User Reviews (21 - 31 of 185)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

UT + Q3 = UT2K3

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 6 / 7
Date: October 09, 2002
Author: Amazon User

What to say? They took a game I loved, and still do, and took away all the things I loved about it, then added nicer graphics.

UT2K3 is SLOW. It's Quake3 slow. Player movement is slow. Rate of fire is ridiculously slow. Even the speed the projectiles travel is slow.

UT2K3 is imbalanced. After all the touting of the weapon tweaks they made, the only weapon that gets regular use is the sniper (lightning) gun. Why? Because with how outrageously slow the rate of fire is on every weapon, there's plenty of time to pop your enemy's head clean off before he can deal enough damage to finish you off.

The player models are almost direct copies of the Quake3 player models. I far preferred the originals.

Finally, no Assault mode. Assault is the only mode I play in UT, so it is sorely missed. Bombing Run is decent fun in UT2K3, but not a worthy replacement.

If you are a Quake lover or a sniping freak you may enjoy this game. More defensive players or those looking for fast action should look elsewhere.

A bit too real

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 15 / 30
Date: September 23, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I love UT and once I heard they will release the sequel, I couldn't wait for it. A bit to my disappointment, the essence of UT was missing. Its not a fast pace game as in UT. Its not that I am not flexible, I play all the games in this genre, but UT2003 seems to lack a few things behind - not to mention the addition of the annoying voice of the anouncer. Many people who are used to UT, complains about the voice of the anouncer. Its like playing a 70's Smash hit TV or a commentator from one of those home shopping network - which makes it really annoying, thus the fun factor is reduced - it tends to become boring.
All in all UT2003 has one of the best graphics I had ever seen. It is recommended that you have a Geforce to have the "feel" of UT2003. I don't think I will be much enthusiastic about UT2003. Call me old fashion if you like. I still like UT more, there seems to be an adrenaline rush in UT. This version seems to be a futuristic gameplay modified version of Counter Strike in an Arena - since the maps are more of CS than UT or Quake Arena.
Whatever happened to gameplay? I sure enjoyed Quake Arena, Half Life, and UT... not much of a CS fan... and somehow not much interested in playing UT2003.
Some thing is missing!!!! I don't feel the adrenaline rush in this "fast pace" game....
I'm disappointed, yet, I'm giving 4 stars to the overall. Not to mention the limit on the translocator, the annoying announcer, and my favorite sniper rifle had been replaced by a futuristic gun (which is sooooooo slow), the weapons which had been weakened... anyway, for those who haven't played it UT, then there wouldn't be much to compare - so the gameplay will be fine for them (I think).
I would have given 3 if you are expecting a modified version of UT. Since the essence is missing. Some people play just for the sake of it. I have 5 computers at my house, and I have lan parties every evening. So, I am sort of a UTian. I guess I'm just old fashion.

Frustratingly close

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 9 / 15
Date: May 28, 2003
Author: Amazon User

The original Unreal Tournament is hands down my favorite game of all time. As a result, I was first in line to purchase the follow-up, virtually sight unseen.

There are a lot of little changes that bother me, such as the absence of the sniper rifle, the weakening of the rocket launcher, and the awful remaking of classics like "Lava Giant" and "Facing Worlds." But the gameplay is still stellar, the AI unbelievable, and the graphics are a definite improvement.

But what kills this game for me is the framerate. That's it. I've got a good machine (1 Ghz PIII, GeForce 3), and am accustomed to reasonable framerates, but UT2003, no matter what I set the resolution at, wouldn't climb over 20. For a game so frought with action, a constant awareness of what's going on is priority one, and frankly, this game fails to live up. Based on the professional reviews I've read, there are similar complaints all around.

So, instead, pick up a copy of Unreal Championship for your Xbox (same game, better framerate), or better yet, the original, classic Unreal Tournament.

Oh, and bring back the old announcer. The new one [stinks].

OK single player, great on line gameplay

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 10 / 18
Date: November 30, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Think of Unreal Tournament 2003 as a great-graphics weapon fest. As a first person shooter it has an OK single player mission series, but the game really shines in its on line tournament play.

Yes, there is a single player mode. You go around shooting things, learning about the weapons and maps. Play with the six races and various classes to learn which best appeals to you and your gameplay style.

The character choices are interesting, and the sound draws you into the game. The booming wrestling-match commands give you that tournament feel. On the down side, there is a lot of cursing in the default taunts, so this is yet another reason the game isn't great for younger kids (apart from the obvious violence).

The graphics and physics are truly amazing. They've gone an excellent job both with indoor and outdoor maps. Players who are used to the Doom-like graphics of some other games out there will really appreciate the attention to detail put into the development here. The way in which your character moves, and the world through which you are moving, are both very realistic.

The weapons represent a good mix of styles. Some might complain that some of the uber-weapons from previous releases are missing - but there's a reason for that, it's called gameplay balance. The weapon set you have available here helps ensure that you have to use some brains and strategy to win, not just raw button-mashing ability.

Where the game really shines is multiplayer. This is what it was made for. Once you've spent enough time in single player to learn the controls, races and weapons, be sure to head on line! You can play classics like deathmatch, capture the flag, bombing run (like football) and domination (a control-area setup).

Highly recommended for any on line fan of first person shooters!

AWFUL

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: October 08, 2002
Author: Amazon User

The Demo played smoothly, but I purchsed the full version today and so far its been awful. ... System freezes, texture problems, sound problems are just a few of the things plagueing this game.

I have several games that are more more system intensive, and play great. This game is just terribly engineered. 4 year wait...

I would wait a few months for the dust to clear. Or shelve this. It's useless until they patch it over the next several months, if it ever really works at all.

Dissapointing...

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: November 27, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This games boasts more of an engine than an actual game. I don't doubt the engine's capabilities, it does render gorgeous graphics and the polygon count on the models are very impressive. But it would seem to me that the developers spent more time on the engine development than on the gameplay design. It has not changed much from the original Unreal Tournamnent and I found the gameplay to be repetitive and monotonous. The only "breath-of-fresh-air" in this game is "Bombing Run", but it still won't improve my overall impression of this game.

In a nutshell, this game is BORING.

Don't expect the same feeling as UT

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: January 09, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I agree with Peter. This game gave me a feeling of Quake which I never liked. I should have checked the demo at unreal2003.com before bying this as I assumed that this would be better technology but similar to UT. I miss the bow, sniper and some realistic weapons as well as maps. It was fun playing dm-bathroom , morpheus etc. in UT.
Multiplayer connection/lookup is faster.

Playable on a P-III 600 with 64MB of RAM and a TNT? PLEEZE!!

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: April 07, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Overall, UT2k3 is a good cool game but isn't as good as the original. And isn't the fps on the market to grace either. I downloaded an installed the demo, the engine was great, and produced beatiful 3-D graphics and 3-D sound(if you have a HW T & L enabled card such as the original GeForce or Radeon or better) quality, but overall wans't sure what do think about it. The demo offered TOO LITTLE overall. So I decided to purchase the actaul game and patch it up to version 2199. Now I have three computers, one is low-end, one is mid-range, and the other is below low-end
The Below Low-End is:
Windows 98 1rst edition
Intel Pentium III-600MHZ clock-speed
64MB of SDRAM
NVIDIA RIVA TNT 16mb
Onboard audio
DirectX8.1b
Two 18gb hds
56k modem
and more

The Second low-end one is:

Windows 2000 Pro
Intel Pentium III-800MHZ, overclockable to 1.0ghz clock-speed max
two sticks of 128MB of PC133 SDR SDRAM
Sound Blaster Live! Value 1024v digital sound card
NVIDIA GeForce 256 32mb

DirectX8.1
Two 30GB HDS
ISDN
And more

That is my low end system. Here is my mid-range computer:

Windows XP Home Edition
Intel Pentium 4-1.6GHZ clock speed. 2.0GHZ clock speed max.
256 MB of PC2700 DDR SDRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 4 ti4200 64mb
Sound Blaster Audigy(white box)
DirectX9
Two 80GB HDS
ADSL Yahoo SBC 10.0 MBPS internet connection
And more

On my below low end system, the game wasn't playable. Even at the lowest settings, it was too slow, too frequently crashed and page swapp cached to the hd, and didn't look right, even with the latest drivers. And was NOT playable online-got too much lagg, poor ping, and too much pl.
I don't know how the game is playable on a machine like that like it SAYS in the readme.txt
Bunch of liers at digital extremes/epic games.

It ran on my low end system, and was playable. Playable, but not great or good. The game looked great though, and i recieved the proper frame rates. I got some occasional page cache swapping. It ran at a playable frame rate, some times crashed.
It was some what playable online. Didn't get any PL tho.
It was OK.

On my mid-range system, it ran fine.
It ran quite smooth, looked even better, rareley cache dto the hd, and almost never crashed. Didn't get any lagg or pl when playing online. Even at a 1024x768 resolution at high details, the game runs basically fine on my mid-range system.

Anyway, the game features new characters, redone old ones, new weapons, redone old ones, new and redone old arenas, completeley new smooth network code(at times even on a 56kmodem), one new game type(bombing run), and four new game types overall. New commands in the voice menu. ETC. Overall UT2003 is decent for a normal gamer, needs to improve for a SP gamer, and is great for a hardcore-mp gamer. Just come prepared with a mid-range system or higher to enjoy the game itself.

Recieving the deserving proper frame rates and visuals at high resolutions and smooth and playable frame rates with high polygon counts and vast 3-D details and environments and a variety of options and new features and smooth network code is what presents UT2k3 as an absoluteley splendid shooter on the market.
Trust me, the game will appreciate you as much as you will appreciate it if you have a mid-ranged system or higher.

It's worth the price*.

UT2K3 - trying to be objective

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 4 / 4
Date: May 22, 2003
Author: Amazon User

First, my credentials: I'm a semi-professional Quake 3 player, and I've been playing shooters for the last 5 years. No, I'm not the catscratch from QW - I played Lith Q2 with SoH before moving on to OSP Q3.

Ok, let's get to the reviewing. When it comes to UT, there's little to no middle ground - people either love it or hate it, but only a few will be objective. I'll try to be one of those.

From a technical point of view, the game is superb. The graphix are phenomenal, and the performance is acceptable - the game runs on top systems about as well as Q3 did when it first came out. I expect that in another half a year performance will not be an issue for the average gamer.

The textures, effects, and animations are all very well done. The levels are rendered with a degree of style rarely found in other shooters - the environments are unique, imposing, and impressive. If you want to show off that l33t gaming rig, then this is definitely a good choice.

But, as they say, gameplay is king, especially in online first person shooters, and it is here that the game begins to fall flat.

First of all, the game just doesn't have enough depth. All the various movement options are very easy to do - without having played the original UT, I've picked up the basics of dodging in an hour, and was hopping happily along with the best of 'em in 2 days. Compare this to the 2-6 months that strafe-jumping normally takes to learn, and you beging to see the difference.

Secondly, most of the maps are designed poorly - not many maps are suited to 1 on 1 play, and are often too large to control. Spawn points are placed poorly and lead to too much spamming in a free-for-all. There are numerous choke points and camp spots that seriously detract from the flow of the game.

The game isn't very customizable. There is no way to handle mouse acceleraion from within the game, nor can you specify sensitivity individually for each mouse axis. You cannot force enemy models or disable many of the effects. The weapons are interesting, and compliment each other well, but they don't seem to pack the punch that other shooters have.

It's not surprising, then, that Fatal1ty was able to come in to the game with only a few weeks of practice and dominate the CPL. I'm pretty sure that most of the people from the old Quake crowd would have done the same, had they bothered to show up.

Still, ALL of these gripes apply only if you plan to play the game at a hardcore level. Admittedly, most of us will not, and for the casual gamer, UT2K3 should offer a lot of fun. It's fast paced, it's easy on the eyes, the weapons are original and interesting, and the learning curve isn't very steep.

I'd rate the game 5 stars for the casual gamer and 2 stars for the hardcore gamer. If you just want to have fun, then buy it by all means, but keep in mind that this is not the Next Big Thing.

Final rating: ***1/2.

Terrible!

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 10 / 19
Date: September 26, 2002
Author: Amazon User

The original Unreal Tournament was great. The announcing voice came on at appropriate times. In the new one, it states obvious facts and gets annoying, fast. The old game had better weapons, and also had better skins. What's up with the guys in robot shells? Anyways, UT Gold was, and always will be, the best!

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

Actions