Blue's News artwork by Walter |2| Costinak <2@2design.org>

Please visit our sponsors and buy lots of their products. Also, you should floss. ignlogo.gif (1565 bytes)

Mail Bag

Monday, May 25, 1998

Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 8:15 PM
From: Modern1
Subject: Michael Monahan's comments on qw 2.21 in the mailbag

I don't usually stick my two cents in, but cant resist this time. Michael Monahan's comments to the mailbag regarding qw 2.21 are a prime example of one of the biggest problems with the fps community. It's called the "My Way Is The Right Way" syndrome. Everyone in the fps community seems to spend so much time complaining that the games are not custom made for them that I don't see how they have enough time to play the actual games. In reality QuakeWorld was nothing like Original quake. I've played every incarnation of quake, from qtest all the way through to quake2 3.14 and Up until qw 2.21 qw and quake were 2 entirely different games.

QuakeWorld would relentlessly drop sound cues, the physics were more like sliding on glass than the rock solid feel u got from regular quake. The earlier qw's prediction would get so out of whack u would outrun our projectiles if u saw them impact at all. All of these things formed a huge gap between players of quake and qw some people actually liked qw's features and some didn't. But QW was not Quake.

Now Zoid has put qw as close a possible to Quake without the lag and to that I say Hoorah. It's what should have been done in the first place. People who started out playin quake up until now have had to suffer with super lag to get the quake experience as it was intended. And how can anyone complain about the anti cheats. I mean if anyone is ruining the quake experience its those who get some lame pleasure from cheating their way through a game. Now alot of people are gonna say "But I don't care a bit about Regular Quake", I like QW the way it was. Well fine you've still got ver 2.01 which is about as stable a version as anyone could ask for. So just play that. As for the tournament question, what's the big deal? Wouldn't most players rather have  a version that they know is gonna prevent most cheats? I mean its a tournament right? Unless you had the intention of cheating I'd think you'd want the most security conscious version available. Ok I know it'd take getting used to the new physics, but isn't that worth it to reduce or eliminate cheaters. Answer is Yes. Finally on the bugs issue. You stated that in order to use GameSpy with  qw 2.21 you had to "downgrade" your GameSpy from beta 2.0 to 1.53. You should be aware that 1.53 is not a downgrade its an upgrade for the shareware users just as there is a GameSpy beta 2 upgrade for the registered beta that was actually  available before qw 2.20 came out and works perfectly with 2.20 and 2.21.


Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 4:50 PM
From: Ian K. Poma
Subject: Mailbag

This letter is in response to Nour Sharabash's letter on Unreal reviews from Monday's mailbag:

Ok, now let me see if I understand this....just because someone likes a game and you don't makes them a liar. They couldn't possibly enjoy the game at all, they are just getting paid of their words. Maybe if you had made some points as to why you dislike Unreal, there might be some merit to your statements. Sorry calling it a piece-of-shit game does not qualify (is that a technical term by the way?). And just because the people you surround yourself with tend to agree with your opinions, that invalidates everyone else's opinion. Hmmmm, very interesting. Here is a tip for you, if you and your friends tend to have the same opinions as to which games you like, don't read the gaming sites and take your game purchasing advice from your friends.


Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 11:39 AM
From: LDespot (J. Reitman)
Subject: Mailbag Posts and general stuff

On the subject of Unreal reviews... I actually went out and bought the game on Thursday before we actually got our press copy in the mail.   I thoroughly enjoyed the game and gave it a 5/5 .  My reasons were that single player play as great, it was technologically sound, and was fun in general.   Yes the game has some bugs that are being addresses but I still think the title is one of the best I have seen.  Since writing the review, I have gotten several emails (about 20) concerning my opinions.  Some, like yours, were wondering what I was smoking and others were thanking me for a good review.  I wrote each disgruntled person back and found out why they did not like Unreal and most of it boiled down to framerate or bugs.  Both of which stemmed from awkward hardware on their end.   The one guy's game kept GPFing on him while the other guy was running it on a P166 with 16 MB of RAM and no 3D accelerator (the minimum specs).  The only gameplay related complaint I heard concerned the weapons in the game. This particular gentleman preferred the Quake 2 weapons to those of Unreal. Out of the 12 negative emails only one bad comment was about gameplay. Not too bad in my book.

In any case, I am going to put up a mailbag section on GamerzEdge after E3 concerning people's Unreal opinions. If you would like to voice your opinions with some clear thought out points, feel free to email me at ldespot@gamerzedge.com

--LDespot
Head Writer, GamerzEdge (http://gamerzedge.gamestats.com/)


Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 5:02 AM
From: Lance Boil
Subject: MailBag

RE:
Well knock me over, the new Internet Websites Top 100 is out and in a list even further dominated by gaming (the top 10 is all game sites), would you believe Blue's News is up to #3?
[SNIP]
they've nailed down the new top spot as the number one website in the whole entire world! Yee-hah!

This is VERY silly, Blue.  Your site and Voodoo Extreme are top gaming sites perhaps...but that's all.  IMO, Microsoft, Netscape, Yahoo, Altavista, etc. are but a few examples of top websites in "the whole entire world".

Your site is truly useful for gaming people (myself included), who make up a tiny minority of internet users.  The sites I mention above are far more useful, and dare I say popular, than any of the gaming sites on that silly World Charts site.

You don't have to sell your readers on your site.   That's cheap. And you don't have to break your arm patting yourself on the back either. It's very unbecoming.

Ouch! In case it hasn't been clear, I have never made any bones about the Top 100's foibles. I would have thought stressing VE's position as the "number one website in the whole entire world!" would be obvious that my tongue was somewhere near my cheek at the time.

No one needs a website to know that Microsoft or Yahoo get more visits in an hour than Voodoo Extreme and Blue's News combined get in a month. But do the users of those sites care enough about them to vote? Obviously we need to get Bill Gates to pimp this in a little "From the Flood Gates" section on the MS site to make this a fair competition. until then, to keep this fair on Bill I will no longer provide a link to vote for this site on the Internet websites Top 100.

Previous Mailbag