go back in time and stop q4 from ever being made.

there u go

you could still do the same thing with quakelive now

Please tell us how.

.

That would really upset all 10 players!

a better netcode as said before on irc :p
besides of that, lower viewheight and faster weaponswitches since the weapons switch as slow as a train :/

Well it's 1 thing, but those 3 are the most important :D
I would go for the faster weapon switch or the lower viewheight idea.

It doesn't really have to be just 1 - I'm really after what people consider important - if its just little things, ofc more than one thing will be done.

I've already done 4 bug fixes that have been reported in the last 2 days.

At the moment, its not really looking like there are any significant features that people really want.

You want a significant feature ? :p
-> CPM style gameplay for Q4 :D

there is a mod to be doing that, that is under construction still :}

Yeah i know but we don't hear any news about GTR :<

Does the Q4 community really want this? Or is it just Q3 players who do not really play Q4?

Q4Max has had CPM physics for a long time, but I've never prioritised making the Q4 weapons act the same...

Dunno i played q4 since 1.3 till it stopped being active enough (when eswc decided to pick q3 instead), and i never heard about a CPM style gameplay in q4 :D

Oh, its never been released, because CPM without CPM weapon changes is not CPM ;)

ah ok indeed :x

I think it's mostly Q3 players that ask for cpm movement.

IMO, the only thing that should be incorporated from cpm, would be the fast weapon switching. Q4 movement is to fast paced to have Q3 weapon switch speeds.

With Q4's fast movement, I would say there is no actual need for this. And to have CPM in Q4, you would need to have the right maps as well that fit CPM, which most in Q4 probably don't

Slow as a train? :P

120 fps.

Can't really think of anything but maybe a centerweapon option.

I just can't seem to get my shaft beam in the exact middle with gunx, y and z.

There is a center weapon option. You mean like this right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lyhgg2a-a0A&feature=related

Still not fully centered.

what stops you from centering it?

Limitations, I've tried centering it, but it seems to be impossible.

Ok, never tried it before...

Are you after centered with no gun model, or do you want the model too?

One of the issues IIRC is that raven only modelled one side of some of the weapon models, so if you can actually see both sides, you see the missing polys.

125 fps is already doable - or do you just mean you want the default dual framerate raised? If so, surely you're not also proposing 125 for TDM / CTF etc? Or are most people still playing Q4 on hardware capable of hitting 125 stable in team games?

Dunno, does centering without gun model work? I think I've tried it before and it didn't.

Maybe I'm being stupid I'll try it out, I just want my shaft beam in the middle:D

It'd be trivial for me to add a new option to center where the shaft / rg trail gfx comes from with ui_showgun 0. Getting the models to look right might be a little more work....

It will - the models have only one side done as you mentioned, but they're also rotated themselves in the model file which means guesswork in a model editor and a bigger media pak.

Ah yea, had forgotten the funny origin / orientation bits ;)

One of the issues IIRC is that raven only modelled one side of some of the weapon models, so if you can actually see both sides, you see the missing polys.

now that's awesome :D seriously though a lower viewheight and a better netcode (...and 120+fps...) would be nice to have. not that i have the intention of playing anything else than qw/q3/ql.

Hardware is seldom the problem for 125 FPS but is still a factor to be looked at.

If mappers really did what they where suppose to do with the maps then most players would hit 125 FPS without any issue.

Problem is that most mappers tend to map without performance in mind and don't check if things are working properly or not.

If mappers do good maps with good performance the game will feel like butter once you use a mod and strip down unwanted graphics.

Best is to map then test with 125 fps at ultra (EVERYTHING on) vs 1 player firing as much as possible all through the map and to see if you peak some values. If this doesn't happen it's a perfect map as none will play at this GFX and it will just be good one it's released :)

Sadly most mappers tend to test at medium settings on 60 FPS, none players in it and they either peak the values or barely does so and releases the map. So even at ambient you'll have one shitty map to play on once there are more then 3 players on it.

125 FPS isn't therefor all a mod issue but a mappers issue for not doing good work from the start. Mod just supplements a good map and makes the felling and flow better.

If I could have 1 more thing, it would be that you keep the gameplay the same. This means, no change to viewheight or weapon switch speed, no change to movement, no change to any weapons and just generally, keep it as it was in past pro tournaments.

IMO, the only thing that needs fixing is grenades that stick in the ground instead of bouncing.

Except you also favour a wider shotgun spread ;)

I'm undecided whether to enable another gameplay with changes, but at the moment I'm
leaning away from touching gameplay still. Everyone seems to have a different view of
the changes they want, and I do not think we're in a position either for q4max as a team,or the community as a whole, to test and determine the best gameplay.

As Q4 is pretty dead, it would just split the very few amount of players left. I changed my mind about changing SG, I think it's best that gameplay is kept the same as that's what Q4Max has always been about. The gameplay is pretty much perfect, only bugs should be fixed at this stage. 1.3 and 1.4 are better than Quake 3 imo, it would be a tragedy to ruin that by changing the very things that make it so.

i don't know anybody that wants to keep the ridiculous viewheight and the 10sec weapon switch except diabz, but i know a lot of players who are (were) moaning that q4 feels so slow (high viewheight causes that) and that the weaponswitch is just too annoying

Do you really like Q4? I thought the engine wasn't that great? Seems like sort of a waste to have you working on Q4.

Maybe you just really like the game, if so; fair enough, otherwise your talents could be put to much better use (like Q3/CPM.)

i thought cpm was perfect already

ppl still work on qw, doesn't mean they alter the gameplay, just add awesome features. :)

Nah there's loads of stuff Q3 could have. Q3 has a pretty weak demo system, I mean Valve games absolutely rape it (except for the part where even if they do a minor update you can't play them any more) and Valve are fucking terrible at making games. We'd probably see more Q3 videos if it wasn't so fucking annoying to work with the Q3 engine.

how is it that bad though. the timescale can skip forward much faster than q4's demo_scale and it can capture infinite fps ($$$), that's all you need for making a movie imo. things like being able to wind back in the demo aren't that necessary, since playing the demo back again and jumping to the time u want takes like 10 seconds in q3. if people only know how hard it is to record stuff in q4, :}

10 seconds? in a 20 minute game it can take over a minute to get to the right spot. Now think what it's like when you have about 200 demos to go through.

Not to mention that if you fuck up and miss the shot you have to start over again.

It's not awful don't get me wrong, it could just be miles better with a tiny bit of attention.

I agree with Liam. ff command in cpma is very slow.

I think ezquake has perfect demo system. You can rewind mvds and demo_jump only takes 2 or 3 seconds instead of 1 minute.

ff = fastforward? I think it depends on your system. For me it only took about 10-20 seconds to go through a whole demo in QL, which is the same thing as Q3. But anyway, I was just comparing Q3's demosystem to Q4's, as I never had a chance to try out another demosystem. Rewinding and Jumping, sounds pretty nice :}

Thanks Didnt know ql had ff :D

Valve are fucking terrible at making games.

And id isn't?

Right now it is. :/

They do monumentally less retarded shit at least.

QL

Case closed.

Nothing compared to the shit Valve pumps out.

Are you a Valve fanboy or something, do you type it VALVe on the steam forums?

Not a fanboy -- I rarely even play their games nowadays -- but face the facts:

- The Source engine is by far better than the Doom 3 engine, and has been a lot more open for community developers to use for their projects.

- Valve pumps out more games than id, and came up with a very good solution for preventing delays unlike id (namely, episodic content).

- Those games, on average, are better out-of-the-box than id's.

I think, if anything, disagreeing to this would make it obvious that you suck id's cock.

Only thing I'd disagree with is delays, you've got to be kidding if you think Valve don't delay things horribly. I mean there is literally a scale known as "Valve Time" for what it means when they give a timeframe.

Also, HL2: EP3?

That's not the episodic content I referred to, though. Although I guess it's not so much a prevention of delays as it is an alternative to further delays. But it's still a good and efficient solution.

EP3 is late, sure, but they said that it's late because they decided to just scrap the episodic idea and make EP3 a full length game. You could insult them for going the episodic gaming route to begin with, since it's completely retarded, but at least (unlike id) they are willing to change course when they make a mistake.

Really? I didn't know that about Ep3, sounds good, ta for the headsup. You cunt, sorry, couldn't resist!

sauce?

I think I read it on Kotaku, but I can't remember for sure.

- The Source engine is by far better than the Doom 3 engine, and has been a lot more open for community developers to use for their projects.

Oh wow, it is entirely far better...doom3 is capable of more complex lightnings, hl2 doesnt have any normal mapping it makes use of heigth maps but they are rarely used.
The only thing which makes it better is, that d3 got broken vis portals and therefore not able to render bigger areas whereas in hl2 you don't really have any limits.

Got to admit that i cant garantee the hl2 things by myself but i was told so by a hl2 mapper.
But still your source > d3 engine argument is, sorry, bullshit.

So you're suggesting I ignore the fact that the Source engine has gameplay capabilities that expand far beyond the D3 engine's? I mean, you're focusing solely on the graphical aspects of each engine in your argument anyways, which is pretty damn ignorant if you ask me. Especially considering those differences are marginal in terms of the aesthetic quality of the graphics.

But this is getting off-topic and I think I've made my point pretty clear, so I'll leave it at that.

Where did i suggest you anything?
Are you talking about the physic puzzles? Like dropping the barrel below something to push it up? Yeah, valve may have made their game more interesting with stuff like that, but that doesnt mean d3 is not capable of that.

@Vedic:
Well, that may be true but that just relys on the interaction and the specular maps, its rather the fault of some of the artists than the engine's. And i find that most of the Source levels look rather boring from a lightning perspective, cause its mostly a big ambientlight with a small light in it to highlight something.

I just said your source > idtech4 argument is bullshit cause both are different engines which have a different goal.

Since when do they have different goals? The basic goal is quite obviously the same: to provide a means with which to make an overall good game.

Also,

Where did i suggest you anything?

wat

wat

Was aimed at "So you're suggesting I ignore the fact"... dunno where i've suggested you anything.

With different goals i meant that d3 was all about horror and darkness and hl2 was more a pure action shooter.

I think we both made our points clear and you won't ever agree, you would have to agree since you were the person which started with source > idtech4, which means source engine would be better at every point, which is not true. The point where d3 outclasses source is the lightning, and that includes dynamic shadows. Just take a look at some of the official hl2 screens http://www.moddb.com/games/half-life-2/images...l#imagebox for example, where are the shadows? Only the characters are dropping shadows nothing else.

hl2 had more horror and darkness than d3

With different goals i meant that d3 was all about horror and darkness and hl2 was more a pure action shooter.

Huh? Those engines are not developed for the sole intention of making the game they're "debuted" in. They're developed generally for making games.

So, no, you haven't made your point clear at all because your logic is misdirected.

Sure they aren't limited to the scenario/theme they are made in but thats where they perform best.
Since they were build with that in mind, obviously.

The point where d3 outclasses source is the lightning, and that includes dynamic shadows. Just take a look at some of the official hl2 screens http://www.moddb.com/games/half-life-2/images...l#imagebox for example, where are the shadows?

HL2 wasn't meant to be dark. Now look at L4D which is also on the Source engine.

Well its a entirely differnt game which is developed on a later version of the Source engine.
And the use of dynamic shadows doesn't necessarily result a dark themed horror game. ;)

If you're comparing it to doom 3 at release, the performance was even more embarrassing. While newer versions of tech4 mildly improved performance, upgrades to Source not only added a shit ton of bells and whistles, but it still kept great performance.

Sorry for the late reply..

We are comparing HL2 state of the release with d3 state of the release here.
What does the performance improvement with newer engine versions, (quake4/orange box) have in common with our discussion?

Was the discussion not over "source > idtech4"? You could write up a lighting system thousands of times better than what is currently available, but it will but completely unplayable on current hardware - does that still make it better?

Of course it was, but as you said, comparing d3 with the latest source version doesn't make sense.
Dunno what you want to tell me with your "[...]unplayable on current hardware", cause d3 simply was playable on the current hardware availiable.

And of course with no doubt valve could have added dynamic shadows but they didn't, no matter what, and thats the point.

It was still chugging on a 6800, and continues to have issues even on recent hardware/operating systems. Source stood the test of time with performance, ability to be upgraded, and overall, just plain visual quality.

When it comes down to the things that you can argue about without personal preference, Source wins at every point.

Well, my points were facts, your points with "i had performance problems with d3 and still have!" are not.
As far as i can remember i don't had any issues with performance back then. But i do agree that source isn't as fps hungry as d3 is.

ability to be upgraded

What are you talking about?

just plain visual quality

Didn't u just agree that d3 looks better but you prefer performance over looks?

Source wins at every point.

In your world it does, indeed. ;)

What are you talking about?

Source was dynamic enough to undergo plenty of changes to add bells/whistles after release. Doom 3 managed to eek out a tad bit more performance, and less large demo files.

Didn't u just agree that d3 looks better but you prefer performance over looks?

No, I said that Doom 3 made everything look like it was made of wet plastic. Performance is merely a part that can be judged without bias.

Where is the bias when i say that d3 looks better cause it has the more complex lightning system with dynamic shadowing etc.
Just look at the screen (which is linked above), its meant to be a sewer but it is completely lit?
And there are no shadwos at all... i mean what?!

The plastic looks comes from the overbrightened specularmaps (which hl2 didn't had at all btw) that is nothing but an artistical mistake/or whatever you may call it. Its not a feature or a bug or something like this.

Where is the bias when i say that d3 looks better cause it has the more complex lightning system with dynamic shadowing etc.

There.

Just look at the screen (which is linked above), its meant to be a sewer but it is completely lit?
And there are no shadwos at all... i mean what?!

There are shadows, they're just not dynamic. Did you actually play the game, or are you basing it all on screenshots? That screenshot appears to be on low settings.

The plastic looks comes from the overbrightened specularmaps (which hl2 didn't had at all btw) that is nothing but an artistical mistake/or whatever you may call it. Its not a feature or a bug or something like this.

I didn't say it was a bug, I said it was ugly. Every single tech4 engine game has that horribly ugly look to it - not just Doom 3.

Where is the bias when i say that d3 looks better cause it has the more complex lightning system with dynamic shadowing etc.

There.

Then i could go on, and say that i don't like point lights at all, i rather have it all lit in one level of brightness (ambientlight) and call you biased towards HL2. Sounds ridiculous, right?
Dynamic Shadowing is feature which HL2 didnt had, therefore d3 looks better. That is a FACT.

2. Yep, i played the game and i found it better than d3. But the dark places didn't looked as good as in d3 even because of that.

I didn't say it was a bug, I said it was ugly. Every single tech4 engine game has that horribly ugly look to it - not just Doom 3.

Did you gave Prey a shot? Imho they did an awesome job with the idtech4 engine.

Then i could go on, and say that i don't like point lights at all, i rather have it all lit in one level of brightness (ambientlight) and call you biased towards HL2. Sounds ridiculous, right?

I already told you that we shouldn't base any sort of opinion on which one is better on things that could be influenced by opinion. YOU asked me if I said that Doom 3 looked better, and I said that I did not.

Dynamic Shadowing is feature which HL2 didnt had, therefore d3 looks better. That is a FACT.

Simply having a feature does not make it better. This is an opinion, both based on the perceived usefulness of the feature, and aesthetic taste.

2. Yep, i played the game and i found it better than d3. But the dark places didn't looked as good as in d3 even because of that.

Also likely because you were using the same graphics settings as the above screenshot. Again, this is preference anyway, and has nothing to do with which engine is superior.

I already told you that we shouldn't base any sort of opinion on which one is better on things that could be influenced by opinion. YOU asked me if I said that Doom 3 looked better, and I said that I did not.

The fact that d3 makes use of dynamic shadowing and HL2 doesn't is as said before a FACT and not an opinion or anything else. It is an visual improvement, how can realtime shadowing be an aesthetic taste?
Plus you can turn it off, if you don't like it.

Also likely because you were using the same graphics settings as the above screenshot. Again, this is preference anyway, and has nothing to do with which engine is superior.

I am pretty sure those screenshots are taken with everything turned to max, since its a modding page showing off the engine. Its just poorly compressed (pixelated look around the letters) and probably resized from a 16:10 resolution to 4:3 or something.

That doesn't have anything to do with what i was referring to.

The fact that d3 makes use of dynamic shadowing and HL2 doesn't is as said before a FACT and not an opinion or anything else. It is an visual improvement, how can realtime shadowing be an aesthetic taste?

It's a feature which you like, but it is not arguably better in any way. The only FACT that you can point out is that it reduces performance.

I am pretty sure those screenshots are taken with everything turned to max, since its a modding page showing off the engine. Its just poorly compressed (pixelated look around the letters) and probably resized from a 16:10 resolution to 4:3 or something.

That doesn't have anything to do with what i was referring to.

Probably? Maybe? You were arguing your taste on the shadows, which it seems that if you are basing it on those screenshots, you don't really know what you're arguing against.

It's a feature which you like, but it is not arguably better in any way. The only FACT that you can point out is that it reduces performance.

I think we had a good discussion till now, but now you are going into your trolling mode once again. Trying to defend your _opinion_ at all costs.

Probably? Maybe? You were arguing your taste on the shadows, which it seems that if you are basing it on those screenshots, you don't really know what you're arguing against.

As i said above, those screenies are always taking with everything maxed, the poor quality you were moaning about comes from compressing etc. And, if you don't even know if the shown screen lacks some features of the game, i need to ask you, if you've actually played the game. ;)

//Edit:
How can be shadows a matter of taste in a realistic shooter? Depth of field and stuff can be, but shadows in a game which aims to represent the reality (in its visuals ofc) are not a matter of taste.

I think we had a good discussion till now, but now you are going into your trolling mode once again. Trying to defend your _opinion_ at all costs.

No, we didn't have a discussion until you agreed with me. At that point, you gave up.

As i said above, those screenies are always taking with everything maxed, the poor quality you were moaning about comes from compressing etc. And, if you don't even know if the shown screen lacks some features of the game, i need to ask you, if you've actually played the game. ;)

Nah, the screenshots appear to be about medium. You seem to forget that this isn't even a valid discussion. We just got done agreeing that opinions have nothing to do with this, so weather you like the shadows in Source or not is unimportant.

How can be shadows a matter of taste in a realistic shooter? Depth of field and stuff can be, but shadows in a game which aims to represent the reality (in its visuals ofc) are not a matter of taste.

Realistic shooter? What? It's a GAME, not real life. One of which takes place on mars, where you shoot plasma balls at demons from hell that came out of a portal - the other where you play in a post-apocalyptic world with a "gravity gun," a robot dog, and a trans-dimensional mercenary salesman. Again, this is a vague attempt to justify the NEED for a feature, but you fail to offer any factual argument as to why it is superior.

Source performs better, is far more scalable, is easier to mod, updates better, records better, handles sound better, and is even being used in new games to this day.

[...]blabla...rage going on.. cause you cant be arsed to read...[...]

How can be shadows a matter of taste in a realistic shooter? Depth of field and stuff can be, but shadows in a game which aims to represent the reality (in its visuals ofc) are not a matter of taste.

I've highlighted it for you, you may read it again.

Source performs better,

- At the cost of visual features

is far more scaleable

- Based on what?

is easier to mod

- Did you try it by yourself? Afaik, both got their strenghts and weaknesses.

updates better

- Thats steam and not the Source engine.

records better

- Ye, agree there ;)

handles sound better

- This is were you clearly run into blind fanboyism, d3 still outclasses many games up to date with its EAX 5.0 Sound engine. While sources is not bad at all, but not as great as d3's. Clearly using a headset, you won't notice it that much, but with an soundsystem taking full advantage of everything, you will.

used in new games to this day.

- Of course the source engine got used more then idtech4 but which game (which is not developed by valve) was released recently?

I throw another thing into it, multiple platforms... source still superior?

//Edit: Just reminding you, that i've said that they are both nice engines which are designed for different purposes, you+advent were the ones who are saying that the source engine is superior to the d3 one, in every aspect.

- At the cost of visual features

No, even with dynamic lights, motion blur, and HDR, it STILL performs better than D3 with just dynamic lights.

- Based on what?

Based on the fact that you can run Source-engine games on very weak hardware, but still scales perfectly up to modern day hardware.

- Did you try it by yourself? Afaik, both got their strenghts and weaknesses.

Yes, actually, I have. Can you name one weakness that Source has over tech4 in the modding department?

This is were you clearly run into blind fanboyism, d3 still outclasses many games up to date with its EAX 5.0 Sound engine. While sources is not bad at all, but not as great as d3's. Clearly using a headset, you won't notice it that much, but with an soundsystem taking full advantage of everything, you will.

Yet still suffers from locational issues. Another feature made useless by the implementation.

Of course the source engine got used more then idtech4 but which game (which is not developed by valve) was released recently?

I throw another thing into it, multiple platforms... source still superior?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Source_engine_games

Multiple platforms? Yeah, got you beat there, too. Good performance on other platforms, as well. I still remember gamespy giving the "worst framerate ever" award to Q4 on xbox.

//Edit: Just reminding you, that i've said that they are both nice engines which are designed for different purposes, you+advent were the ones who are saying that the source engine is superior to the d3 one, in every aspect.

Which you continue to argue with "I like the shadows in doom 3 more," instead of actually arguing it with any points.

No, even with dynamic lights, motion blur, and HDR, it STILL performs better than D3 with just dynamic lights.

All of these features got years later implemented.

Yes, actually, I have. Can you name one weakness that Source has over tech4 in the modding department?

Not really a modding thing since i am quite a newb in the modding department but working with triggers is a pain in the source engine.

Yet still suffers from locational issues. Another feature made useless by the implementation.

Nothing but personal opinion, never heard this before. And "made useless" oh come on ;)

Multiple platforms? Yeah, got you beat there, too. Good performance on other platforms, as well. I still remember gamespy giving the "worst framerate ever" award to Q4 on xbox.

We're talking about the first version of the idtech/source engine here, so what do you want with q4? which isn't even id's work ;)

What about Linux/Mac support? ;)

Which you continue to argue with "I like the shadows in doom 3 more," instead of actually arguing it with any points.

Rather a "doom3 has them, while source (back then) didn't".

All of these features got years later implemented.

The only feature you have mentioned that Doom 3 had is dynamic lighting, which is not "better", just different. However, when the Source engine added dynamic lights, they still did better.

Not really a modding thing since i am quite a newb in the modding department but working with triggers is a pain in the source engine.

Stick to defending things that you know about.

Nothing but personal opinion, never heard this before. And "made useless" oh come on ;)

Opinion means that it only applies to me, whereas the sound issues happen for many people.

We're talking about the first version of the idtech/source engine here, so what do you want with q4? which isn't even id's work ;)

I see, so Raven made the tech4 engine that Q4 was on? Doom 3 had to be gutted like crazy, and still ended up having the same bad framerate.

What about Linux/Mac support? ;)

They run rather well with cedega/wine/etc, depending on your distro and drivers - same for every game. What about Vista, Windows 7, and console support?

Rather a "doom3 has them, while source (back then) didn't".

Which has nothing to do with superiority - the topic in question.

We were both comparing idtech4 state of release and source state of release.

The only feature you have mentioned that Doom 3 had is dynamic lighting, which is not "better", just different. However, when the Source engine added dynamic lights, they still did better.

How can it be not better? Doom3 had it since release... hl2 didn't. Are you able to grasp that?
It is a feature, which hl2 lacked. HDR and stuff goes into your "had better updates" department.

Opinion means that it only applies to me, whereas the sound issues happen for many people.

You say that it happened to many people, and i said i didn't had any problems at all, nor did i heard of any other people expieriencing issues.

http://vancouvergamedesign.com/2008/06/08/why-half-life-2-sucks/
Wow, somebody had problems with the HL2 soundsys.. can i call useless now?

I see, so Raven made the tech4 engine that Q4 was on?[...]

See my first sentence.

They run rather well with cedega/wine/etc, depending on your distro and drivers - same for every game. What about Vista, Windows 7, and console support?

Doom3 has native support for Mac and Linux you are talking about emulating.

Which has nothing to do with superiority - the topic in question.

You still don't get it, there can't be any superiority, since the engines are to different to get find it out by facts. But to compare them a bit, we needed to set a fixed state and try to compare them from that point.
And the easiest is the state of the release.. and that is exactly what we did.

//Edit: I am out, arguing with you is so pointless. Keep thinking that the source engine was superior to the idtech4, both at its release. I tried to show you some facts what d3 did better in the past and what hl2 lacked and vice versa. But you simply fail to grasp that.

How can it be not better? Doom3 had it since release... hl2 didn't. Are you able to grasp that?

Which you like, but is a preference. The Source implementation ended up being far more resource efficient when they did add it.

It is a feature, which hl2 lacked. HDR and stuff goes into your "had better updates" department.

Which, again, has nothing to do with superiority.

Wow, somebody had problems with the HL2 soundsys.. can i call useless now?

Did you bother to read the entire thing, or did you just do a google search and paste what you found?

See my first sentence.

Hey, you were the one trying to defend it. I can understand how you would want to back down from your claims, though. Even still, Doom 3 on XBOX failed just as hard - why didn't you address that?

Doom3 has native support for Mac and Linux you are talking about emulating.

Funny how performance under emulation is still better than native support for tech4.

You still don't get it, there can't be any superiority, since the engines are to different to get find it out by facts. But to compare them a bit, we needed to set a fixed state and try to compare them from that point.
And the easiest is the state of the release.. and that is exactly what we did.

And? I didn't argue that we shouldn't compare them at release - I pointed out that you shouldn't since tech4 was even worse. I've been waiting for you to prove tech4's superiority without opinion on any level.

While the source engine runs exponentially better, it also doesn't look like everything is made of fucking wet plastic.

the feel of source > d3 engine
the lighting and post effects of source > d3, it's got light maps as well as some decent dynamic lights. Looks way way better.
framerate is better too.

Half-Life is a fucking great game lol

Yeah but look at all their newer shit, MP wise they're terrible.

I"m not gonna compare multiplayer, but when it comes to single player, in particular when it comes to overall story, art, level design, etc., Valve has id beat by a mile.
Sad but true.

Maybe but I dunno, I don't think of either of them as an SP company, What's Valve done anyway? Half-life and portal (and portal was just another mod team they bought anyway)

I'm just mostly talking about retarded decisions, id makes less.

just compare how many good games ID has published in the past 10 years, should remove any doubts.

retarded decisions

id makes less.

Haha. Good one. Also, your ignorance regarding what Valve has developed amazes me. It's no wonder you're so dumb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Software

Half-Life series
Counter-Strike series
Day of Defeat series
Team Fortress series
Source
Steam
Valve Anti-Cheat
Portal
Left 4 Dead

Unless I'm missing something?

4/6 of them are MP games, and every single one of those MP games are basically mod teams Valve bought.

each and every one of those mods are better games than doom3/q4.

Doom3 maybe, Q4 is actually a good game (better than Q3, but CPM is better than Q4) although I dunno about the SP but that doesn't really apply to MP games.

The only one of them that is actually any good is TF2, and it still has some crippling issues.

come on, q4 may not be utter shit now thanks to mod community,but it sure was when it came out.
not to mention half-life and portal rape every singleplayer id ever made and altho css,dod,l2d might not be your cup of tea if you take those cpm goggles off you'll see they're very decent mp games.

I regularly play l4d and dod (although I only play the latter to grief), FAR more than I play cpm (haven't played it in about 2 months?) and I still think they're utter fucking shit. Can't even stand to play CS.

l4d is filled with glaring issues and the community is terrible, without even trying we destroy anyone... we even resorted to playing with clans a few months back and we still destroyed them. The game is just about making the best of lucky situations and hoping you don't get fucked over by something retarded.

"and hoping you don't get fucked over by something retarded."

haha :D

let me get this straight, you play a shit game 2x more than a good game. does your brain lack oxygen or is cpm community really that dead?

No I just troll in it too, plus it's something new.

oh damn, I never saw this coming

Saw what? Do you think I'm lying or something? I only ever play l4d with demu so there you fucking go.

Also gameplay wise Q4 got a lot of decent updates, but yeah I'll agree id really fail at polishing games, which is where Valve shines, but the problem is they focus entirely on that and end up with a gleaming turd.

Yeah, cpm and q4 > q3 ! :d
I like cpm quite a lot

So what if they bought them out? They're a part of Valve now, the same Valve you're saying makes such shit games. And, as tourist mentioned, all of those games are good. They're only shitty in your mind because your tastes are different.

So I was right and you're a fucking moron then, good job idiot.

Other way around, actually. I don't know how you could possibly get the impression that that makes you right -- unless, well, you're retarded.

I listed hl and portal as the only SP games valve has done, you replied with "your ignorance amuses me lol", I then pasted a list of what they have done proving me right and you didn't even dispute it. Therefore: I'm right and you're wrong, you fat faggot nerd.

Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2.

There's your multiplayer comparison.

L4D was good, but TF2 was a steaming pile.
:<

No?

Yes, unfortunately, compared to the original. :<

TF2 was a huge success for what it was made for, though. It's a great casual time waster.

True, but I remember when it was in development and people thought it was gonna be this huge thing.
Then it wasn't, and it sucked, and yeah...

:<

By huge you mean how a fucking shit ton of people play it? It's a massive game man.

Good god, really?
I admit it's been about 6 months since I fired up Steam, but last time I looked there didn't seem to be more than a few hundred people playing.
Maybe it was a down time or something, but it looked to me like the numbers had dropped off significantly since its launch. :<

Nah the updates do actually breathe some life in to it. It's a really fun game but it's purely a pub game. I tried watching a competitive match once and it was the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

The spy is the best thing in any game ever.

Seen it, pretty good :).

Agreed again!

Sure the engine got its flaws but still we got a promised Patch from id (altough i dont belive it will ever see the light) and its still the best looking engine from id.

You talk like Q3 or CPM has a bigger audience, plus most of the people in the q4 community appreciate the work of guys like him, can't say that this is the case with q3.

Yeah, good points I guess, maybe I'm being a bit selfish :)

I don't think theres anything too fundamentally wrong with Q4 in its current state - the engine itself isn't fundamentally flawed. Things weren't good at the beginning, and the lack of working autodl meant that as modders we couldn't sort things out without making it even harder to get on the servers. Q4 released as it is now could have been a much bigger success.

This post is about tidying things up and leaving it in a "finished" state for those still playing - it should be 1.0 now IMO, especially given how nobody has yet come up with any significant changes they want. It also should ship with a working Mac build, and should have the changes I made last year but never finished off.

As for working on Q3 etc, this weekend I committed the first changes made in 2009 - I've been owned by work for the last year or so (since someone I work with left and I've effectively been doing 2 peoples jobs), so I do not really have time to commit to doing anything significant on CPMA / PMX etc.

It also should ship with a working Mac build

Damn, and I was in front of the mac last weekend :) But hey, maybe I can get a hackintosh partition running when I format this laptop. :p

1.3 movement!!

i can't even remember anymore 1.3 movement felt like, the only things i know is that the rampjumps weren't as insane and running/jumping/sliding down ramps didn't slow you down so much (or at all) and the crouchslides were a bit shorter

My only request is that you don't screw it up for the sake of a bunch of people that won't play it anyway (looking at the view height requests, etc.)
They don't even like QuakeLive because it's not enough like Quake 3, so I certainly wouldn't bother entertaining their requests to make Q4 more Q3ish.

I am very, very intrigued by the idea of a CPM style Q4max, though. With fast wep switch, ofc.

Haribo

higher fps

Have you run Q4Max since 0.80?

yes

i think he wants to have a higher fps cap. and it should be put on 125 now i think, the game has been released for 3 and a half years now, it would be sad if people still didn't have better pcs

Higher cap is currently controllable by server admins. Does raising the cap really need me to change the default?

Unfortunately, there are lots of server admins that can't even put proper maps onto their servers, so yes, I do think so. :}

1.3 movement/physics was supperior, IMO Q4 saw its best matches on 1.3 movement speed because everything from aiming to control to postioning and timing was balanced perfectly at this speed.
1.4 just made the game far too fast.. To this day I'm not really sure what prompted ID to speed it up so much more. The game feels completely off balance at this speed :(

I've always thought that Q4 could be awesome with weapon switch speeds identical to Q3. It always felt just too slow..

Finally.. when you hit someone with a rocket/nade (or get hit) up close the explosion has always been so blinding and big that the opponent is impossible to track through it. Can these explosions be toned down or minimized in some way?

Also on phrantic I've always thought there should be nade ammo by the lg ammo at the lower YA. (but thats a mapping issue)

It's been a few months since I played. I'll hop into some Q4 tonight and see what other critiques I have of the game in its current state.

Thanks for fighting the good fight all this time Anthony!!

spend your time for something else more satisfying/enjoyable

So you know whats enjoyable for him? Cool.

yes because i'm a developer too :)

q3 engine would with q4 gameplay :)

Why aren't people +ing this?:(

because most people have updated their computers in the last ten years.

fix: many bugs in Deadzone
fix. bug, when first time in game enter in team
change: nail damage 25 ->30
And better netcode, of course :)

you don't join any team when joining a game in q4max, it's just there in q4base, but since this thread is about q4max..

nailgun damage is pretty much fine atm i'd say

omg, someone has played Deadzone? I find that hard to believe...

I did! With buymode as well, it felt like a cs-fake

For the real CS-fake, try CTFSBM - OvsD, flags as objectives, and buy mode ;)

CTFSBM - OvsD, flags as objectives, and buy mode

...why?!

Cos we already had CTFS, and it kinda felt necessary to make buymode work with all of our existing modes.

Pretty sure nobody actually played it though, but it had potential to attract CSers ;)

hehe :p add some AKs and M4s and they might will come

Yes, I love Deadzone, but in q4max really many bugs there :(

Sometimes, when I click "join in game", I remain in spectators, and to me write "too fast change of teams"

Sometimes it says you joined one of the team and your still at spectator. Then doing it again you will have that warning :)

change: default ca ammo (more hyperblaster's, nailgun's, shaft's ammo and less rockets and slugs)

Hyperblaster is enough, noone actually uses it, and even if then they don't hit anything with it. The nailgun firerate is so slow that you would probably never run out of NG ammo. I totally agree with the shaftammo and the railgun ammo, but not with the rockets.. if you saw me playing CA you would know why :p

hyperblaster and nailgun may use for wall-climbing.instead of RJ

Why would anybody want to go for 200ups climbs instead of 1000ups rocketjumps through the whole map? Besides of that, the hyperblaster knockback is so little, it can barely be used for wallclimbs.

Therefore I suggest less rockets, that people saved them

To take away even more speed from CA which already is campy as hell? Wouldn't be a good idea

Speed and campy don't have anything to do with eachother.

You could triple the game's movement speed and I could still be sitting on top of bridge:D

"Speed and campy don't have anything to do with eachother."

that's like .. your opinion, man.


compare cs and cpm, which is faster and which is more campy? ;)

Depends on who's playing CPM:D

1.3 ramp jumping and crouch sliding would be great. Even having an option in q4max to enable 1.3 physics would be awesome.

For anyone that has never played 1.3, this video will show you why it's better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAYeTqx4zik

Almost all Q4 maps were designed for smaller ramp jumps than 1.4.2 has. Once 1.4.2 was released almost all maps were no longer as fun to play, and some were just about unplayable. This is probably why Galang died.

I never thought the difference between 1.3 and 1.4.2 rampjumps was that much. But then again, the movement right now is so smooth and I'm too much used to it to change back to 1.3 :p.

Also, Galang died way before 1.4.2

You would probably get used to it pretty quickly. 1.3 is not THAT much different than 1.4.2, the ramp jumps are just less sensitive, and the crouch sliding is a tad weaker. Nothing like the change from 1.0 to 1.4.2, and yet it's really amazing how much better scaled the game is with 1.3.


"Also, Galang died way before 1.4.2"

I'll have to take that statement back, but Galang definitely feels more natural in 1.3.

That might be, but actually I don't really want to have the movement changed (again) right now. :p
Also I think, it's just the duel maps that feel better on 1.3 than on 1.4.2, CTF maps feel great in 1.4.2.

"I think, it's just the duel maps that feel better on 1.3 than on 1.4.2, CTF maps feel great in 1.4.2. -
agreed.

But a good player can use 1.3 movement to play at CTF maps. This movie really show that 1.3 movement was a lot better for all maps. I play some 1.4.2 CTF but i can enjoy 1.3 also.

nice video, I forgot about blip :P
i think the case of movement in 1.3 > 1.4 has been made for a while now, too bad ID doesn't listen/care :<

most q4 maps were built before the 1.3 patch was released

The hitboxes are actually to blame for this -- this was covered way back when 1.4.0 came out.

So, I'll blame the hitboxes for shizem's movement? =p

I don't know if his half-beat movements are accelerated by 1.4.2, but for now, um, I guess?

Well crouchslides and rampjumps, which he does pretty well, were changed/boosted from 1.3 to 1.4 due to the hitboxes.

I wouldn't say that it helped his crouchsliding so much, as the hitboxes only really affected crouchsliding after dropping from a certain height. I mean, he could still be relatively fast in 1.3 just as consistently -- 1.4 just made it easier for him to come across as batshit insane.

It was just meant for a laugh. :)

lol shizem :DDDDD

wow after watching that video im reminded of how fucking good some of those maps were :(

Change 'impressive' and 'excellent' awards to auto 'dos attack' and 'spam email' @ id software. Only thing that seems worthwhile really, heck we may see Q4 be a success after all.

no gameplay changes plz, except you make it voteable (like osp/cpma).

The game itself is fine and I consider q4max netcode the best one I ever played (I never played cpma netcode on the inet).

The only thing I can think of is the we have to have all maps of the server to be able to play on this server. this sucks

btw maybe ID will patch q4 for a last time. sync said it

Yeah, he said that about half a year ago, but we all know how likely it will be released

they are all into ql atm so a patch in the next few days is unlikely ;)

there are gameplay changes I would like too see but I dont know if it will be a good idea to change them in q4max. I would like to have them in a new q4 patch.

gameplaychanges:

- ql weapon switch
- q3 edge catching
- ql weapon balance
- lower view height
-125fps by default for duel, 90fps by default for team games
- maybe 1.3 movement... but I think 1.4.2 movement is awesome when you can handle it fine (1.4.2 movement is better for ctf)
-maybe add a crouchslide sound

q4max changes:

- change superhud in clan arena (read my pm anthonyJ)
- take my custom hud as default (latest version out now)
- remove the must have all .pk4 issue
- Low ammo warning + sound

optinal:

- raw mouse input
- new custom models + custom sounds (keel would be enough)
- tutorial demo for movement (zuphrin thats your turn)

ordered by priority

The "edge catching" thing only has to do something with Q3's low viewheight. I've experienced this "edge cathing" thing in GTR a bit, since it has lower viewheight (not as much as Q3 though afaik), I am not sure though if it is actually caused by the viewheight, but that is what I heard. I agree with the other things.

no there is an actual feature in q3 that makes it easier to still catch some ledges when in q4 you would just fall down.

Ok, nevertheless, I've seen it in GTR, so it's there for Q4 (or at least it will be when it is released..).

"maybe 1.3 movement... but I think 1.4.2 movement is awesome when you can handle it fine (1.4.2 movement is better for ctf)"

1.4.2 movement better for ctf? whys that because you can make capping runs faster and make insane flying ramp jumps? Come on dude..

1.3 movement pls.

It feels smoother on CTF and it fits the CTF maps better.

how do you know?
"i can't even remember anymore 1.3 movement felt like"
-taken from your post yesterday :)

Haha :}
Well I said I can't remember how it of it _felt_ like (sort of the flow of it), but I still know that there were less tricks possible than there are now. :p

http://www.quakeunity.com/file=2424

Check 3:14. That was on 1.3.

You also have to take into account that:

a) that was during a game
b) people were not as good with Q4 movement in 2006
c) that was not shizem :P

I recommend making a 1.3 install and trying it out yourself.

I know that cap and it makes me want to play 1.4.2 rather than 1.3 even more. I'm too much used to it already. :}

The CTF maps were made for 1.0 and 1.3 movement in mind, not 1.4 and you know that.

Although I agree that 1.3 gameplay was better overall, it's not Q4Max's responsibility; if it's to be reverted back it would have to be done by id and that looks exorbitantly unlikely =P

Hmm... interesting discussion.. I would like to see and get a feel for faster weapon switches and lower view height in Q4 to see how that would change the game. Never know untill you mess with it and try it out. I think q4 was a different type of game than Q3, it brought out different styles of play.. Q3 is frankly just fucking old.. its nice to see a game that has changed.. I look forward to more q live as that is a little different than q3.. not much but there are changes.. And whatever else decides to come out..

Now if you guys actually wanted a game that was seriously based on some skill.. man.. all of your silly asses needs to go back and fix painkiller.. or take Q3's netcode and recreate it. sick of hearing.. q3 this q3 that.. jesus.. almost seems like some have a q3 vibrator under their mattress they get off on it soo much.

Hi fatal1ty.

"almost seems like some have a q3 vibrator under their mattress they get off on it soo much. "

Mine's on my nightstand.

More statistiscs like q3 (damage taken/received, pick-ups mega and armor)

man I seriously miss q4.. 1.4.2 kinda sucked but by that time I had already stopped playing on a regular basis.

One thing... that the game shouldnt never been released.

Original trolls only please (see #1)

cba to read replies on a Q4 thread.

Being a game developer for a hardcore gamer community must build a hell of a lot of character.

Mucho respect to AnthonyJ.

seriously, release a q4max version with cpm physics.
if not, speed up weapon switching

Wasn't there something like this in development? Think it was called Delta Revolution or something.
I dunno, after 1.3 I never bothered to play again, but I remember hearing about it.
At any rate, yes, that would've been sweet. :>

It's GameType Revolution. Delta is another mod, I've heard that it even removes crouchsliding :/.

air control > crouch sliding :P

I just played an ntf pickup and it felt pretty good. I like both the same :p.

I think going back to quake 4 1.3 moves and a faster weapon switch time would be great...add lower view height and 125fps and it would be even better.

No gameplay vote it'll just split the comunity...

A community that doesn't simply hate on Q4 just because it isn't Q3.

Deep down, you all know it's true. Don't deny it.

Agree, +1 :)

I hate people that say +1 :\

It's useless, and there's an actual [+] button:\

Agree! +1

I love ESR:P

+1

Now you're just fishing for +'s!:>

+1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUPJCB4xotY&feature=related

+1

it's just a shame q4 had so many issues when released that made it a hassle to play games. i don't know if it's still the same.

- really long loading time for game and maps
- the fact you have to have every map on the server
- people unable to connect to servers for no apparent reason or being kicked for random things
- too high system requirements for good, constant fps for many people

the fact was it took at least 2 hours to have a 2 map game in q4. many people just couldn't be bothered with it, and once you have given up and gone back to q3 there didn't seem much incentive to try q4 again.

q4max starts up much faster than q4base
but arqon changed
that very early on, so it may not be faster than you last tried it.

cannot get on servers.... is fixed.autodl works, rather than giving the checksum of files you do not have.

q4max framerates are much better than q4base 1.0 - I would expect most people can hit the framerate cap (90fps by default) in duel.

Like you say, shame it was release in the state it was - the lack of autodl is the reason why y hard to get a game at the start

I want to be able to playback all demos with 1 installation.

:O

Not gunna happen - engineside netcode changes mean that its not possible to playback a 1.3 demo in 1.4.2.

And there is no possible way to hack around it?

Not really, no.

If someone with access to the Q4 engine source-code were to spend the time, it would be technically possible to make a converter application that could re-parse a demo and save it in the new format.

That would be a huge amount of work though, and is never going to happen.

It really sucks they 'broke' demo playability like that:\

How about a version switcher?
An option in q4max to start with either 1.3 or 1.4.2 or any other verson.

Is that possible?

Well the main reason for the changes was to reduce the network bandwidth requirements, which is one of the things the commuity whined about.... I'd rather Q4 worked better but broke demo compatibility, than leave things being wasteful and continuing to cause problems....

do you still adhere to not change q4base gameplay and looking for only new features?
if not i wanna see stairs behaviour like i suggested here =) its easer to implement in q4 than in q3/ql
viewheight and accel average between baseq3 and baseq4
remove NG spinup and reduce damage
change LG back to 1.3, add cripple effect, decrease damage or increase reload time

+1 for faster weapon switch.

If you want to add some kind of EPIC feature that will pump up the community, build some kind of way to change the basic gameplay mechanics in a config format.

For instance, being able to change RL/LG knockback, RG damage, weapon switch speed. Take all those variables and draw them from a config on exec.

I think what you'll see is first a couple community leaders step up and make changes to the gameplay that are reasonable and well-thoughtout. And then you'll see the community split into a couple core groups (not so good a thing at the start), but after awhile, each community should develop on it's own.

If I had to pick gameplay changes, I'd say...

1) Greater RL knockback and more inclined towards vertical rather than directional (a la Quakeworld).
2) Stronger LG knockback
3) Lower RG damage with high rate of fire (think UT's shockrifle -- no hitscan weapon should have super strong damage these days with everyone's aim and connections getting better)
4) GL to have a dynamic range based on click and release of +attack. (Dunno how easy that would be to implement).
5) Implement the same player edge clipping as in Q3. Current clipping slows gameplay.

I think the biggest issue at hand for current gameplay is rail being overpowered. This is clearly an issue because average aim and internet connectivity is up. I think in order to explain the hierarchy of things, people should be looking at fire-rate versus damage/knockback. The lower the fire-rate, the higher the damage (+ knockback effects).

From fast/low-damage to slow/high-damage weapons (not many maps take advantage of BFG so I left it out):

Hitscan - MG, LG, SG, RG
Non-Hitscan - GL, RL, PG

With Q4's 8 sided hitboxes, you have to be far more precise with your shots for them to count. So personally, I don't think any weapon nerfing is necessary.

I like your other ideas though.

The irony is that q4 always has exposed the weaponbalance via a text file format -def/weapons/rocketlauncher.def defines all properties of the rl (switch times excluded)

If (and atm that is a big if) q4max were to support multiple gameplays, that would likely be a case of specifying which set of defs were used.

Like you say tho, multiple gameplays probably would split the community, and just make it harder for people to find a game. At this point I do not see any big increase in players coming, and that is not my intention - this thread is about fixing/adding things that are annoying current players. Seems not much is wrong tho, other than eternal debates about gameplay.

fix bug: in CA when use Lockteam sometimes kick players from locked team in spectate.

Sorry for poor english :)

I'd say try to fix annoying bugs rather than trying to include new physics.

Just fix bugs that left and witch can be fixed by mod. There is nothing epic that anyone can do now except id coming with HUGE 1.5 Patch that will have all you mod inside, forcing auto-update on 1.3 clients, block <1.5 servers from showing up and finally sv_strictAuth "0" as default ...

Any gameplay change witch people dislike (1.3 ramps) will cause people to block of update servers like spontanctf community servers. The only change that should be consider is adding sound for cruchsliding with is definitely something that should be done by Raven/id - it is a BUG similar to not have sound when you jump.

Faster weapon switch and the lower viewheight idea are nice and also have chances to be accepted by people witch still play Q4, but it must be definitely done by vote. You can make "trick" here (hi Arqon!):
- default gameplay to vq4v2(Faster weapon switch and the lower viewheight)
- callvote gameplay: vq4,vq4v2

So admins who update their servers(and those will be only admins with active Q4 community) will give everyone gameplay changes. By the time that some whiners get to the admin, most people will enjoy new gameplay and they don't want to old gameplay back ;-]

About cpm physics: since cpm is nothing without ALL rules(physics, weapons,items etc) it will take too much time to implement. But only movement can be still fun for some people, maybe they see it and will enjoy it for some CA/Tricks etc. Maybe you can find a way to add cpm only for LAN servers(that will save community from split) i don't know. But is this is worth it ? You must decide. Even I can live without playing cpm on Q4 maps.

I try to find something that Q4MAX can do(Q4MAX mod can't fix engine-side bugs like addon.config/pk4 limit/ligts/other) but there is nothing on my my mind. Q4 + Q4 MAX is really great experience as an gameplay + options. If only Quake4 has 50% from you mod at time of the start ...

EDIT: And ofc 125 sv_fps for duels, 90 for other gametypes as defaults.

Wait, you play QIV?
BTW can't get the idea of different FPS at all.

BTW just watched this http://www.quakeunity.com/file=2854
and it clearly redefined my opinion on q4 movement.

Yeah, he is so slow there and does a lot of mistakes, hitting walls etc. :/

No, it actually made me think that this movement is MUCH MORE faster and skilled than any of q4 demos (including 1v1 and TDM) I've seen before.
I've never thought that q4 mechanics allow to demonstrate such decent dynamic.
OFC it's not THAT fast or whatsoever but still I was truly impressed and the movement seems somewhat interesting.

spec zuphrin. He is actually fast.
or watch some latest demos of toxjq

Well as long as I remember there are some compatibility issues with playing q4max demos, so I hope these demos are on 0.82.

i-32 demos are 0.82 for sure

vehicles.

Really?

We stripped out all support for the SP vehicles a long time ago, so thats not getting put back in.

vehicles!

now you can add vehicles from ET:QW SDK + megatexture support and vehicle ctf mode =)

q4 already has vehicles and megatextures, no need to add from etqw.

etqw vehicals is mp oriented, so its probably more suitable for q4
by the way is it possible to play etqw maps in q4?
and one thing for q4max - items scripts like in cpma calling by /cv map !mapscript

Is it possible to get around needing all the maps a server had to watch demos recorded on that server?

No. It is engine feature with isn't in SDK.

Actually it can be done, but only by breaking demo compatibility with existing demos. At this point, that would be a bad idea, so I don't plan to do this.

Great information but since when it can be do ? Having 2 different folders with Q4MAX isn't such a big deal in exchange for proper demo playback don't you think ?

Not really - there aren't exactly many new maps, so I imagine anyone who cares about watching demos already has all the maps they need most of the time. It would however mean that there would be *no* demos that could be played with the current build from any real tournaments.

got nothing rly to add, just wanted to say thanks for everything AJ, and the rest of the ppl behind q4nax

smiley

EDIT:
q4nax :}

seconded

fix: Do not force specs to free float mode when match started

I would like to pick up Q4 again. QL is just shit. Are there any pickup chans left? Where are the good servers where i can play?

Plus what do i need to play? Updates, q4max the other mod died right? Whats the name again?

You need Q4 PR 1.4.2 and Q4Max 0.82 I think... And yes the other mod (x-battle) died !

1.4.2, q4max 0.82, #spontan.games (unfortunately its activity went down about 2 months ago)

Summer time, you know :)

Nah it's for another reason. And even if it was the summertime, it wouldn't have died 2 months ago but more like some days/weeks ago.

BTW where do I get and how do I watch good CTF demos?
I''ve downloaded some from chtv (.netdemo) but q4max just can't find them (tried putting in q4max/demos & q4mp/demos) :<
Thanks.

.netdemo demos are pre 1.4.2 demos which means it's impossible to play them back in 1.4.2.

Here are some demos from NaAani: http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1410331

OK thx.
Don't want to sound retarted, but where can I get all the neccessary maps (for CTF)? Been able to find some (i.e. for toxjq 1v1), but not all :< AFAIK you need every single .pk4 used while recording demo to play it.

Some of the maps could be found here:

http://www.clan667.com/index.php/Latest/Maps-For-Download.html

This is quite a big filebase, I think I never even had a map that I couldn't find on there: http://q4supremacymod.com/quake4/

EDIT:
You don't necessarily need all maps to play demos back. It should work as well if you start a listen server on the map the demo is recorded on (spawnserver mp/mapname), disconnect, put demo_enforcefs 0 and then play the demo.

OK thx guys will try that out.

It should work as well if you

No, it shouldn't work. When that works, there is luck involved, and you probably will see crashes / bugs because of using this method.

Yeah well, I've just ecnountered some problems with this method. The demo loaded OK, but as soon as the first rocket explosion was about to be drawn, the demo was aborted with error refering to some special effects.

So, to make it clear, I need to have each .pk4 which is reported when I try to load demo? What about q4max .pk4's? If the game states it misses 0.78c .pk4 I must play this demo from 0.78c only?

yes, you need all pk4s it asks for. drop all of the q4max pk4s in your dir, you do not need to uninstall the newer one - just set the force option and it will pick up the right q4max version automatically.

KK what about maps? I mean some maps come in either different packs, or stand-alone. Sometimes it's pretty hard to find the exact map .pk4 to match the required.

It really is very simple, just make sure you give it every pk4 listed by the q4max demo menu.

Yeah, I knew it wouldn't work all fine, but at least you could watch it if you couldn't find the maps anywhere.

Here are most of the popular maps for 1v1, TDM, and CTF.

http://www.studio421.org/smq/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=155

Finally was able to watch them and I actually liked it.

Cool thing :p.
It's a pity though that there are almost no other demos than those. :/ Maybe I should upload my own demos some time :p.

Ye, CTF plz.
BTW how do you get such amount of ground friction while sliding (enough to turn around)? How do you determine when to use sliding?
I'm a trick addict so it's just interesting for me to find out.

use it all the time :)

I'm not at home right now, but I will upload some demos against some known clans like k1ck and qah this weekend.

Right now I only got some okayish fast caps done in Q4Run (a defrag-like Q4 mod).
http://www.youtube.com/user/zuphrin#play/uploads

Also, there are two ways to slide, you can either use forward + sidekeys or just sidekeys without forward.
To see what keys are being used in demos you can use hud_showinput.

Ye I've watched input still I can't get the whole idea of it. I mean in demos these guys are using it in the way somewhat similiar to +f or strafe only in CPM. I'm literally amazed by their ability to turn 180 in one slide.

I got some demos uploaded now, there are more to come.

np vs k1ck:
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1718492

np vs pbm:
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1718512

Oh thx :D
BTW isn't "kick" a clan of some presumably cheating guy in QL (I mean this 700+ comments thread here on ESR)?
Oh ye could you please give a link to 7ixctf1_beta2 'cause I've been to find the 3rd beta only :<

Yeah it's the same clan, and the same guy "yuka" (who even played for np for a very short while after k1ck completely stopped playing q4 and yuka wanted to play some more Q4), though in Q4 he never cheated or was accused for it.
The map is on here

And oh yeah, here are some more demos, np vs qah:
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1718557

Watched them all.
Really liked some lolcaps with 6hp from coast to coast.
Also liked converting fall to a slide while gaining immediately a 1100 ups speed.

I get lowhp caps pretty often on pickups ;P pretty funny.
Are you talking about the overbounce I get when rocketjumping against the ceiling on DBD? It's pretty funny :d found it by accident, heh. It didn't work out well though against qah I think :/.
If you want some more, I only got another 2 demos against some lows tho, they ended up like 20-0 or so and I got lots of pickup demos, which might be pretty boring though :P
Anyway, feel free to come to #spontan.games and !add up :p

Well I play CPM mostly and I still can't get my Q4 config to work the way it should :<
The biggest problem is huge fps drops when a rocket/grenade explosion is drawn nearby, otherwise I get stable 80 fps. BTW I don't get the idea of fps limitation in q4: is it limited to 90 or what? On some maps (like wcp9) I got 60 fps anyway, even when looking at the bare wall.

fox's config is pretty good I'd say maybe you should try that one. The limitation is set serverside, most servers use 90fps, the default value is 60fps which is why you will have 60fps on some servers with bad settings/admins that don't know anything about smoothness. And yeah, wcp9 a bad remake, it takes so much performance, the perf version though (q4wcp9_perf.pk4) is much better already.

q4 owns.

Zuprhin's suggestions are the best imo. Plus, it'd be great to see the old community come back to q4 to see what's up.

i loved q4 when there was a pickup every time of the day.
I just want to resurrect it. :o

cvar "playerlist" in Q4 TV :)

you mean viewerlist, showing the names of all viewers? (as a command, not a cvar). Does anyone actually use Q4TV anymore?

Yes, command for showing names viewers :)

Well, currently not, but the only Reason why q4TV was rarely used even back in 06/07, was that it is pretty annoying to set up and to spectate, this command would help to get rid of it a bit. But yeah, definately not a thing with high priority, imho.
Rather fix stuff that helps (new)players to enjoy the game and then go to the serious tournament stuff. ;)

Yea, realistically I don't think this one is worth it (the repeater doesnt actually have the data anyway, so its a hassle). Improved Q4TV stuff is on my mental "not worth doing" list - you could do all sorts of things with trying to allow creation of a lobby server that connects to the repeater you want, for example. But at this point, thats just a waste of time.

"but the only Reason why q4TV was rarely used even back in 06/07"

the only reason why it was never used in 06 was because it was introduced in 07

wow, thanks for looking into the changelog, finding the exact date for me.. could you please investigate further and tell me the exact date? Thanks in advance.

No seriously, way to post an unnecessary nitpicking reply.

Just noticed this reply now ;)

Help either extone or me get q4 gameplay on q3 engine :-D

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1720431

Na, don't have time to take on anything new.

License issues aside, it should be pretty trivial to backport the code from Physics_Player.cpp to the bg_pmove.c code in q3. Finding all the crouchslide references should be a pretty easy thing to do, and if you want the 1.4.2 powerslide changes, thats pretty much all the SlideMove / AdjustVelocity funcs.

As arQon said at one point, the code is so similar that it even includes the same bugs.

"As arQon said at one point, the code is so similar that it even includes the same bugs."

Ye. I remember his at the beginning of Q4. The fact that they copy most all Q3 code with ALL bugs that Arqon&Reah fixed for over 6 years blow my mind in that time. I don't know any worse way to fuck up all things from the start, yet it's all about the money. I hope that someone been fired for this and all his money was disappear because Financial crisis ...

With your knowledge and skill, it shouldn't take long to get a good version out within weeks:)

'I think going back to quake 4 1.3 moves [...] would be great..."
-HelLKey

Or Go back to 1.3 ramps keep the cs the way it is in 1.4.2 and add a cs sound like in this mod: http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1720431

Normal command for Shuffle teams, like QL

quake 4 militia 1.7 rcon has everything

lol, you fail at trolling. I doubt anyone here would be interested in any of the features that provides.

omg what a troll!!!!!!!!!!11111111

EDIT:
wtf, i'm kinda confused atm :O

EDIT2:
but anyways you could help me on this ;D http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1775626

I've no doubt that post was from port666 who wrote that mod. I believe he only posts on forums when drunk, which is why hist posts never make much sense

Ironically, I'm one of the few people who successfully used his mod, since it was so hard to actually use it, due to how fucked up his release was.

hehe :D sounds like a great mod there ;p

whos trolling, posting codes have 1 in 25 usage if using a cell

q4 militia makes q4 a game and has si cvars to disable voice taunts, flashlights, sfx etc, got to try it to know

start working on AQ4...

lulz

Do we even have an AQ3? UrT = AQ3? .. if so, -........-

means nothing, put vehicles in mp maps yourself, the waljer is the only good vehicle in q4, out door terrain is crap without megatextures for the gev

tits

yup, the shit power mod with so much recoding it makes people cry and the future of any real q4 action if any

http://c0re.vndv.com/

meh, militia must fix all the tears not specific to q4max

I'm starting to dislike that your using Opera and therefor 'anonymous' points to Opera's norwegian part so you get a Norwegian flag :/ Use proper account that way rightful birthplace will be ashamed! (hopefully not the same *crossing fingers*)

version 1.6 was beta mp, you can play sp from start to end, 1.7 a complete general overhaul with glitch free gaming in both sp and mp, the world of q4 can carry on coplaining about the same stuff, witness militia mp code changes and any of you do it and sync it all on listen and dedicated servers

im british, whats they`re to be ashamed of, the modding scene went from just a mod to all holywood releases with aload of n00bs from consoles finding them

so anyone largin last man standing in the hijack spam militia

loosers, you anon post stuff in http://c0re.vndv.com/forum.php?op=topic&t...p;min=0#15 if you want some done in what already is a masterpeice of the next 1.1.12 dll

just recently found GTR unlagged source so I wanna ask you again - mb you'll consider to add unlagged to q4max?
http://www.moddb.com/mods/gametype-revolution...ing-source
besides that how about finally forget about iD bad guided vanilla and make subtle chandes to gameplay to improve game?
my list is decrease ground accel from 15 to 10 (remaining 15 for cs), increase speed from 320 to 350, increase jump height by 10% keeping jump time the same (both jump speed and gravity tweaks are necessary), change LG, SG, NG.
if you are not confident of gameplay changes you can release beta for community testing

GTR unlagged stuff is conceptually wrong, and is based on a misunderstanding of how the Q4/D3 engine runs in a predicted state all the time (net_clientprediction 0 does not disable prediction, it just lowers it by a few ms)

So no, that won't be added.

for ( i = 0; i < MAX_CLIENTS; i++ ) {
userInfo[i].Clear();
persistentPlayerInfo[i].Clear();
}

for ( i = 0; i < MAX_CLIENTS; i++ ) {
clientsPVS[ i ].i = -1;
clientsPVS[ i ].h = -1;
}


That's cool! Imagine MAX_CLIENTS is greater than the length of userInfo[], persistentPlayerInfo[], clientsPVS[]? BOOM!!

if there were ever less userinfo than clients things would go horribly wrong anyway. I dont have the code infront of me but they are probably declared as that size.

Edit: btw, I checked the code, and was right - they're all declared in idGameLocal as:

pvsHandle_t clientsPVS[MAX_CLIENTS];
idDict userInfo[MAX_CLIENTS];
idDict persistentPlayerInfo[MAX_CLIENTS];

I've released the sources for the GTR unlagged due to the following reason:

- Give other developers a insight of how unlagged was implemented by TTK-Bandit back in 2006/2007 and how a concept of a 'netcode' can be implemented.

Yes it has flaws, yes it is broken, yes it is laggy, yes it is optimized and yes it is better then original. Nothing is perfect but it isn't released as a final version nor an alpha. It's released as a start on a idea and concept of how one might make things better. What's better or worse depends on what your goal is by adding such a given 'feature'.

Since the version of 'unlagged' currently being in GTR has been rewritten I felt the time was right to release our first thoughts of how to implement the 'unlagged' code. How you read or use the released code is up to you.

the key flaw is that the concept is just wrong with how d3 was put together. D3 runs the clients "ahead" ofthe current time, at a time estimated to be in sync with the time it will be when the server gets the data. Moving the players to where they were when the client sent the data wont help anything, especially as the server doesnt know where the client predicted them to be. Net_clientprediction is just a small fudge factor to account for1-2 extra frames of prediction to cover built in latencies. Setting this to 0 does not disable prediction (see com_showasyncstats)

Cg_unsmoothclients fixes a (raven introduced) issue to do with the prediction of player positions that meant the higher your ping, the worse the prediction. To improve "netcode" further you are better of focusing on improving that. I note that sd changed this area significantly in etqw

use numclients not max_clients