Quake 3 or UT2003?

[TheCoop]

im not sure whether to buy ut2003, (ive got q3a already), so i want your opinion on which is better...
_________________
95% of all computer errors occur between chair and keyboard (TM)

"One World, One web, One program" - Microsoft Promo ad.
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

Change the world - move a rock

[aardvark]

Can't play UT2k3 on my TNT II under linux Played the demo under windows and that was quite ok!
I would advise you to check out the DEMO

[jconover]

UT 2003 is pretty good,

The 3rd CD in the box has a linux installer.

Download the UTliveCD, follow the instructions and see if you like it.

[tirantloblanc]

I had only played the original Unreal, and UT a couple of times and didn't like them. But UT2003 rocks! It runs pretty fast on my Duron/Geforce2MX, plus it has 3D sound (openal-emu10k1). But 60€ is too much for me, and i wasnt going to play it a lot (no time!), so i will enjoy the demo and nothing more...

[PlatinumCursor]

Personally I am a bit partial to Tribes 2, but between these two games, Id go with UT2003 - far better graphics and playability, and it really is quite fun and addictive to play.
_________________
PlatinumCursor
Blinded by the bling...

[bung-foo]

I say quake3. It's my favorite. I've been playing it an hour or two a day for the past two years or so. I like the physics better and I think the AI is much more subtle then the ut or ut2k3 AI.

On harder difficulty levels, the bots in Q3 actually use different tactics, they respond more fluidly, more quickly, their accuracy is higher but not perfect. In UT and UT2k3, the AI is very simple. The higher you crank the difficulty levels the more perfect the bots accuracy. It just gets stupid on hte highest levels.

On another note, in ut2k3, the world is so incredibly detailed that I have a really hard time seeing what I'm shooting at. The frame rates are atrocious on my system too, although they are a bit higher in linux then in winxp.

Here are my specs so you can compare.
athlonxp 1800
512M ddr2700
geforce4 mx 460
sblive

There is no discernable difference in frame rates between 640x480 and 1024x768 low or high detail settings. Its always 30fps in small indoor maps and 15-20 in large outdoor maps. Hardly comfortable for a good high speed match.

Maybe in a year when hardware catches up ut2k3 will be worth playing. For now, its just a nice (and expensive) tech demo.


Bung-Foo

[azote]

doom III

[elboricua]

Right now as things stand I have to go with Quake3. I get 95-100 FPS average, I can see what the hell I am shooting at, and the levels are pretty straightforward. I run Quake3 at 1280x1024 with all the graphical goodies cranked all the way.

UT2003 is awesome but I have a hard time picking out targets like bung-foo. The screen is so detailed it is hard to tell what is a pickup, and what is an enemy. I am also not fond of the physics in the game. I can't stand the moons. The ridiculous jumps, and hang time just throw me off.

I get on the average 45 FPs on my system. I have the graphics set to 1280x1024 and all graphics settings to normal. I can run with them maxed and I get about 20 FPS. If I tone the graphics all the way down and go 640x480 I can squeeze out 75-80 FPS but who wants to play that way

My system specs:
AMD Athlon 1000Mhz
Geforce 4 TI 4400
768 MB PC133 SDRam
SBlive

I have noticed that with UT2003 turning on AGP Fastwrites, and SBA helped a great deal.

I got this from a mix of threads. One here, the infogrames boards and reading the nvidia online manual.
NOTE To enable fastwrite you must have a motherboard that supports it, and have it turned on in the BIOS. Most AMD boards have fastwrite capability. I am not sure about Pentium based boards.

*(This tip requires a reboot. Unloading and reloading the driver just gets you an unstable system:/)*

First check to see if the FastWrites and SBA is enabled or disabled.

[dob]

ut2k3 looks good, but the gameplay is boring.
It's mostly a game of who sees the enemy first in the visual clutter.
The weapons are very spammy, and movements do not require any special skill. I get very low FPS even on a high end machine. There is no linux server browser (like xqf) that is compatible with ut2k3, you need to use the ingame one or The All Seeing Eye in wine.

Quake3 looks good too, is cheap, has very good framerates, and has an awesome gameplay.
The only drawback I can see for quake3, is that if you're just starting the game, you'll have a much tougher time playing q3 online than uT2k3, for tha game has been out for a much longer time and the average player is more "experienced".

[Soul-Crusher]

It's system-dependant. UT can get pretty chunky at times. It's very detailed, so unless you have superb hardware, you might want to wait on it. Quake 3 on the other hand easily runs 1280x1024x32 with full details on an Athlon 1.33 + GeForce 3. I almost never drop below 100FPS on my Athlon 1.733GHz + GeForce 4 Ti4600. You can also change your field of vision in Q3. I usually run at 120, which makes the game feel much faster than UT. Using UT's benchmark system, my lowest score was in DM-Inferno at 37FPS. In DM-Asbestos, my low score was 80. Inferno has a huge animated background, where as Asbestos is indoors with no animated textures.

Actually, the only reason I like UT so much is because it's new. Q3 has been kept alive by modders. Rocket Arena is still fun. Urban Terror used to be fun, but I think they made it resemble Counter-Strike too much.

[hhaamu]