

I'm not speaking of trivial things like vehicles. There is nothing inherantly special in having vehicles, as both UT and Q3 did in fact support them through mods. I am speaking of the fundamental characteristics of the core game engine. Doom 3's revolutionary new light/shadow rendering system (yes, I believe it is revolutionary), in addition to D3's utilization of DX9 features and its complex scripting languge all contribute to making D3 a next generation engine. Similarly, HL2 also takes advantage of DX9, as well as having a very robust physics engine, making the HL2 engine next generation as well.

ut2k4/linux

[symbolset]

UT2k4 works better on Linux. On identical hardware I get about 30% more FPS. If you have the CD version, run the shell script on CD1. Some caveats:

• The installer only works in X
• You'll need the driver installed for your video card first
• Some distros use an obnoxious method for automounting CD's that conflict with the installer. Open another window to unmount and mount the CD's in this case
• The installer writes to a number of directories including /usr/local/games/ut2004, /usr/share/applications, /usr/share/applnk/Games and /usr/local/bin. You'll need write access to these, so the installer may need to run as root. Once installed you can run as a normal user.
• Some Mods are not available for the linux version
• There is no linux version of the editor

Happy fragging!

Re:Unreal engine physics.

[Mia'cova]

I've got to disagree with you on a few points here. While I'm a huge fan of the Q2/3 physics (rocket-jumping, strafe-jumping, plasma climbing...), that's not to say the feel to your movement in the Unreal camp is lacking its own advantages (dodging, lift-jumping, higher air-control). There's a vastly different feel and strong players in one camp really have a tough time jumping back and forth between the two. I think I'm one of the rare people (honestly) who's used to both sets of physics. I can strafe-jump my way around a huge RA3 map and then happily move to 2003/4 and lift jump from the bottom to top of DM-compressed without even thinking about it.

I mention air control as a plus for the Unreal camp. I say that because there's more air control for Unreal games. Unreal 1 had air control. I'm not entirely sure but I doubt that Q3 was the first id game to have air control. I thought Q2 and maybe even Q1 had air control. Maybe someone could clarify this for me. U1 came out (slightly) before Quake 2 though so Q3 was certainly not the first game with air control.

The feel of the weapons is more in the hands of the artists and designers than the engine coders. There's some interaction with the physics but if they say to add this much momentum in some direction, it doesn't really have anything to do with the physics engine. Maybe because you slide more in Quake you prefer that feel. Everyone loves the railgun though. It'd be hard not to :)

As for poor netcode. Sorry but it's just not true. There is a slightly different feel to the two games' netcode, eg I find leading more helpful in Quake though I might just be insane. But when you say the good UT players can't use a hit-trace weapon consistently, you're just wrong. Drop by Cached.net and download some recordings of pro players. I think you'll find that if they're playing Q3 or UT, they're making their shots with deadly accuracy.

And one last point about the mouse... UT seems just as configurable to me. Finding UT too sensitive for small movements would seem to imply mouse acceleration in Quake, not UT. But that aside, UT has a bunch of options for you too. Pitch, yaw, and master sensitivities, obviously those are there. There are a bunch of options to configure the mouse smoothing as well. You can set it to whatever level of sensitivity you want. There's also some mouse accel, separate menu-only settings, and force-feedback you can toy with if you're interested.

I really believe that these days it comes down to knowing your game, rather than who does what better. Differences exist for good reason. Maps in Quake are designed to accommodate their physics. They know you can strafe-jump and rocket-jump. In UT, they know you can lift-jump and dodge-jump. I think these differences make for different games and add to the variety we all get to enjoy. I'd hate to lose any of that because people start believing that one physics implementation becomes considered the best.