I'd have to agree with those that aren't satisfied with this game. FPS isn't my preferred genre, and until recently I avoided multiplayer FPSs largely because of the rampant cheating i had heard about. That changed awhile ago when some friends at i installed UT on a work server and started playing some LAN games. I really got into the multiplayer aspect - but mainly it was enjoyable because I KNEW these people and we could all laugh about it and exchange stories and boasts. As a single player experience, I thought UT dull (at best).
In UT2K3, I was hoping for some broadening of the playing experience. Yes, as people have noted, the visuals are impressive. Beyond that though, it really seems like a rehash of old material. The weapons are largely the same, the game mechanisms are the same, and the opponents are the same....It's like a mediocre sequel to a good movie: you're left thinking it's good because of your positive feelings about the original, but on reflection you're wondering what's so good about it....
Compare, if you will, NOLF to NOLF 2. The demo looks to have recaptured the elements that made the original great (wit, gameplay) and then added to it with new elements like character development and encumberance
quick notes:
rock: agree with you on the lightning gun. I also thought the sharp sound of a nearby richochet was more ominous(and effective) than the lightning gun's visuals.....which made me just think of something: why develop a sniper weapon that reveals its shooter's position?
robo: spam and no skill? yeah, i think so. I think people use this tactic cause ammo is plentiful and a life is short. I wonder if a map had very limited ammo or if you could only carry one/two weapons, if that would make a difference?