Quakewars receives unprecedented preview
•
1 Dec 2006, 13:39
•
News
Today my copy of PCZone magazine arrived through the letterbox, its usual 3 days ahead of the shop delivery dates. Removing the plastic packaging and cardboard support I had a good look at the cover, noting with interest their month's chosen subject: Enemy Territory - Quakewars.
"The shooter that obliterates Battlefield!" yelled the banner, and quickly flicking to page 50 I saw what can only be described as a mammoth preview. PCZone is a magazine notorious for its hardline review and refusal to be swayed by industry pressure, delivering definitive and above all honest depictions of the games they play. To hear "quake zero with Wolf ET style gameplay" is very reassuring. Anyway, I of course scanned all the pages, you can read each of them in high-resolution by clicking on the thumbnails below.
SCANS REMOVED AT THE REQUEST OF FUTURE PUBLISHING AND PCZONE
"The shooter that obliterates Battlefield!" yelled the banner, and quickly flicking to page 50 I saw what can only be described as a mammoth preview. PCZone is a magazine notorious for its hardline review and refusal to be swayed by industry pressure, delivering definitive and above all honest depictions of the games they play. To hear "quake zero with Wolf ET style gameplay" is very reassuring. Anyway, I of course scanned all the pages, you can read each of them in high-resolution by clicking on the thumbnails below.
SCANS REMOVED AT THE REQUEST OF FUTURE PUBLISHING AND PCZONE
BF2 is all about camping around flags and a scattered battlefield, no real frontlines. Quake Wars has a concentrated frontline which shifts during the match. It also has a great solo assignment system so even de biggest noob knows what to do in a match and be helpfull for the team.
Quake Wars will set a new standard for teambased FPS.
I played it at Game Convention and am in close contact with the devs. This game will rock!!
www.quake-wars.eu
Hallo Arnout
:)
No i registered because i read lots of bullshit and couldn't resist replying.
Just noticed you have regged at quake-wars.eu, welcome :)
www.quake-wars.eu
but where is page 51?
2. - the name is still 'et'
2. any person that has served in the military can tell you that 'enemy territory' is a general term used in the fields. Just like 'Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory', this game is called 'Enemy Territory: Quake Wars'. Absolutely no clear connection, besides containing the same words.
If I want to put a birthmessage in the newspaper, but they don't have a page for that, should I put it on the page that tells me who passed away this week?
- Same developer
- Developers want the game to be a bit like W:ET..
+ I won't say the gameplay will be a lot like W:ET but I think it well be.
Wouldnt it be allowed to post Battlefield 1942. Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 2142 in a regular Battlefield topic
Go stewie, jij zal het nog ver schoppen in je leven!
This discussion isn't about "there aren't connections between the 2 games", this discussion is about "is ET:QW directly related to W:ET, and therefor ETQW is a sequel of ET, and therefor this topic must be placed under "news:ET" ?.
I'm not denying that there are no resemblances.
So please: read before you say anything.
Is it SO hard to see that W:ET is about Germans fighting against Americans, and that ETQW is based on the QUAKE story "humans against stroggs"? Is it really that hard?
Is it so hard to see the word "Quake" in "Enemy Territory: Quake Wars"?
And yes, there are some similar things between these two games, but that doesn't make ETQW a sequel of it. In COD you can use an MP-40, just like in ET, and in both games you are playing as a team against a team, but should we put all the COD news in the ET section as well?
Ik zit al tig keer mijn visie uit te leggen, en het enige dat ik terug krijg als antwoord is "je mist hersencellen", en "je bent eigenwijs". Wanneer ga je stampvoeten?
Je eigen standpunten motiveren is te lastig voor je?
Dat jij alleen maar kunt reageren door te zeggen dat ik geen argumenten aanbreng, is een dooddoener. En het feit dat jij mijn argumenten niet ziet, draagt alleen maar bij aan mijn opmerking dat jij meer grijze hersencellen nodig hebt.
Ik zie je argumenten wel hoor, en ik weerleg ze zelfs.
Of heb je daar over heen gelezen, en alleen "je zult het ver schoppen" gelezen? Het is sneu dat je het wel normaal vindt om tegen iemand te zeggen dat hij meer hersencellen moet halen, maar dat je gelijk begint te janken als ik een suggestieve opmerking maak.
Wie maakt zich nu belachelijk?
Wie zegt dat ik het woord 'eigenwijs' heb afgeleid door het door jouw eerder genoemde 'ignorant'?
En van dat tweede snap ik helemaal geen ene grafkanker. Tuurlijk heb ik ze gezien. Als ik ze niet had gezien had ik geen weerleggend antwoord gegeven. Of bedoelde je dat niet?
Maar ik sta hier m'n tijd te verdoen aan iemand die zijn gelijk probeert te halen over een door hem zelf aangesneden onderwerp, dan het oorspronkelijk begonnen discussie, namelijk "behoort een spel als ETQW in een ET rubriek te staan?".
Voor de rest heb ik niks meer aan waarde toe te voegen, totdat je mij een goed argument geeft waarom jij denkt dat ETQW als een vervolg op ET mag worden beschouwd. Is dat te veel gevraagd, of ga je nu weer schreeuwen dat ik het allemaal niet snap?
Jij schreef eerder:
"Ik zit al tig keer mijn visie uit te leggen, en het enige dat ik terug krijg als antwoord is "je mist hersencellen", en "je bent eigenwijs". "
M.a.w. ik geef argumenten. Daarna zeg je dat je mijn argumenten hebt weerlegd. Wat begrijp je niet? Grappig gegeven is dat jij op mij reageert door te zeggen dat ik scheld. Vervolgens reageer jij opdezelfde manier, en gebruik je hier het woord grafkanker.
En als jij eigenwijs niet van ignorant hebt gehaald, vraag ik me toch af van welk Engels woord jij dat dan wel hebt gedaan.
Dus zucht jij nu maar even lekker, een lees even alles opnieuw. En dan laat je het lekker met rust.
Anyway, laten we nog 1maal teruglopen wat er is gebeurd:
post @ 18:14: daarin beweert U dat wanneer de woorden ET in de naam van de spel bevinden, en wanneer beide spellen een klassensysteem bevatten, dat er uit kan worden gegaan van een relatie tussen W:ET en ETQW.
post @ 18:23: daarin zeg ik dat het feit dat U zegt dat spellen een relatie met elkaar hebben wanneer ze de zelfde woorden bevatten, vals is. Als uitleg zeg ik dat ETQW verwijst naar Quake, en dat het spel ook nog eens een ander verhaallijn volgt.
Verder probeer ik aan hand van een voorbeeld te zeggen dat twee spellen wel overeenkomsten kunnen bevatten, maar dat dat niet per se hoeft te betekenen dat die twee spellen direct een relatie (lees: sequel) hebben (behalve dan dat ETQW de klassen van ET heeft overgenomen).
post @ 18:25: ik ben onwetend en ik wijn (in dat laatste heeft U gelijk btw:P)
Dus waar is de discussie nu onderbroken? Niet bij mij.
Niet `een klassen systeem` maar eenzelfde. In de post van 17:23, probeer je een punt te maken, door te lullen over een woord. Maar het gaan niet om 'een' woord, maar om de trademark en alles dat eromheen zit. Ik neem aan de je dat begrijpt? Dat het niet om de definitie van het woord Enemy Territory ging. Iig bij mij niet. Maar de discussie ging daarna niet meer over of het nu wel of niet bij ET hoorde, en dat geeft ook niet.
Ik vond het een gezellige discussie :)
Oh yes and lets put Battlefield 2142 in section of Earth 2140 - its alsmost the same fabule and time!
and mr understand this: the sequel doesnt need to resemble the previous game. if it does, its like CoD:UO (dunno the word: 'dodatek' in polish :p). it need to be changed and it is:
- different time/world
- added some bf-features like tanks, planes, etc.
but there are still:
- gameplay
- teams
- classes
- objective! (and i mean OBJECTIVE, not plant-and-boom or kill-them-all)
- developer
- developer's will to et:qw being et's sequel ('Enemy Territory' addition is obvious signal)
CONCLUSION: it is et's sequel
then we come here: who cares if it is in cod or et section? why you use filters the hell? :p
why you whine, you wont change it
and then we come to same opinion: et:qw SUX HARD!!!!!!!! :p
However, these two games kept their name, namely "Battlefield". So Battlefield stays Battlefield. But the difference between W:ET and ET:QW is that the first one contains the word "Wolfenstein", from the Wolfenstein series. And ETQW contains the word "Quake", from the Quake series.
A second point, is that the developpers said in an interview that the game is kind of a 'presequel' of the Quake series. However, they would use the class system of ET. That's great ofcourse. That shows that people appreciate a game like ET. But what the developpers did not say, was that this game itself was based on the ET story. That's an important statement right there.
I also have to agree that the difference between games have become vaguely. I mean: Doom3 and Quake4 do look a like. Even in graphics. And the same thing goes for all the WWII games.
It's a shame game-developpers can't come up with something new.
Anyway, I'm getting off-topic now. Thanks for your comment. Finally somebody who actually uses motivation and examples to proove his point, instead of crying.
GET A LIIIFEEE!!!111
This is easely conciderable to be true because EA really doesn't want to lose players choosing for ET:QW
I have played Battlefield 2142 for a while and i can conclude that it really sux and really gets boring after playing it for a while, and also made just for the purpose which i stated above.
EA Games : Fuck Up Everything.............
bf2142 has bf in the title and yet it's not the same "setting" as bf1942. bf2142 is the sequel to bf1942.
total anhhilation: kingdoms has tain the title and a completely different setting than the original ta. ta:k is ta's sequel.
etqw has et in the name and a completely different setting than et. etqw is et's sequel.
Wrong, it's axis vs allies. :<
and you know it
Maybe you don't see a connection, but the creators of both games certanly do otherwise they wouldnt keep saying it. Besides, the only thing about gameplay you know about ET:QW is what you read in articles so there is no way you can say there is absolutely no connection besides the name.
I see a connection between CS and COD: 5v5, trying to blow things up, or eliminating the other team.
Is COD a sequel of CS?
but who gives a fuck :(
I can already see a config coming out within weeks removing all heavy weapons and verhicles.
My burning question is what they have done to accommodate the real ET players, because the only thing left is fueldump style maps and the classes each with their individual assignments.
At the moment, I feel almost afraid of buying this game. RtCW was a superb game, ET mediocre, only God and SD know how BF:QW will be.
You are comparing the differences of themes between the games ET and ET:QW, with the amount of bugs in BF compared to ET:QW.
Themes (ET, ET:QW) = Bugs(BF, ET:QW)?
I dont fully understand what you are saying, but we don't know yet what kind of bugs ET:QW has. So it will be hard to compare the amount of bugs yet.
But, the gameplay is definitely much more Battlefield like. Running for 30 secs with no action or getting owned by a huge overpowered gun or bomb, slow objective type gameplay. Rounds will last for much more time looking at the size of the maps (comparing it to fueldump which is very much alike Valley)... All ingredients of BF.
ET = Fast dynamic gameplay, 12 people running around (not 12 verhicles), instant action (within a few seconds you are shooting at your enemy), objectives can be captured within a few minutes. Ow and alot less spam than those new weapons, trucks and planes can do in ET:QW.
Global config ftw ;)
Will it be just like ET ? Of course not. Developing something that was no more than a re-skinned ET would be completely stupid. Trying to turn it into ET after the fact would stupid. 6v6 SMG battles isn't the only possible way for a game to be good :/
A few months ago some guy compared Quake 3 and Quake 4 both at high resolution, max detail, the whole bunch. Quake 3 looked even nicer, best part was that was running on 125 fps. The same quality for Quake 4 and his vid card had trouble pushing out 40.
While taste is a subjective matter, and I like lighter "worlds", I truly cannot care about graphics if they remain the same as my current tweaked ET and RtCW.
I want great games, the excitement and all-decisve moments for glory with my clan from the RtCW days (and sporadically in ET). I have a hard time seeing that in BF:QW.
I do agree though - I'm going to get both and try them. No point making any judgement until then.
Who knows, maybe it will be a top down shooter like the original!
but with a random aimskill like cs
And buck fush all those who says that ET:QW sux, but haven't seen anything more than few videos and pictures. I'm not that big fan of futuristic games like BF2142 (and partly ET:QW) but i will definately try ET:QW just because SD is promising the feel and some gameplay moments from ET. And if I won't like the whole game in general or will be dissapointed by seeing nothing that reminds of ET, I will not go like "WTF OMFGIGLASH QW SUXOREH YEH YE HE!!!!!1111one" or maybe I will.. can't say that without seeing the game omg!
Personally, I'm waiting ET:QW more than RtCW 2 as ET:QW will be primary developed for PC gamers, for those who likes ET gameplay (which is a bit slower than for RtCW, but still), not like RtCW2 for console owners. That is just so sad that the ever best FPS MP game gets such a destiny (and why do I have a feeling that RtCW will be almost as CS:S but a bit faster?). :C
And yes, thanx for scanning the magazine, foonr :)
I would guess that it would probably require the removal of a significant number of the special vehicles and weapons to enable a retention of anything like the same style, but I'll withhold judgement until I've actually played it.
The passage in the second to last paragraph about the gameplay indoors being similar to W:ET makes me think it's definitely not impossible that ET:QW could be great, though.
And you can not complete a map without footsoldiers.
www.quake-wars.eu
| this MAN for president!
And to all the doubters, I promise that this game will be some serious ownage...
I played the game in an early alpha version and i can tell you it's beyond great. Even in that stage it was even better then BF2.
The only comparisasion to BF series is the big (outside) open spaces. The only comparisasion to Quake is the story line.
This game is Enemy Territory 2 in all aspects
www.quake-wars.eu
Exhibit A. The vehicles
I rest my case.
btw, i do think this game will rock.
W:ET had vehicles as well although they were scripted. In ETQW you can control them but the essence of the ET gameplay remains...OBJECTIVES :)
XP save!
Balancing is the highest priority of Splash Damage. I am very confident that this will be the best balanced game ever.
www.quake-wars.eu
I played BF2 a lot but it will never ever beat the ET gameplay as found in both W:ET and ET:QW and hopefully also in RTCW2 bit that's developed by Raven.