The * Official * Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Thread

Lonewolf · 31 May 2007 at 05:30

Cyberstrike2027 said:
bump.

Anymore info on this, like a hard + fast release date?

"When its done"

silversurfer · 31 May 2007 at 08:29

Thats not always the case of course, sometimes its released 'before its done'

Lonewolf · 1 Jun 2007 at 17:39

Cyberstrike2027 said:
bump.

Anymore info on this, like a hard + fast release date?

During a conference call today, Activision revealed it now expects Enemy Territory: Quake Wars to ship during the July-September quarter, the second of its fiscal year. Though, like all id Software titles, its official release date is "when it's done," Activision had previously planned that it would come out by the end of June.

Source

silversurfer · 1 Jun 2007 at 18:45

Autumn/xmas imo, thats where the money is

Supercow · 1 Jun 2007 at 18:58

You know what - I'm actually sick of ID just telling us "when it's done"
We are the consumers, and we have the right to know how far along they are.
If they keep dragging feet, I might just not bother anymore, since UT 3 should be then coming out relatively the same time, and I'll only play that.

I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling peeved at this

Scottland · 1 Jun 2007 at 19:07

sup3rc0w said:
You know what - I'm actually sick of ID just telling us "when it's done"
We are the consumers, and we have the right to know how far along they are.
If they keep dragging feet, I might just not bother anymore, since UT 3 should be then coming out relatively the same time, and I'll only play that.

I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling peeved at this

Surely it's got to be better than the EA method - It ships whether it's done or not!

Kezmo · 1 Jun 2007 at 19:21

Scottland said:
Surely it's got to be better than the EA method - It ships whether it's done or not!

True True but, this game looked finished last year, i think the console ports are to blame for the delay.

Gerard · 1 Jun 2007 at 19:31

According to that guys feedback (assuming its true) the game seems to be another bunnyhopathon, oh great havn't seen enough of that in every other id game in the past. :rolleyes:

Curio · 1 Jun 2007 at 22:47

Gerard said:
According to that guys feedback (assuming its true) the game seems to be another bunnyhopathon, oh great havn't seen enough of that in every other id game in the past.

That's what makes it an id/Quake game. I probably wouldn't buy it if there was no hoppin'

Gerard · 1 Jun 2007 at 22:54

Curio said:
That's what makes it an id/Quake game. I probably wouldn't buy it if there was no hoppin'

Why is it people seem to want the same tired boring sad old gimmicks from ids past games to live on? Seems people that play quake expect certain things and are afraid of change or having to learn anything new. If ID release this game with retarded bunnyhopping then this game is nothing more than quake 4 with vehicles. And we all know how well quake 4 done in multiplayer, sorta akin to a car slamming ito a wall at high speed as it was crap.

Keep the sad bunnyhopping exclusive to the quake deathmatch games, this game can do without it as its supposed to be a competitor to the battlefield series.

Supercow · 1 Jun 2007 at 23:48

Bunny hopping = suck
Dodge jumping = win

2 Guesses what FPS i "grew up on"

Curio · 2 Jun 2007 at 00:34

Gerard said:
Why is it people seem to want the same tired boring sad old gimmicks from ids past games to live on?

Because it's part of the "history". If they called it ET: Monkey Wars then I wouldn't expect elements of Quake. As it is, I want hopping, railguns, Strogg, Quad Damage, etc, because it's a Quake game. If you have no interest in the Quake feel then I suggest maybe you don't bother with this game.

If ID release this game with retarded bunnyhopping then this game is nothing more than quake 4 with vehicles. And we all know how well quake 4 done in multiplayer, sorta akin to a car slamming ito a wall at high speed as it was crap.

Quake4 was fine in multiplayer. The lack of players doesn't say much about the quality of the game, more about the state of classic DM these days.

Tom|Nbk · 2 Jun 2007 at 00:51

Curio said:
The lack of players doesn't say much about the quality of the game, more about the state of classic DM these days.

Oh how I miss those days

, hopefully Quake wars and UT3 bring some of that magic back for the people that don't like it bugger off and play BF2

Gerard · 2 Jun 2007 at 12:35

Curio said:
Because it's part of the "history". If they called it ET: Monkey Wars then I wouldn't expect elements of Quake. As it is, I want hopping, railguns, Strogg, Quad Damage, etc, because it's a Quake game. If you have no interest in the Quake feel then I suggest maybe you don't bother with this game.

I really don't think you get it, it may be a quake game in title but the goal of the game is team orientated vehicle and on foot combat. Why bother making realistic looking characters if you're gonna have them tarding about the map in an unrealistic fashion? If anything this game is an "offshoot" from the standard quake series and shouldn't be bound to what people expect from a snorefest deathmatch game.

If people expect the same sad gimmicks to apply then they'd be as well buying the same game with updated graphics each year because it seems that all some people want. Its not a bit of wonder ID's last 2 games didn't exactly set the world on fire, doom 3 and quake 4 (developed by raven but still an ID game) were decent in sp but totally divebombed in multiplayer, probably becuase the majority that bought them realised they'd played the same multiplayer back in the quake 2 days and id seemingly are afraid to try anything new. If the best they can do is give people quake 4 with a few vehicles lobbed in then it just shows lack of imagination.

1mm3 · 2 Jun 2007 at 14:30

Gerard said:
Snip

Agreed

I think the same principles apply to a lot of the new games that are due to be released. The people that enjoy the previous game in the series, want it to have the same basic gameplay.

Just as an example, my younger brother is a huge halo 2 fan, and all he wants from halo 3 is the same old halo 2 gameplay and is against anything new being implemented, eg. new inventory/ new gametypes etc.. In this case, halo 3 sounds to be the exact same gameplay as halo 2 (constant br headshots/ melee/ grenades) with a few new items/gametypes/ updated gfx

Curio · 2 Jun 2007 at 15:48

Gerard said:
I really don't think you get it, it may be a quake game in title but the goal of the game is team orientated vehicle and on foot combat. Why bother making realistic looking characters if you're gonna have them tarding about the map in an unrealistic fashion? If anything this game is an "offshoot" from the standard quake series and shouldn't be bound to what people expect from a snorefest deathmatch game.

Firstly, if you want "realistic" then stick to BF1942 or MOH. I would hope ET:QW is about taking the basic elements of what makes those games good and then putting a Quake spin on it. Otherwise why not just play BF or MOH? If it's going to carry the Quake name then it's going to have to appeal to fans of Quake to a large degree - and you know how stuck in their ways they are. Q3A didn't have hopping in the demo and what happened? Due to insane pressure from the fan base they stuck it back in.

If people expect the same sad gimmicks to apply then they'd be as well buying the same game with updated graphics each year because it seems that all some people want. Its not a bit of wonder ID's last 2 games didn't exactly set the world on fire, doom 3 and quake 4 (developed by raven but still an ID game) were decent in sp but totally divebombed in multiplayer, probably becuase the majority that bought them realised they'd played the same multiplayer back in the quake 2 days and id seemingly are afraid to try anything new. If the best they can do is give people quake 4 with a few vehicles lobbed in then it just shows lack of imagination.

To be fair, Doom3 was purely SP orientated and I don't think anybody was expecting anything from the MP because Q4 was announced before D3 even shipped, if I remember correctly. Quake4 was more like Q2 in that it was largely about the SP but also had a solid MP side to it. If they had released a rehash of Q3A then I think we could accuse them of missing the boat, but as it is, I don't think they were too far off.

As for "gimmicks"......well that's what makes a series of games what it is. UT has dodge-jumping....Tribes had that sliding around thing going on....it's part of the package. ET:QW might have all the best elements of other similar style games and still have the hopping as well. Why not? If you're only concerned that it looks silly or isn't "realistic" then I have wonder why you would even consider buying a game that carries the Quake name.

Tom|Nbk · 2 Jun 2007 at 16:09

In other news : I can't wait for this game I wish they would ship the damn thing already, people will be calling it vapourware before long

Gerard · 2 Jun 2007 at 16:38

Curio said:
Firstly, if you want "realistic" then stick to BF1942 or MOH. I would hope ET:QW is about taking the basic elements of what makes those games good and then putting a Quake spin on it. Otherwise why not just play BF or MOH? If it's going to carry the Quake name then it's going to have to appeal to fans of Quake to a large degree - and you know how stuck in their ways they are. Q3A didn't have hopping in the demo and what happened? Due to insane pressure from the fan base they stuck it back in.

To be fair, Doom3 was purely SP orientated and I don't think anybody was expecting anything from the MP because Q4 was announced before D3 even shipped, if I remember correctly. Quake4 was more like Q2 in that it was largely about the SP but also had a solid MP side to it. If they had released a rehash of Q3A then I think we could accuse them of missing the boat, but as it is, I don't think they were too far off.

As for "gimmicks"......well that's what makes a series of games what it is. UT has dodge-jumping....Tribes had that sliding around thing going on....it's part of the package. ET:QW might have all the best elements of other similar style games and still have the hopping as well. Why not? If you're only concerned that it looks silly or isn't "realistic" then I have wonder why you would even consider buying a game that carries the Quake name.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that moh or the bf series are in anyway realistic? They focus in an around real events but the gameplay is arcade styled.

As for why i would pick up a quake game, quake wars is suposed to be competition for the battlefield series, according to splash damage bunnyhopping has been turned on and off a few times in the beta testing so far and its not guaranteed to be a part of the final product. Problem is knowing Id they'll end up puting it in just to make the "fans" happy and screw over regular gamers.

An interesting quote i seen a while back was that Tim Willits considered quake 3 his biggest failure, reason being the gameplay was very similar to quake 2 so all those players just jumped in andnewer players hadn't much of a chance. Seems to me id are continuing this trend, cater to their "fans" and let them have the same quake gameplay so this game will most likely be dominated right off the bat by whoever can bounce about like a tool the best. Hardly makes for introducing new players to the game if the onfoot gameplay is literally quake 3 on bigger maps does it?

Last Kronin · 2 Jun 2007 at 16:56

Our ET clan will more than likely be upgrading to this, about 98% sure we will im personally hoping that it will be a cross between ET and BF2142, i like objective based fps rather than kill a thons, as for class, like in ET i will play them all thats the best way to get a feel of the game rather than restricte urself to 1 class and 1 team.

Smalltownboy · 4 Jun 2007 at 13:51

I think we all need a demo of this game and pretty fast. All this waiting is making my atticipation for this game turn flacid. :mad: