Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) First Person Shooters (Games) Entertainment Games

Unreal II Demo Released 275

Posted by simoniker from the last-train-to-na-pali dept.
G9o writes "The demo for Unreal II: The Awakening has been released. The 153MB file is available for download at Fileplanet or FileShack. Originally Epic said they weren't going to release a demo for it, but perhaps the mediocre reception changed their mind?" In related news, French games site FactorNews are hosting a press document that claims "Unreal II" for Xbox, "Unreal Assault" for PS2 and "Unreal Tournament 2004" for PC will all be shown by Infogrames at E3, albeit possibly behind closed doors.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Unreal II Demo Released More

Unreal II Demo Released

Comments Filter:

  • A better place to download (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Control-Z ( 321144 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:33PM (#5858845)

    I usually download whatever I can from http://3dgamers.com You don't get all the crap that FilePlanet puts you through.

    • Re:A better place to download (Score:5, Funny)

      by paulpuddles ( 669120 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:34PM (#5858854)
      Yeah, if I wanted to wait in queue for hours, i could just go on IRC and get the whole thing ;)
    • The Fileplanet subscription servers aren't so bad, and only $6/mo. I'm getting the file at 75KB/s.

      The site works fine with Mozilla, too.

      • Re:A better place to download (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:55PM (#5859002)
        $72 a year to download game demos. Sorry fella, I gotta eat.

      • Re:A better place to download (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Gojira Shipi-Taro ( 465802 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:54PM (#5859323) Homepage
        $6/month for one service, that I would rarely use. Doesn't make sense.

        I see a lot of "subscription services" starting up with unrealistic expectations. How many people can afford to pay $5 a month for EVERYTHING that they use occasionally? not fucking many. One reason why I haven't subscribed to WineX. I dont' want to encourage that. I don't want to encourage media companies to try to charge me $3.50/ week to access content that I'd rather purchase outright for a reasonable price (see DVDs) either.

        If Epic or any other publisher really expects to continue to use demos to promote their product THEY NEED TO FOOT THE FUCKING BANDWIDTH BILL. Just like in the early days of Quake, et al. A free demo isn't a free demo if you're bludgeoned into paying a subscription fee, or flooded with unnecessary Java download applets.

        Lots of companies seem to think that subscriptions, or "software as a service" >spit are a sure way to "guaranteed revenue" in this post dotcom economy. They haven't done the fucking math, or they wouldn't be trying to charge $5 and more for the subscriptions. If you want an GUARANTEED revenue,l you're going to have to lower your per-head expectations. Because once EVERYONE is wanting their $5 of flesh a month, people will have to start making choices about what they reallty want/need, and YOUR product may be the one that gets flushed down the toilet.
        • Fine, don't pay for it. It's no big deal. You can still download the demo. It's not like they're restricting you.

          However, you do have the choice to pay what amounts to VERY little money to get better service.

          Damn, I can't believe how many people missed that basic point. :)
          • The problem is (at least with FIleplanet) I have to allow them to run a Java app, and I have ot wait in line. Now the line thing wouldn't be a big deal, if it would start the download when my place in line arrived, but LAST time I tried to get something from fileplanet, I went away and did something else. Because I wasn't sitting in front of my computer watching the advertisements in the queue window, when my time came, I wasn't there, and it eventually timed out. I lost my place and had to start over.

            Not
        • Hmm, looks like the game publishers should just start to put their demos on the big p2p networks.
          That could be the death of fileplanet et al.

      • Re:A better place to download (Score:4, Interesting)

        by WasterDave ( 20047 ) <davep AT zedkep DOT com> on Thursday May 01, 2003 @11:06PM (#5859377)
        Doesn't bother me, really. I click through three or four boxes that say "you're joining the queue with 350 other lamers" and two hours later the download starts. SFW? Play Ut2k3, netsurf, email some old friends, sometimes I even go outside.

        Dave

    • Another place to download (Score:2, Informative)

      by Sim9 ( 632381 )
      Also mirrored:

      http://editingarchive.com/view.php?ID=332

      No registration needed!

  • purple argh (Score:4, Funny)

    by wadiwood ( 601205 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:34PM (#5858851) Journal
    who knew purple could be so bright and its my favourite colour but I don't think I can handle this shade of unreal purple.

    • Re:purple argh (Score:2, Insightful)

      by deadsaijinx* ( 637410 )
      I don't know, I like it, kinda gives you that surreal look. Personally, i think its nice and easy on the eyes, which is good if you look at a screen all day. What would be cool though is if the slashdot logo was in old arcade block style. i would like that.

      now to go offtopic, is it just me, or can we no long hit the anon on for our posts?
    • Of course. In true slashdot style, they still aren't using a stylesheet, and still not hover colours! Hover gives user feedback.

      Personaly, I's just leave link colors alone (except add a hover color), especialy since purple is a common vistied-link color. It's not like we'd miss much. But I have to say, the logo does look a lot geekier with the plasma-glow.

    • At least you know where you are. If you're screaming 'AAAAHHHHHH!!!!! My EYES!!!!' then you can be quite certain you are in the games section.

  • maybe? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by deadsaijinx* ( 637410 ) <animemeken@hotmail.com> on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:36PM (#5858867) Homepage
    Just my thoughts here, but releasing the demo probably won't help. Don't get me wrong, I loved Unreal, and I play UT2003 at least once a week, but Unreal2 is just crappy. Wait, here me through. The game has spiders in it, and that tells us ONE thing, they ran out of ideas. Sorry, but it's true, they just couldn't muster the quality you want in a game. So, in my way of thinking, a demo of a bad game isn't going to boost sales, since people will see just how mediocre the game is.

    • Re:maybe? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Jenova ( 27902 )
      Its a little bland. Most parts of the story line seem copied out of other FPS.

      Kept expecting Sacifice in-game music to start playing when I was playing the Sulferon mission. The graphics looks so much like those on James' map.

      Graphics are nice though.

    • Re:maybe? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Slime-dogg ( 120473 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @12:55AM (#5859830) Journal

      Conversely: Epic will put the single best level in the demo (maybe the defense level w/ sniper rifles and artillary). Then people will get it, be wowed by the amazing graphics, have their heart pounding because they think that it's so exciting...

      Then they'll buy the game and find that it has a thin plot that doesn't seem to go anywhere. Seriously, the plot is the same as Zelda... mainly get pieces of this miraculous old-technology and then face the evil of all evils.

      :Yawn: The parent has it right. The game content sucks. The presentation is astounding. I justify my purchase of it as supporting the research and development of the engine. (Heh... kinda like Wolf3d-the original, Doom, Heretic, Quake, Quake 3......) Sorry, but the original ID games have the same problem. They were brand new to the market, which is why they did so well. I play the original Doom now, and I know where every secret door is, I know how to get every single item, I can play on Nightmare with custom respawn and beat the game. It just doesn't have a plot.

    • I'll tell you want if U2 was a girl she'd be the prettiest one at the party, of course if you tried to talk to her you'd realize in an instant she's all looks and no brains and has the personality of a stale piece of bread.

      The graphics where simply amazing, but the plot and the game play seems to have been put together by the B-movie/game crowd.

      Tell you what though, I'm looking forward to seeing who leases the engine and spends more of their budget on content and talent without having to recreate the wh

    • There was no demo, so I shamelessly warezed the full version.... hear me out. I got about average-demo-length through it (couple of levels) and gave up. It was easy... it sucked. Nothing new. The weapons felt useless, there was no 'feedback' to the game. Never once did I feel like changing weapons, there seemed to be little tactical reasons (well except for the flamethrower). AI was just plain dumb :P

      Great engine... I love the Unreal engine, and work on modding it... but... but.... aaaaaagh! This was meant

  • Ahh, the old days.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Masem ( 1171 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:38PM (#5858880)
    I remember way back when when they released demos BEFORE the game hit the shelves, as to give people a chance to play it before buying and as to hopefully make them buy it at full price rather than stale bargain bin prices.

    Mind you, 100meg+ demos aren't very EASY to transfer nowadays, much less with the terrible state of sites like FilePlanet, etc. (Has anyone considered a positive use of P2P to split such large files over several clients?)...

    • Re:Ahh, the old days.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by deadsaijinx* ( 637410 ) <animemeken@hotmail.com> on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:50PM (#5858971) Homepage
      It's really for marketing, it makes more sense to just feed them little bits and peices, maybe one level before it's released. maybe. They turn plenty of profit keeping the lid on it. Of course, for those epic games that everyone wants to play (DOOM3), a demo would just kinda ruin it. I wouldn't download a demo for DOOM3, it would just kinda ruin the fun of playing it for the first time once i've boughten it.

      on a lighter note, you can easily find the demo on a p2p network. Just search for "full insert game title here", and 90% of those files will be demos.
      • I always DL demos before buying a game, even if I already know I'm going to buy it. This is especially important for a game like Doom 3 - I need to know if my current computer will handle it, or if I need to run out and upgrade everything.

        Who am I kidding... of course I'm going to need a new computer for Doom 3... Just hope 4 processor Opterons and Dual Radeon 9800 Pro prices drop significantly before the years out! ;)

      • Did the original Doom demo ruin it for the full-version? Heck no... I think it was one of the first games we actually bought. And doom2... well people just had to get that one for the double-barrel shotgun and neato stuff there too.
        Same goes to DN3D, played the demo, got the full.

        Chop off a few items/weapons, give it a few levels to play (maybe only "demo" levels and not actually game ones), trim the multiplayer, and throw some "this is what you could have" eye candy in the end.

        Seems to me that I bough
        • Half-Life (the original) did it right - the demo included a completely new mini-adventure, without actually "spoiling" the full game. You got a good taste of what the engine could do, you got a taste of the weapons, enemies, and evironments... and when you played the full version, you didn't just blow through the first [N] levels saying "Been there, done that".

    • Re:Ahh, the old days.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ewhenn ( 647989 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:05PM (#5859068)
      (Has anyone considered a positive use of P2P to split such large files over several clients?)

      Im not trolling here. If the company wants to boost sales (or attempt to) by releasing a demo, they should be the ones to supply the bandwith for it. They should not rely, or expect, a user base to pay for an internet connection to distribute their files, so they can profit.
      • Oh, I totally agree. EA Games is the worst at this. They release SO many games, and SO many patches, and then have the nerve to foist their customers off on these pay-to-download services like FilePlanet and Gamespy. Only their Australian subsidiary offers patches without making you subscribe to 3rd party services. What's the sense in this? Is EA getting kickbacks from the download services for putting out patches?
    • Has anyone considered a positive use of P2P to split such large files over several clients?

      uhmmm ... bittorrent [bitconjurer.org] anyone?

    • Mind you, 100meg+ demos aren't very EASY to transfer nowadays, much less with the terrible state of sites like FilePlanet, etc. (Has anyone considered a positive use of P2P to split such large files over several clients?)...

      BitTorrent?

  • Yep, it'll be a good game (Score:4, Funny)

    by Drummer_Dan ( 648348 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:38PM (#5858884) Journal
    This screen is enough to tell me it's good: http://www.unreal2.com/screens/pc/2b.jpg [unreal2.com]

    Now I just have to stand in line at file planet for 60 mins.

    • Re:Yep, it'll be a good game (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 19Buck ( 517176 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:51PM (#5858972) Homepage
      Now I just have to stand in line at file planet for 60 mins.

      The Unreal engine has never looked better if you ask me, and the ragdoll physics just rock.

      The story however, completely sucks. Absolutely nothing memorable or original about it. enemy AI is dumber than a brick (of course) as well.

      Weapons are completely uninspired. your starting weapon is quite good, and throughout the game, you pick up quite a few new ones, but there is just no overwhelming tactical reasons to switch weapons at all.

      Save your money till this one is in the bargain bin.

    • This screen is enough to tell me it's good

      that depends, can i extract this model to maya like you can for UT2003? Cuz, well, the tournament girls are just too ugly, and the one that aren't ugly wear all those clothes, i mean, what's up with that?!
      Seriously, what's the point of exporting the models if they aren't hot? YOWZA!
    • Unfortunately, that's pretty much the only good thing about the game. The graphics were spectacular, but I think that's all they spent time on. The gameplay sucks. The story sucks. Everything felt pointless. The original Unreal kept me glued to my seat wanting to keep on playing all the way to the end with the queen. I got bored of playing this game after defending the ship from whatever those weirdos were while the wannabe c3po alien guy acted like a retard. Seriously. Save your money. This game sucked. It
    • There aren't enough polys in those boobs. Boobs don't really turn me on if they look like geometric figures. We need NURBS man, do you know what I'm saying?

  • UT 2 and UT 2003 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ninja Programmer ( 145252 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:39PM (#5858889) Homepage
    Bizarre -- I've already bought and finished both games. Not bad, just kind of short.

  • Bittorrent!!! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperCal ( 549671 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @09:39PM (#5858890) Homepage
    If slashdot would offer a bittorrent streams for subscribers... Anyway, anyone already got it want to set up a torrent?
    • Exactly. That, and the long-desired mirroring feature.

      I'm already paying them $5/mo to get my msteeeerious future, they might as well take a little more manage a torrent server for me.

      Now I guess they just need to hack in authentication to the BitTorrent protocol. :)

  • wow, they must be running out of ideas (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I loved the original unreal. I really like Unreal Tournament, i literally worshiped that cd. I liked UT 2003, it was a good game and given its nature, it was hard to make bad since it was mainly concentrated on killing people/dumb bots. The real problem with FPS game sequels (especially those who are mostly single player) is that no matter how hard the authors try, its never going to be as good as the first. Its just like movies, where they try to milk as much as possible, hoping that new special effects /

    • they ran out of ideas over a year ago (Score:5, Interesting)

      by August_zero ( 654282 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:09PM (#5859086)
      Sadly, Unreal Tournament seems to have been the high watermark for this paticular franchise. I bought UT2003, and i liked it, but it was the same game, albeit with nicer graphics of course.

      What's peeved me the most, is I remember playing Unreal 1 and UT for the first time, and being impressed with the array of weapons you had to play with. They were not the typical pistol-shotgun-machinegun-rocket cliches that most every other FPS had accepted as the gospel of arsenals. You had a goofy blade that could bounce off walls, a Snot-Gun, a 6 barrled rocket launcher and so on. You get UT2003 and there is nothing new (the ion-gun doesn't count since it's in only about a quarter of the maps)

      The unreal 2 pops up and well the series seems then to be in trouble.

      • Re:they ran out of ideas over a year ago (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @01:13AM (#5859917)
        UT 2003 wasn't really intended to be anything new. What Epic has realised is that with most multi-player FPSes, there are two big places to make money: the mods and the engine. UT 2003, like the orignal, is very, very moddable. There are already tons of mods out there and tons more will come. Go find yourself one you like. All the 3d FPSes I've ever played online have been for a mod, not for the orignal game.

        The other, and probably even bigger way Epic expects it to make them money is the engine. UT 2003 is the for sale, show off version of the new Unreal engine. Many companies are intrested in liscencing this engine technology for use in their games. Splinter Cell, for example, is an Unreal engine game using the new UT 2003 codebase.

        So for their purposes, just doing UT over again and better was enough. Look at Quake and Quake 2. There was nothing new with Quake 2 single player, same old shit. The built-in multiplayer was the same stuff too. However, it had nifty new graphics and got modded all over the place.

    • Re:wow, they must be running out of ideas (Score:5, Funny)

      by exhilaration ( 587191 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:28PM (#5859202)
      i literally worshiped that cd.

      Hmmm..... so you literally worshipped that CD, eh? Can you share your philosophy and rituals (human sacrifices perhaps?) with the rest of us? Can your CD perform miracles? Perhaps turning water into Mountain Dew? Those of us seeking guidance thank you!

    • is that no matter how hard the authors try, its never going to be as good as the first...

      Err, Doom II, Doom III ?

  • This is getting old (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gurnb ( 80987 ) * on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:06PM (#5859074) Homepage
    I must be the only one that doesn't have to have the latest and the greatest.
    I don't want a game that requires me to have to upgrade my current machine to the hilt just to play it.
    The original UNREAL & UNREAL Tourn. were great, and they still run on my machine.

    My reward for upgrading my machine and getting the latest version of UT will still bring the same result. I'll be FRAG'd repeatedly & often. But that doesn't mean I'll have anymore fun than I do now with a version I already have. No.

    I find myself enjoying games like Out Of The Park 5 (www.ootp5.com) where it's all about the game play/story, NOT the 1.5 trillion Polygons that were drawn on my screen in the last 30 miliseconds

    I think I'm getting old. . .I've spent to much time away from playing games on my PC 24/7, and mistakingly developed a life!

    • No, what gets old (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 )
      Is the people that whine everytime some new technology comes out, or something that requires it. Look, there are perfectly legitmate reasons to want better eye candy, physics, AI and so on. Personally, I think almost all games could benefit from a better look and feel. You don't have to sacrafice anything for better graphics, you can keep the same game and just make it look better.

      As for game types, well know what? Different epople have different tastes. Some people like twitch games, it is fun to play a g
    • ...and mistakingly developed a life!

      This is not good, but I think you're still in the early stages. If you act quickly, there is a chance that you may be cured!!
    • For me, it's less about having the latest-and-greatest, and more about paying what I think it's worth. For me, it's a rare game that's worth the brand-new retail price of $40-50 (or more), but there are plenty of games that I think are worth the $10-20 I end up paying when I get them. The downfall? Stores are keeping fewer older titles around (other than best-sellers like Half-Life et al), so it might be out of print, sending me to eBay or just doing without.

      Although eBay still hasn't been much help in

  • the demo released ?!?! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Archfeld ( 6757 ) * <treboreel@live.com> on Thursday May 01, 2003 @10:07PM (#5859075) Journal
    I finished playing the PC version of the game a month ago...a Great engine, a moderately decent story with some sub par level design.@ or 3 of the levels really shine, the rest are mediocre filler at best. Expect to see other game companies put the engine to MUCH BETTER USE, but hey that was what EPIC has done all along, create the best game engine, not the best game :)
    Still it was MUCH better than the Cartoon network version of Unreal Tournament.
    • My idea is for a company to spend all of their energy working on an engine. Don't worry about the front-end -- let someone else do that. Charge a royalty for use of the engine, and then reap the benefits. More of a B2B idea.

      Or, they could sell the engine directly to the consumer and let people build front-ends for cost or free. However in this model there is more chance of failure as you can imagine an engine costing about 100 bucks and the havoc a P2P sharing of said engine would do to the poor accou

  • I've just started playing it, and so far I'm very underwhelmed by it all... so far the actual gameplay is boring me, and the graphics aren't thrilling me at all. The skins on the ships in the cutscenes are particularly amaturish looking.

    What I would like to know about the graphics though, is it because of my lackluster graphics card? I have a Geforce4MX which I know is starting to get to the point of being old... but...

    The thing that gripes me is that other games, such as RTCW or NOLF2 look absolutely fan
    • I think a large part of it might be your graphics card. I don't know about Unreal II specifically, haven't played it yet (I'm getting the demo). However I have played UT 2003, which is the showcase for the new engine. On a GeForce 4 Ti 4400 the graphics are, to put it mildly, stunning. It is just a great looking game in just about every respect.

      IF you want another game that showcases the latest Unreal engine technology, go check out Splinter Cell. X-box or PC, both use the Unreal engine.
    • I have to agree with the other reply in this thread - the Geforce4MX was old technology before it was even released. It was really a sad step backwards, and terribly underwhelming. It gets whipped by a fast Geforce 3 in some cases.

      On the other hand, graphics certainly don't make the game. It's too bad Unreal games just aren't fun.

  • Reason for demo (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kdgibson ( 626349 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @11:03PM (#5859364)
    Here's why I think they released a demo of it. It's evidently already out, and since it sucks (according to posts i've read) it hasn't been a good seller. Maybe they think releasing a free demo to people will encourage them to buy the full version. Just a thought.
    • No, a lot of people complained that there wasn't going to be a playable demo.
    • Here's why I think they released a demo of it. It's evidently already out, and since it sucks (according to posts i've read) it hasn't been a good seller. Maybe they think releasing a free demo to people will encourage them to buy the full version. Just a thought.
      Well, they could have made a demo that didn't suck nuts. I spent about an hour and a half grabbing it. Well, an hour waiting in life, and a half hour downloading it. It was shit. It was one very unimaginative level with bad guys that resemble

  • Could all the criticism (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Thursday May 01, 2003 @11:10PM (#5859396) Journal
    Be based on the fact that FPS GAMES ARE BORING?

    I mean, all this "the story stinks", "the levels are the same". This can all be said about any FPS game that comes out. This can be said about Doom 3 even before it comes out.

    Same old run around and shoot, all thats new is eye candy.

    People keep paying for FPS and then compaining "this one sucks!"

    FPS games just aren't fun. Get over it.
    • I wouldn't say "FPS games aren't fun". I haven't bought one in a long time (although I just picked up Postal 2 today), but I spent a couple years playing Quake and its sequels, did the Clan thing, kicked some ass, had some fun. Tested some big mods for some good guys (Hi Monstro Brukes). The only reason that I don't play anymore is I simply don't have the TIME to stay in competitive form.

      As much as people will deny it, being competitive in your typical FPS requires as much preparation as any traditionally
    • If you can play the following games and tell me that they were not at least engaging and fresh then I'll agree with you.

      Thief
      Deus Ex
      System Shock 2
    • If you want something different, try BattleField 1942. It is not just running around with a gun. You can get in tanks, jeeps, airplanes, battleships and submarines. I think adding vehicles adds a whole lot to an FPS game.
    • That's because a good FPS is immersive. You turn the lights off, get into, and the interface makes you a killer, not a guy clicking on shit. If you've never felt the adrenaline surge of a good run, never felt the demon getting unleashed in a game of deathmatch, well it's no wonder you're bored. I have to put up with the same complaints every time my friend and I get excited about a new FPS...we love that feeling, it's something you don't get from any other video game, it's the closest to a real OUTDOOR S
    • "FPS games just aren't fun. Get over it."

      I think you're wrong. Hackneyed plotlines, cliche'd presentation, repetitive gameplay aren't fun and they never have been.

      Doom - outstanding game, novelty value, suspense, great music.
      System Shock II - scared the crap outa me. Wonderful game.
      Halflife - great plot, great presentation.
      MGS2, Thief, Giants, etc. not to mention all the ones that are truly great online, CS, GR, AA, etc. - there are quite a few very good FPS games out there.
      Granted, they are dwarfed by
    • I disagree, I loved Halo and that has to be one of the most inspired FPS's I've ever seen... Only Half-Life can come close to matching it... The problem with most FPS games is they lack real challenge... It's all just run & gun...

      They fall to the fantasy that you can just run into a firefight & come out the sole survivor... It doesn't work that way though... & games liek Half-Life & Halo are about that.. They may not be super realistic, but you have to use your wits to survive (Well at leas
  • As a Mac gamer (I know, har har, but I have OS X suckas :P), I don't really bother trying to keep up with what's the latest and greatest coming out on the Windows gaming scene. From what I know, UT2k3 was released not too long ago. Now Unreal II? Are the games really that different?
    • Bitter that you can't play it? ;)

      Just kidding.

      There is no real technical difference, the both use the latest version of what is called the Unreal engine. So does Splinter Cell. It is Epic's latest and greatest engine technology.

      Now as for the games, UT 2003 is a multi-player only type game. It has a single player mode, but it is just MP maps and gametypes against bots. It also comes with a load of tolls so you can mod it to your heart's content (full featured scripting language, awesome map editor and a
  • Unreal 2 has been out for a while and was summarily tanked by pretty much every critic out there. Simply put, the game is no fun to play, it's basically just a rehash of every FPS to come before it and offers absolutely no innovation. Nevermind the action is far from "fast and furious" and the weapons really aren't that inventive. The only somewhat cool weapon in the game is found on the very last stage and you only get to use it like twice. The "story" is AWFUL. The characters are total cliches. The levels
  • It took an hour for me to get to start downloading it from the FilePlanet link, but now that it's started I'm getting speeds of 180 KB/s. I think the limit on my cable modem connection is 200 KB/s or so, so it's basically giving me full bandwidth.

    Warning: it told me the wait time was 7 minutes when I first clicked on it, and it actually took over an hour. I got to watch Friends and the president (co-opting Will and Grace) on my ReplayTV in the meantime.

    For those of you pissed that the president can

  • 150megs for THAT?!?! (Score:2, Informative)

    by iamhassi ( 659463 )
    The demo was only 10 minutes long! And there's a 10 minute non-skipable video at the beginning at that!

    What a crock.

    • Now you know why they didn't release the demo before the game was released. I imagine that releasing a demo then would've been unwise since it probably would have hurt sales.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Hey, the real version was only twice that!!
      Seriously though, the full version, I finished in a night, from beginning to end, on normal level.
      I went throuigh afterwards, and tried to alter certain events to see if I'd missed sidelines, and nope. Nothing changable.. Try as hard as you can, they're merely scripted events.
      The idea of putting out a Demo that's shorter.. Whoah.. They must be putting a tenth of a level out there to show you how pretty the engine can be, but nothing to really play.
  • Hate to sound like a troll, but first things first...Epic didn't make Unreal 2, just the engine.

    Blame Legend for the demo coming out well after the game (they weren't sure they wanted to release one) and for the game not being that great (well, I should warn I haven't played the game but am very disappointed to say I haven't heard many positive things about the actual game's value and challenge).
  • check out oldunreal.com *especially* if you have a Nvidia based card as the guy's driver work wonders.

    I played thru Unreal again...and it was a blast.

    Unreal tournament took a while to grow on me.

    Heh, thanks to a /. link I downloaded and installed jdoom (OpenGL version w/ transparency/particles) and quite honestly I've never had so much fun playing doom 1/2 in single player.

    Jaw dropping, considering its age and this is a hacked up/rewritten version.
    I wonder if doom III will even compare?

    It just seem lik
  • Because Unreal II sucked, that's why. It had a plot that's barely thicker than a human hair, uninspiring level design, unsatisfying weapons, unskipable cutscenes you really don't want to see again, very little atmosphere, cringeworthy dialogue, and barely existant AI which makes it just another shoot-and-drool exercise.

    PC Zone said "This is no three hour no-brainer" when they reviewed it (and gave it an insane 94%). And, you know what? They're right: it's a four hour no-brainer.

    Never mind. Half-Life II

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close