Leaked ET;QW Beta Screenshots

Jimi · 11 Jun 2007 at 21:17

This is why people shouldn't leak stuff, especially using a **** PC, people start judging it based on those screenshots.

drunkenmaster · 11 Jun 2007 at 21:33

Jimi said:
This is why people shouldn't leak stuff, especially using a **** PC, people start judging it based on those screenshots.

the problem is even if, and i'm convinced its lowest settings or close to the lowest settings, it is crap settings. the textures will improve, and AA/AF can be much higher obviously. but that doesn't change the style of the game, textures of those buildings won't significantly change anything. the style, the buildings, the maps, the land, thats what all looks very BF2 styled. even if the textures are sooooo good that it does indeed look better than bf2, personally i didn't mind BF2 for a while, but its style just felt all wrong and i didn't really like it after a while. if its bf2 with different objectives i won't enjoy it for long. quite frankly, on bf2 you controlled different map points. in reality it doesn't matter if you go to a point to assemble a gun, or blow up a cardboard box, or stand at a flag till it raises. in all situations you do the same thing, you move in, clear the little area and stand around an objective. that i don't think will change that much.

James J · 11 Jun 2007 at 22:41

tbh as long as the GAMEPLAY is good who cares if it looks quite a lot like BF2? I dont for one

Hen_Dawg · 11 Jun 2007 at 23:20

drunkenmaster said:
the problem is even if, and i'm convinced its lowest settings or close to the lowest settings, it is crap settings. the textures will improve, and AA/AF can be much higher obviously. but that doesn't change the style of the game, textures of those buildings won't significantly change anything. the style, the buildings, the maps, the land, thats what all looks very BF2 styled. even if the textures are sooooo good that it does indeed look better than bf2, personally i didn't mind BF2 for a while, but its style just felt all wrong and i didn't really like it after a while. if its bf2 with different objectives i won't enjoy it for long. quite frankly, on bf2 you controlled different map points. in reality it doesn't matter if you go to a point to assemble a gun, or blow up a cardboard box, or stand at a flag till it raises. in all situations you do the same thing, you move in, clear the little area and stand around an objective. that i don't think will change that much.

So what would you want?

drunkenmaster · 12 Jun 2007 at 01:58

Hen_Dawg said:
So what would you want?

who knows, i played bf2, i played bf2142 and well i haven't played much but i thought a lot of maps the scale feels better, more city like area's which introduce the street to street fighting where bf2 was so hugely open it didn't have the same feel. the pictures there show what i think look like fairly boring maps that aren't jumping out at me as looking like they'll be great to play. i don't mind bf2 but i do hate the maps and found it especially irritating holding an area when its an opened up map, with too many players worried about stats leaving you to die rather than rush into the open to help it just wasn't great gameplay IMHO. obviously need to see it in a open beta or final release to see how it plays, that might be all pictures of one map and all the others are going to ones that play the way i like who knows. can only comment on those pictures and the style of map they show though.

what i REALLY REALLY want is a game where they don't have a sniper scope that has a huge and completely unrealistic heatshot capability. almost every single multiplayer game has sniper rifles that seem to ignore any movement, irratic movement you just go into scope trigger and bam, the guy is down. i'm bored finding servers with sniper rifles banned, few in cs ban the awp, even less the scout. a game that simply doesn't introduce a stupidly good scope for no reason at all would be fantastic.

Hen_Dawg · 12 Jun 2007 at 08:24

You could consider Project Reality. Loads of new maps, some are still quite open but others are city maps. Also the snipers are limited to one per team (2 when there are 64 players). The sniper rifle has an execellent scope but there's only one guy capeable of using it at one time.
Version 0.6 due out in a few weeks with even more improvements

FrenchTart · 12 Jun 2007 at 10:15

Anyone on the beta must be laughing right now. Amazing amounts of conjecture from just a couple of low-quality screen shots.

The game looks good to me and that's without the badgers.

peetee · 12 Jun 2007 at 13:05

twoodster said:
I'm a bit worried about the bunnyhopping - it completely wrecks BF2 at times, so it would be very annoying if ID hasn't done anything about it either.

In quakes games bunnyhopping is about as hard as strafing, and it does spazz the game up like it does in the bf series, bunnyhopping is a commonly accepted practice in other quake games. Its utter retarded in bf though i agree, itll probably be part of this game, but it will be balanced, and everyone will do it

Fr0dders · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:46

shame that this isnt a quake game

its an enemy territory game but set in the Quake environment

its not going to have bunnyhopping of any sort, and basically just a BF2 / BF2142 clone, but hopefully with more objective based gameplay (BF's CTF mode never did catch on

) and without any of the bugs

any of you expecting Quake with vehicles may as well give up now.

as for the graphics, he's obviously playing it on a 6200 or something equally daft and has got all the options turned down and running a low res. The screenshots are obviously from somebody who'se broken NDA and on the beta programme. As hes using his own mid range system, the graphics look less than their best.

Remember these arent official press shots, just some leaked beta shots.

running at 1680 x 1050 with 4 x AA and all the options ramped up, it should remove all of the jaggies etc..

peetee · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:49

MrLOL said:
shame that this isnt a quake game

its an enemy territory game but set in the Quake environment

its not going to have bunnyhopping of any sort, and basically just a BF2 / BF2142 clone, but hopefully with more objective based gameplay (BF's CTF mode never did catch on ) and without any of the bugs

any of you expecting Quake with vehicles may as well give up now.

aww really? i wasnt expecting it as fast paced as quake, just a better general FPS experience than bf2+2142 etc.
Hmf, im fine with or without hopping, just if it was part id like to see it be as balanced as it was in previous quake games. Should be good anyway, i regret ever buying 2142

Fr0dders · 12 Jun 2007 at 14:53

peetee said:
aww really? i wasnt expecting it as fast paced as quake, just a better general FPS experience than bf2+2142 etc.
Hmf, im fine with or without hopping,

i dont mean its going to play like Battlefield

im just pointing out that the battlefield franchise has prooved very lucrative for Dice, and ID are obviously cashing in on the market with their own version of a BF shooter. This is a direct rival to it, not a copy, but none the less very much an ID version of a Battlefield Shooter.

it will be much more objective based, and the class system looks to be much more varied. It way well be faster paced than BF2, but its not going to be quake with tanks

Weebull · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:04

Man, I remember why PC gaming annoys me so much now. A few leaked screenshots and people are all "it looks poor im not buying it now

" (Oh god that winds me up so much) or "hay it looks like bf2 it must be exactly the same i hope it is".

I mean, really. Is it too much to ask to see how a game plays before judging it so completely?

Gerard said:
So essentially you want it to be like a game that didn't sell all that well, got "ok" at best reviews and had a multiplayer mode that divebombed and is barely ever played anymore.

Id hate to see a company making you chief game designer if thats the case.

Yeah, who'd want variety when we can all just pander to the mass market? Down with differing styles within games! Long live identikit semi-realistic squad-based combat!

FrenchTart · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:10

Ah, it's fun reading guesses stated as facts

The only thing you can be sure of is that information posted anywhere outside of the closed beta site is likely to be wrong, or at best right through luck. Rather than listen to people make statements about something they know nothing about, just wait until you can see for yourself.

Gerard · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:17

Weebull said:
Yeah, who'd want variety when we can all just pander to the mass market? Down with differing styles within games! Long live identikit semi-realistic squad-based combat!

Mass market = more games sold which is all companys care about. The game is already different enough according to kevin cloud with the two sides having very different tech and weapons available so id hardly say "identikit". And since when was bouncing about like a tool "variety"? People say they do this so they can get around maps quicker, well the game already has unlimited sprint so tarding around isn't needed anymore is it?

Squink · 12 Jun 2007 at 15:18

drunkenmaster said:
what i REALLY REALLY want is a game where they don't have a sniper scope that has a huge and completely unrealistic heatshot capability.

The original Enemy Territory handled sniping really well. The sniper scope took a reasonable bit of skill to use and even a headshot wasn't an insta-kill unless the target was on low health. The mechanics of the game prevented the tedium of people camping. Stay in one spot too long and you'd get a knife in the back. Go to an exposed place and you'd quickly find that SMG fire from a crouched enemy could pick you off quite nicely from right across the map.

Since this is the same development team, I'm hoping they've managed to retain the open, balanced gameplay of ET.

Jitters1979 · 12 Jun 2007 at 16:14

Cant wait, bring on this game!!

gurusan · 12 Jun 2007 at 16:54

Curio said:
It's not that bad. The only reason Quake4 MP didn't take off is because the masses prefer the BF style gameplay these days, and the fact Quake games have a harsh learning curve.

I still love Quake 4...I prefer CTF to DM though....I play CTF religiously

peetee · 12 Jun 2007 at 17:00

from people who played ET this seems like its going along exactly what i wanted from the battlefield series, but obviously was disappointed with.
Hopefully it will be along the lines of the other ET games in quality etc, and we'll finally see a true rival to battlefield, which i hope crushes it miserably

EA deserve some abuse after they'v give us all these buggy releases, dodgey patches, crap balancing, unresolved issues etc.

For someone that still plays 2142 - does titan FPS still drop dramatically? Can sentrys still shoot through walls etc?
Lets hope this baby doesnt have the major problems bf did, and if it does that t hey actually get addressed

furnace · 12 Jun 2007 at 17:29

Do you have to pay monthly for ET:QW? I saw it for £1.99 on pre-order in game, and came to the conclusion that it's either a pre-order fee or £1.99 for the game disk then pay monthly..?

peetee said:
Hopefully it will be along the lines of the other ET games in quality etc, and we'll finally see a true rival to battlefield, which i hope crushes it miserably
EA deserve some abuse after they'v give us all these buggy releases, dodgey patches, crap balancing, unresolved issues etc.

Agreed

Weebull · 12 Jun 2007 at 17:29

Gerard said:
Mass market = more games sold which is all companys care about.

Perhaps, but they don't have to be pandered to by copying what already exists. New and unique games become big hits all the time. You can't judge stuff purely on what went before. So just because BF2-style games happen to be the big thing right now, doesn't mean that every game should be like that, or that everybody out there wants it like that.

I mean hell, what would be more likely to attract a long-term fanbase, yet another BF2 game that people abandon for simply not being as good, or a solid mainstream quake-style game that gets the old UT/Q3 players interested again?

Gerard said:
The game is already different enough according to kevin cloud with the two sides having very different tech and weapons available so id hardly say "identikit".

It probably is, but according to you, daring to ask for more quake-like physics is some horrible slur upon humanity. I wasn't knocking the game in the slightest (I'm not going to judge it yet), just your apparent irrational hatred of fast-paced games.

Gerard said:
And since when was bouncing about like a tool "variety"? People say they do this so they can get around maps quicker, well the game already has unlimited sprint so tarding around isn't needed anymore is it?

Because I like bouncing around like a tool? Because I've always quite enjoyed the physics of movement and jumping in certain FPS games, and like the extra challenge of negotiating jumps and gaps within certain game levels? Because I think the difficulty of controlling your aim while jumping, whilst also adjusting for your targets jumping to be a good challenge, and a nice trade off for the ability to jump in the first place? Because it's fun?