Difference between revisions of "Talk:Unreal Tournament"

Latest revision as of 09:28, 24 April 2011

Reception states that, "it is still one of the most played games on the Internet." Is that statement supported by evidence? The game clearly still has a significant body of support but I find it hard to believe that it is still "one of the most played games on the Internet". In any event, unless the statement is qualified by a date, it will sooner or later be incorrect.

It's corroborated by GameSpy stats. It should probably be date noted, though, such as "As of July 2007, it is still..". Also, the wording on the part about playing original Unreal levels needs some clarification as you didn't need OldSkool Amp'd to play Unreal levels, just to go through the Unreal campaign. --Sir Brizz 14:24, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry for worrying away at this, but I have checked the Gamespy statistics page several times this evening (28 July 2007) and Unreal Tournament has consistently been hovering around 15th or 16th on the list. That is a very impressive performance for such an old game but it is not "one of the most played games on the Internet". It is possible that I'm just seeing a snapshot effect but if not (and I will check again over the next few days) then I suggest we look for a better wording. --IronMonkey 0030, 29 July 2007 (UTC+1)

You don't think 15/16 out of hundreds of games is one of the most played? o_O --Sir Brizz 20:32, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Well, this was a list that omitted (mongst other games) EQ2 & WoW. How about, "As of July 2007, Unreal Tournament remained consistently within the top 20 most actively played online games as tracked by Gamespy. This is an impressive feat for a game that is almost eight years old at the time of writing"? --IronMonkey 1249, 29 July 2007 (UTC+1)

I dunno, it seems unnecessary to me. I guess we should get more feedback. --Sir Brizz 10:12, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

I'm content to wait and see if there is any more feedback. Would it be worth moving the discussion to the BuF LA thread in order to get that feedback? Any change should be by consensus. --IronMonkey 0108, 30 July 2007 (UTC+1)

In general, stick to discussing this kind of stuff on the talk pages. Not everyone who will visit here also visits the forums. --Haarg 20:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

Teams: I don't think the Black Legion belongs in the UT section, unless I'm missing something. UTNemesis 23:03, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

I'm actually not sure about that. The Necris team has been called the Black Legion since UT2004 at least, so I dunno. --Sir Brizz 23:56, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

I distinctly remember Black Legion being a UT99 Team, and I'm quite certain they were Necris. Definitely should keep it as such.

Also, please remember to sign any comments you make with Four Tildes (~) so we can easily keep track of who posted what, where. --Dark Pulse 00:50, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

UT2004 referenced the UT99 necris team as the "Necris Black Legion" in several files; for quick proof, open a command prompt, cd to the 2k4 system dir, and type find /i "Necris Black Legion" *.* and see for yourself. Therefore, that team should be on the page Necris Black Legion and the Nightmare Black Legion should stay as-is, though they should certainly have things at the top saying "Did you mean Necris Black Legion?" or whatever. Gnomre 01:05, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, the UT section should reference the Necris Black Legion, instead of the Nightmare Black Legion right? Or are the Necris and the Nightmare races somehow related? UTNemesis 23:07, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

Looking for Skaarj image I ran into UT postmortem I think it may contain some interesting info for the article. Lynx 19:53, 4 August 2007 (EDT)

Music

MOST of the tracks have obvious credits or credits in the sample list. Michiel van den Bos told me who did the rest, but unfortunately I didn't have logs of the conversation (Personal Chat wasn't logged at the time... :( ) and so I'm not 100% sure on some of these, but I'm pretty sure these are what he told me. I've marked these tracks with [?] at the end.

If you read this, Michiel, feel free to fix them. And then message me again. :p

Oh, and the borked spacing on some tracks is how the track is titled in the actual module - please don't fix it, as it's "correct". --Dark Pulse 18:51, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

FireBreath is the real name of FireBr. --UBerserker

Original UT on two CDs?

Are we sure the original UT came on two CDs? I know GOTY did, but the second disk was mods, mutators, and the S3TC textures - the actual game content was all on the first disc. If it all fit on one disc, why would the original release need two CDs? --Dark Pulse 07:39, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

I think it's on 1 CD, and GOTY's on 2. --GreatEmerald 11:27, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

The original UT retail release (Version 400) came (at least in the UK) on 2 CDs. The second CD contained the S3 high resolution textures. I still have the disks. IronMonkey

Some sources claim that installing the demo then applying the full version's patch actually turns the demo into the full version. Can anyone prove or disprove this?--Amitakartok 14:59, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Contradiction?

The introduction paragraph says "Development began sometime in 1998 after the poor reception to Unreal's multiplayer component as a multiplayer expansion pack for Unreal."

But the first paragraph of the History section says "When it was realized that the multi-player aspect of Unreal was popular and something that people sought after, Epic began working on a multiplayer expansion pack for the game to fix the problems with online play.". Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but, is this a contradiction of sorts?

Console maps question

Can someone confirm how much accurate are the maps of the Console Bonus Pack regarding the console exclusive maps? Can those be used for the info in the console-exclusive maps page?