Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: System Requirements for UT2003




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    215

    Default

    FFS a 16MB TNT2?!?
    Like someone said, i cant see it working (at any decent speed/detail) without a GF3 or R8500LE minimum

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    I agree with Beefy.

    I also believe that there is no need to wallow in the past. Q3 has been out for 2.5 years, no need to do a remake of it. And when UT came out, Q2 had been out for 2 years, and UT was graphically Q2 with botched gameplay and an array of weapons designed to attract newbs. Which had all been tried already in a Q2 mod called "Chaos Deathmatch" Damn near ALL of the UT weapons are included with that Free mod.

    And I agree with BZ. It IS all about gameplay, but if UT2003 suffers from the ailments shared by UT, HL, CS, etc, Then I don't see any improvements being made as far as gameplay. But I will without a doubt, buy it and give it a shot. I'm a huge fan of competition.
    "In their capacity as a tool, computers will be but a ripple on the surface of our culture. In their capacity as intellectual challenge, they are without precedent in the cultural history of mankind." - Edsger Dijkstra

  3. #13
    Beefy Guest

    Default

    Once again, I'll say things come down to personal opinion. I liked UT much better than Quake 2 / 3.

    Here's a question though... If something looks terrific, but plays the same as everything else, then is it a better gaming experience? Not necessarily better game play... just a better experience?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthtanion
    Looking back through the responses of this thread, I can't see where anyone claimed that a game that requires more power is a better game.
    Nobody said it in those words, but it is pretty obvious given the other threads on this are of the board.

    gameplay vs game experience is a bit of a grey area. Depending on how you look at it, they can be the same, or be entirely different. I see them as being in different worlds. q3a was an experience. I saw through the pretty colors and 'wow his head just flew past my mine' crap and realised this just isnt what everyone had raved about for the year or so before it was released. It was dull, repetitive and yet horribly addictive and popular. With UT (and other games, UT is just one and many examples) I saw gameplay. I needed to have my brain turned on to achieve results. The game stimulated me in ways q3a never could/can.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    299

    Default

    I ran UT2k3 on my bros pc which has a TNT2 32MB at 640X480 and the slow framerate was unbearable. I'd say I was getting an average of around 10-15 FPS. I don't see a TNT2 being anywhere near suitable for playing UT2k3.
    Specs:

    AMD Athlon XP 2000+
    EPoX 8K3A+
    Corsair XMS2700 512MB DDR333
    Leadtek Winfast A250 Ultra TD 128MB GeForce 4 Ti4600
    SB Audigy Gamer
    Intel 10/100 Pro NIC
    Western Digital 80GB 7200RPM ATA100 Special Edition w/ 8MB Cache
    Pioneer 16X DVD-106s
    Plextor 40x12x40 CD-RW
    Teac 1.44 Floppy
    Enermax 550W PSU
    Altec Lansing 641 4.1 Speaker System
    Antex SX1240 Full-Tower
    Win98SE / WinXP Pro

    3DMark 2001SE - 11,659 (Stock) 12,670 (O/C'd)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •