Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
First Person Shooters (Games)

Updated UT2004 Demo Available 28

Coneasfast writes "A new Unreal Tournament 2004 demo is available. The new UT2004 demo has all the fixes and updates in the latest full version of UT2004, and also includes two additional maps, ONS-Primeval and CTF-FaceClassic, as well as the Instagib CTF game type. In addition, new demo servers are compatible with full version clients, so if you run a demo server, anyone can join it. The windows version is 282Mb, and the linux version is 77.2Mb." Update: Looks like the site is wrong, the linux client is 275 megs.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Updated UT2004 Demo Available

Comments Filter:
  • I just got an athlon64 and I was dying to run the 64-bit version of ut2004 on it. But I couldn't get the demo to work properly and it turns out there were serious bugs not fixed, which were fixed in the full version.

    Hopefully I they updated the amd64 version too.

    • sad replying to my own post but... BLAH. No updated 64-bit version. At least I could not find one.
      • by RussGarrett ( 90459 ) <russ.garrett@co@uk> on Monday September 27, 2004 @01:54PM (#10364407) Homepage
        It's an integrated installer - from the readme:

        AMD64 vs x86:
        If you install this on a 64-bit version of GNU/Linux, then you'll get the
        64-bit binaries. Otherwise, you'll get the 32-bit ones. You won't get the
        64-bit version unless you've got an amd64-compatible chip and are running
        a 64-bit OS on that chip. If you don't know, then you're on a 32-bit

        Please note that the amd64 binaries are considered experimental at this
        time, as is the entire amd64 Linux system at the time of this writing.
        We accept bug reports for them and strive to fix them, but we don't promise
        stellar performance or stability. You have been warned.

        And indeed:

        russ@russ:~/ut2004demo/System$ file ./ut2004-bin ./ut2004-bin: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, AMD x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.1, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped
    • I had everything running perfect in Unreal 2004 for the longest time. Until I installed the latest Catalyst 4.9 driver for Doom III. Now I play 2 minutes of UT2004 and it just dies. I think more people have ATI Radeon 9800 pro than 64bit processors.

      • Re:Please (Score:3, Informative)

        by hawkbug ( 94280 )
        That sounds like a major driver issue if you ask me. There is a reason I quit buying ATI you know ;) Seriously, not to start a flame war because I know people who have good luck with ATI, but I never have. I have owned several ATI products in the past, and each one of them seemed to have beta-like drivers for the entire time I owned the products. I used to like the AiW products, but half the advertised features never did work for me, always causing a crash, and it took months in between driver updates. I
      • Must be a 9800 specific problem, or maybe it has something to do with your mobo because I'm running the 4.9 beta drivers with no problems for UT2004 on a 9600 pro. What are your AA, and AF settings? I'm still on Direct X 9b, have you installed the 9c?
      • Works fine here. I'm not using the Doom3 beta 4.9's, I'm using the final 4.9s: dm -xp.html?type=xp&prodType=graphic&prod=productsXPd river&submit.x=16&submit.y=7&submit=GO %21
  • I wonder why the Linux demo is so much smaller...
  • Talk about a surprise! I didn't expect them to put Facing Worlds on the *demo*-- that's one of the most popular maps in UT! I've already gone out and bought the full game, but I might just grab the demo to shove onto a CDR/DVDR to take for portable LAN party use.
    • Re:Whoa... (Score:1, Troll)

      by noselasd ( 594905 )
      Why ? That level suck utterly. It looks fancy but I saw no fun whatsoever playing on it.
    • I thought the same thing as you. With Facing Worlds Classic on the demo, the people who buy UT2004 just to play Facing Worlds 24/7 don't have to buy the retail version.

      I approve. Weeds them out. :thumbsup:

  • Why some people run 32-people servers with ONS-Primeval?
  • by billybob ( 18401 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @12:07PM (#10363267)
    I played the original demo for probably 2 months and then bought the full version. The main reason I played and bought the game was for Onslaught. I loved Torlan and all of the ONS levels in the full retial package range from pretty good to damn sweet... EXCEPT for Primeval. This map is just a piece of crap. It seriously feels like it is someone's first ever map, made by Billy (age 7)

    The past few months I was actually playing the demo more than the retail version because I love Torlan so much and just wanted to play that for a while. But now the old demo doesnt work anymore with their master servers, you have to run the new demo, this totally sucks because I do NOT want to play Primeval. Everytime I was on the retail version and this map came up, I would change servers. I'm actually really pissed at them for including such a horrible map.

    Other than that, it's cool they released a new demo with all their updates up til this point.
    • I think I love Torlan and its compact tactics as possible, and like to play demo as it's faster in loading textures and skins than retail (the retail version takes 30 - 60 seconds loading time for each ONS play because of its fat textures and more complicated online coordination)

      But Primeval is not bad IMHO. It's kind of brain-less team death match with some vehicles, just killing each other, it's simple and intensive fight to last very long if teams are even. Sure it often brings lag since many ppl are pa
      • No no no...the level does NOT take a full minute to load. That happens to be the default setting, but anyone who knows anything has already turned the "precache skins" setting off. Even if you have more than 512MB of RAM, it makes no sense to have that setting turned on. If someone joins the game, it takes almost instantly to load just that skin, rather than loading all of them and not using hardly any.

        I don't mind Primeval actually, though I didn't like it at first. After playing it for a while, you start
    • I tend to agree. ONS-Primeval is the worst of the stock maps, whereas ONS-Torlan is one of the best. I personally feel that they should have gone with ONS-Arctic Stronghold or ONS-Crossfire. Of course, with Crossfire they'd have to add in the target painter which they may not want to do. Arctic Stronghold doesn't add any vehicles or weapons that weren't already in the demo, and it's a far better map than Primeval.
    • I have to disagree. Primeval is one of my favourite Onslaught maps. It's probably the most evenly contested map there is in the game and you can always guarantee that it'll be all out mayhem.

      I agree that it's simple, but that's half the fun. Everyone meets at the middle node and it makes for a fun, intense battle.
  • It changes completly the onslaught gameplay, but in the tactical sense of it. Awesome game!
    Games are longuer, more balanced between the winning and the losing team, and the teamplay is even more important. The best coordinated team will win.
    Even the redeemer isnt that important anymore, and I have already seen many games were nobody would lose time to go for it, as it would mean losing one or two nodes immediatly.
  • by dn15 ( 735502 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @08:56PM (#10368454)
    The original post neglected to mention that there is also an updated Mac version of the demo [].
  • Before UT2004 I used to play Wolfenstein ET quite abit. I was always on, one of the few servers that ran a full 64-player campaign. it was full-out war and it was fun.

    But UT2004 maxes out at a wimpy 32 players. Surely it can go higher. Some of the 10+ meg maps have more than enough room for 64 players to duke it out.

    C'mon Atari, get with it!

God doesn't play dice. -- Albert Einstein