User Reviews (1 - 11 of 188)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Great game but is it the best?

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 36 / 43
Date: December 13, 1999
Author: Amazon User

Being the avid frst person shooter fan I purchased both Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament the moment they respectivly came out after playing both demos. Let me first say that I enjoyed the UT demo better than the quake one but I had high hope s that John Carmack the guys at id software would come out with the best product in the end as their products in the past have been much better than Epics. With that said, I bleive that Quake 3 Arena, although it is a great game, is not nearly as inovative as Unreal Tournament. Comparing two games made by different companies is sometimes unfair because different idea and tooughts went into their production; however, I feel that this case is a bit different.

The Comparison:

Graphics: I will start with graphics because they are usually the first thing to jump out and get the gamer's attention. Graphics will be broken into two categories level design and player skins

Level Design: this category has to go to UT. Where the are about even the inginuity goes to UT. UT offers levels such as castles, space stations, wooden ships, etc., where as Quake 3 mainly limits the player to levels that resemble only castles.

Player Skins: This is the category that Quake 3 really shines in. Unlike UT, who's player skins are mainy bland humans, Quake offers around thirty different skins which range from demons to bikers to eyeballs with legs.

Sound: For the most part the enviromental sounds on both games but UT wins out for offering excellant voice-overs which the bots use when they taunt other player/bots during the match.

Weapons: Both games offer an assortment of well balanced weapons; however UT offers more. Not only do they offer the usual machinegun and shotgun they also offer a flak gun and biogun. UT's weapons also have two fire modes.

AI/Bots: The bots in the single player mode of Quake 3 are challenging. That's not to say that UT's are not but my experience has shown that the bots in Q3 are better.

Online play: Niether game offers a better online interface, but if I had to pick the one that is better overall I would pick UT. This is because Q3 lags more often than UT. I am using a T1 so Q3 may perform better with a modem.

Overall: UT is a better game overall. Does this mean Q3 is bad? Of course not. I like them both; however not everyone is lucky enough to own both. The main reason I would rate UT higher is ingenuity. UT offer several types of play straight deathmatch, Last man standing, capture the flag, team deatchmatch, assualt, and domination where as Q3 only offers deathmatch, team deathmatch, and cpture the flag.

Remember that these are only my opinions and yours may be different. Which is a good thing so that we can get two great games and not just one.

Why are so many people ignorant?

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 37 / 46
Date: December 20, 1999
Author: Amazon User

This is a comparison between Q3 (quake 3) and UT (UnrealTournament), the two big first person shooters in the gaming arena. Togive you a little background, I am a game reviewer for Game-Guru. I don't want to give a big comparison between UT and Q3, I just want to explain why Q3 is the better game, overall.

First of all, even though gameplay is very important, you have to consider the graphics and level design. Q3's graphics are the best out there, with volumetric textures, curved surfaces, and secular lighting. Thihs allows for organic level disign, while UT's levels are blocky and feel like lego blocks. Although Quake's levels do revolve around a single theme, and UT's has various themes, the detail in Q3 is quite unbelieveable. Skeletons lie on the ground, and statues of past ID heroes stand in the battlefield. You won't find those in UT. Another thing concering graphics, Q3 includes 30 player models, with the ability to add more characters and mods (creating variations in the game from level design to a whole new game), while UT has only 4 models and only small modification abilities.

In gameplay, UT offers the smooth tech like gameplay, where the gamer feels like he or she is just pushing buttons to make things splatter on the screen. While this may be appealing to some gamers, you must remember that the first person shooter genre's perpose is to shoot and kill people, as the name suggest. The tech style of UT doesn't give you this feeling at all. Q3, on the other hand, is furious and fast, immersing you into the dark atmosphere, and really gives you the feeling of a shooter.

In the end, there are so many things that Q3 does as good or better than UT, but that doesn't mean that UT is a bad game, just not for the style that some gamers are looking for. Thanks for reading this!

If you're not into multiplayer, buy something else

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 50 / 70
Date: January 03, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I have eagerly gobbled up every release from Id since the Doom shareware demo, and loved every minute of the hours and hours of gameplay.

But I hate Q3.

Why?

The game is designed *only* for multiplayer. Don't believe otherwise. The classic Doom/Quake format of exploration and level-solving is gone. Kaput. The single-player version just gives you an AI critter as a stand-in for a deathmatch opponent, which means that the gameplay consists of nothing more than running around a small, boring level as fast as you can while frantically shooting in all directions. It's totally lost the scary, creepy charm that really made Doom and the earlier versions of Quake stand out.

Yeah, the graphics are great, and yeah, the AI critters are pretty smart, but the gameplay gets old really fast. If, like me, you don't give a damn about multiplayer gaming and you're looking for a *real* sequel to Q2, check out Unreal or Half-life. But don't bother with Q3.

Hottest PC Game this year!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 24 / 26
Date: December 16, 1999
Author: Amazon User

To say that Quake 3 lives up to the hype is an understatement. I'll admit that, with the exception of the incredible graphics, I was a bit underwhelmed by the downloadable demo.

The final game, however, is fantastic. The bots are great fun - they play with a variety of different styles and "personalities" that make them very life-like. As mentioned above, the graphics are mind-blowing. Q3 is the first and presently the only 3D game that I'm aware of that uses curved surfaces, and they vastly improve the visual appeal of the various environments. The levels are a bit monotonous from a "decorative" point of view, but for actual playability they offer a great deal of variety and are very fast-paced. The jump pads increase the flexibility of the maps to a great extent, allowing players to quickly move vertically.

While the Quake series has been traditionally enjoyed most by the "hard-core" gamers, id software did a good job of providing a few introductory levels in Quake 3 to let the newbies practice their skills a little bit before being thrown into the fire. And Quake is by far the reigning king of Internet play - according to id's statistics, 500-1700 people worldwide join Q3 Internet games every 5 minutes.

Before purchasing, pay close attention to the system requirements. Most mid- to high-end computers purchased in the last 18 months will run Q3 just fine, but some will require upgraded video cards (cards based on NVidia's TNT/GeForce or 3DFX's Voodoo technology are best).

Happy Fragging!

Not Quite A Review...

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 21 / 23
Date: November 22, 1999
Author: Amazon User

I can't review the final product since it just went gold today and hasn't been released in stores, but I have played the DemoTest of the game, and would offer the following comments:

This game requires a lot of energy to play. If you want to sit and relax in front of your computer, then don't try to play Quake 3. Save it for the times when you have lots of pent up aggression and energy. With hard-hitting sound effects, slick graphics and over-the-top gore, Quake 3 is a very satisfying way to release it.

Quake 3 is a fighting game, like Mortal Kombat -- you progress through the game by killing all your opponents. There is also a Capture The Flag option, which is a more strategic, team-based style of play. Both of these modes are playable over the internet or local network against other humans, by yourself with computer-controlled teammates and opponents, or a combination of the two.

Quake 3 *requires* a 3D video accelerator, such as a Voodoo 3 or TNT2. Make sure you have one of these in your computer before trying this game.

I would highly recommend this game to anyone who loves fast-paced action, gore, and state-of-the-art graphics.

Know what you're *REALLY* buying when u get Quake3

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 14 / 15
Date: March 15, 2000
Author: Amazon User

THE GOOD: If you want deathmatch, this is unbelievable. Unreal Tournament looks like stick-figures fighting compared to Q3. Q3 is all about graphics.. lotsa blood and body parts flying.

THE BAD: Sound for Q3 stinks. For all the bad-ass graphix, sound still hasn't evolved from cartoonland beeps and bells. Most of all, forget about single player, NO ONE buys this game for single-player, there isn't one.

THE UGLY: Forget about system requirements on the box. To play Q3 so that it actually works, you need at least 400Mhz processor and a spanking new video card. Even the video cards the box says will work, like Voodoo, will give you major problems. You better spend $300+ on some TNT2 Ultra video card if you want this thing to work. And MOST IMPORTANTLY, you MUST MUST have cable modem. 56K doesn't cut it. you simply cannot play, because you'll be 1000 times slower than eveyone else (even with the lowest graphic detail and no sound, animations). You'll die die die and that's no fun, and there's no single player game to fall back on.

SUMMARY: This is not a $40 game for most people (like me). I had to spend $300 for a new video card even though my original card was "ok" by the boxes standards. And I had to buy a cable modem + monthly service fees. You better have deep pockets to play Q3. But as a game, and not a tech-project, Q3 rocks! After 30mins of play, I walk away from my computer shell-shocked, like i was in a savage bloody war, try taking 30 vivarin and washing it down with a pitcher of coffee for the same effect =).

Oh yeah, one last thing, forget about tech-support. They didn't help me, and apparently didn't help others who wrote reviews. If you're computer can't run Q3 for whatever reason.. its YOUR problem and YOUR money.

An Actual Review of the Game

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 15 / 17
Date: December 10, 1999
Author: Amazon User

Well... It's fun as hell, really.

The weapon balance is very good and gameplay is fast and furious. It's a lot more like Q1 than Q2, really. Q2 was a very slow game and allowed for people to dominate without ever being killed by carrying a ton of armor. It's not like that in Q3.

The single player mode is simply amazing. The way the bots move is very convincing -- you can easily forget that you aren't playing other people. Their taunts are pretty funny, too, and give them personalities. I think that they did a great job with the difficulty levels, because the easy bots don't just stand still and the hard bots don't just rail you out of the air.

The levels look really good, but a lot of them aren't all that much fun. The outside, bounce pad levels are a riot! Some of the new power ups are great fun and remove the boredom and cheesiness of the Quad. They have Haste, Regen, Invul, Invis and Flight (I may have left one out). The teleporter adds a lot to the game, too: teleporting yourself to safety after someone knocks you off the level really frustrates the other guy!

Things I don't like. As I said, some of the levels are kind of boring. They look like Rocket Arena levels, but you still have to scrounge for weapons. The grenade launcher (my favorite in Q1 & Q2) is a bit off. The delay is too long on it, so it isn't nearly as useful. Basically, shooting behind yourself when you're being followed doesn't work.

Minor nuisances. They seem to have taken out the option to save your config, unless I'm just an idiot, and the default for multiplayer games is not rotate maps.

Best Deathmatch

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 34 / 59
Date: November 29, 1999
Author: Amazon User

OK, let's try to be fair. Q3A has great graphics, support cool technologies (Multi-processor, GeForce256's T&L). UT has great graphics too, different but still great.

For the game play, I tried both (even bought UT, and be sure, I'll buy Q3A when it's released) and here is my opinion:

You like pure deathmatch? Q3A is the answer. The gameplay is really good, and feels better than UT's. The weapons are not so fancy as UT's ones but are very well balanced and give a lot of fun.

You want something new? Play UT's Domination or Assault. They're just great teamplay and won't get you bored!

Best of Show - Online Carnage

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 9 / 9
Date: January 05, 2000
Author: Amazon User

First things first. Q3A is designed pretty much as an online only multiplayer experience. If you don't have a fast internet connection, you will only get frustrated trying to compete with your 400 ms ping vs. 60 ms pings of high bandwidth players. That asides, Q3A is an excellent multiplayer online game...if all you like is deathmatch, team deathmatch, and capture the flag. The game shipped with tons of nagging bugs, and a mainly unfinished menu system. The scoreboard is woefully inadequate, and the online server browser is laughable. But the gameplay is fast, viseral, and violent. You need some horsepower to truly enjoy Q3A. A PII-400, and a TNT2 or GeForce is pretty much a good machine. Anything less and you will be battling the framerate gods. The graphics are gorgeous, and the 3D character models are the best to date. You can play single player games against 'bots', which are computer controlled opponents. The bots are supposed to act like human players, but they do not...not by a long shot. They are either too easy, or have perfect aim. Perfect aim is not a replacement for good AI. Q3A has a lot of faults, and expect to download a bunch of point releases (aka. patches) to get the game complete. If you're a high bandwidth owner, and are looking for online carnage, nearly everything takes a backseat to Q3A.

Marginally better than Unreal Tournament

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 10 / 11
Date: November 24, 1999
Author: Amazon User

I don't know why users rate UT way above this title. UT uses more textures to make up for lack of advanced geometry (more slow swaps), still has spotty networking code, and more sluggish overall play over net (mine on cable speeds). Its weapons are way cooler, though.

QuakeIII may still be the overall winner, but only just, with more varied and subtly balanced multiplay design. The bots are predictable, but impressively adaptable. However, the weapons are the same old, which adds to the all pervasive quake fatigue.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions