Sauerbraten featured on Game of the Day

by ctplayer on 04/10/2008 07:36, 19 messages, last message: 04/12/2008 21:14, 1831 views, last view: 05/03/2024 11:18

Hey everyone,

Just wanted to let you guys know that Game of the Day featured Sauerbraten today. We were very impressed by your game, and it has earned its place as only the second FPS game ever to be featured.

Head on over to check out our short review: http://gameoftheday.wordpress.com

   Board Index   

#1: Great

by %username% on 04/10/2008 13:40

Great! Lets drink, guys!

reply to this message

#2: ...

by Hirato Kirata on 04/10/2008 15:05

I can't help but think some of the information in your review is a bit misleading and perhaps false. it's mostly just these lines I have problems with.

"The graphics are comparable to Unreal and Quake."
by those naming, I'm guessing Unreal Tournament 1 (2002 I think), and quake 1 (as you didn't specify if it was quake 1, 2, 3 or 4)

sauer far surpasses those games in graphical quality.

"Sauerbraten is a first-person shooter in the mold of Unreal Tournament"
I'm not too sure of that 'truth' or 'falseness' represent in that line. As far as I know, Sauer isn't based on any other FPS, despite implementing some of their features. (yeah, ctf, weapons, and kewl particles are part of them all)

"You can, obviously, plan over LAN or Internet with friends"
You misspelled 'play' :D

~Hirato Kirata

P.S. if I'm wrong, feel free to correct :)

reply to this message

#3: Re: ...

by ctplayer on 04/10/2008 16:37, refers to #2

Mostly, you're wrong... but thanks for catching the spelling error! :P

reply to this message

#4: Re: ...

by Quin on 04/10/2008 18:23, refers to #3

Actually, he is not. Sauerbraten is more of a modern Doom/Quakeworld clone (modern in the sense it uses new technology and ideas in the same basic style of play).

reply to this message

#5: Re: ...

by ctplayer on 04/10/2008 19:23, refers to #4

I don't want to get into an argument over this, but the site is geared toward people who are not dedicated gamers. If you are really a fan of the FPS genre, chances are you already knew what Sauerbraten was. Connecting the game with more popular titles like Unreal or Quake was simply the more appropriate way to go. Even veteran eyes would acknowledge little difference between the set up of these games.

reply to this message

#6: ..

by James007 on 04/10/2008 21:28

Sauer can be compared to Quake1 and 2. Not any of the Unreal Tournament series.... Graphically you could say it could be compared to Quake 4(ut2004 is not graphically up to date with Sauer).

There may not be that big of a difference between Sauer and Quake1 and 2 besides graphics but comparing Unreal Tournament(the series) to Sauer is nonsense(If you have played any of the series you would know that).

reply to this message

#7: um.. no

by damncookies on 04/11/2008 00:06

It's always nice to have publicity, but everything about Sauer in stuff like this always seems innacurate..

First of all, those screenshots are from a REALLY old version.

Secondly, the graphics are about on par with Q4, not the origional. While it's true Sauer was made with lower systems in mind, you still shouldn't play it without a dedicated graphics card (seriously, onboard graphics are useless).

Third, since you said your site was for casual gamers, why is this on here? Sauer is designed to be as hardcore as it gets, gameplay-wise. People that aren't avid gamers will just get frustrated.

Also, Sauer uses standard FPS controls. Seriously, every game uses these.

PS: Don't tell people that have been here for awhile that they're wrong about the game. We know what we're talking about.

reply to this message

#7: ..

by James007 on 04/11/2008 03:11

Sauer isnt Hardcore, its old school. The multiplayer is kind of hardcore i guess...

i've been playing cube since.... well the first versions of cube.

reply to this message

#8: Well, I say thanks!

by yoopers on 04/11/2008 03:18

Despite some inaccuracies, this was a positive review. Good publicity brings more players. More players means more people for me to frag. ;]

"We know what we doing. More frag. For great justice!"

reply to this message

#9: Re: Well, I say thanks!

by a`baby`rabbit on 04/11/2008 09:00, refers to #8

Sure we could argue quake/unreal/graphics/blah - but this strikes me as a balanced review. Positive publicity... now let us be gentle on the new players it attracts :-)

reply to this message

#10: Re: ...

by Quin on 04/11/2008 10:39, refers to #5

Nor do I wish to argue, was merely reinforcing a fact. You're the one who keeps disagreeing with those who are more involved in the community (and who would know better).

I don't deny it's a great review and what first impressions it may or may not give new people. Thanks for your support.

Maybe you could mention how the code for the engine is very streamlined and effective, making it a great tool for people looking to take advantage of the technology to make their own games (from a C/C++ point of view anyway).

reply to this message

#11: Re: ..

by Megagun_0 on 04/11/2008 19:34, refers to #6

I have played all of the Unreal Tournament series, and fail to see why UT can\'t be compared to Sauerbraten.. Both games rely equally greatly to applying indirect damage to enemies by shooting the surface, walls, etc, with rockets and grenades (Death from Above with a rocket, for example), and possibly finishing off with a more direct weapon (Flak/Shotgun, Chaingun).. Also, both games rely greatly on jumping lots to achieve a better kill result with rockets and grenades... So please, can you give some solid proof as to why Sauer and UT aren\'t comparable, rather than just claiming that they are not and that anyone who played both games should know the reason of that? Either you don\'t know yourself, or you\'re lazy (probably not).

It\'s obvious though that Sauerbraten aims more towards the graphical style of Quake than the graphical style of UT, though...

reply to this message

#12: ..

by James007 on 04/11/2008 21:31

UT has Alternate fire modes on weapons, players can dodge/wall jump/double jump, UT has the translocator device, the weapons are and react very differently than the Sauer weapons, UT\'s player movement feels a lot more fluent(get to place to place with quickly with dodges and hops).

You could compare the multiplayer of Sauer to UT i guess, but they play very differently. I have had UT2004 for a few years now and still play mods and stuff to this day.

reply to this message

#13: ..

by Rinkydinky on 04/12/2008 07:18

While I love Sauer, and think the engine, while incomplete is very nice, saying that it's better graphically than ut2004 is just false. There's more to graphics than fancy lighting and effects. UT2004 has models, maps and textures that no free FPS to date even come close to.

reply to this message

#14: Re: ..

by MovingTarget on 04/12/2008 17:11, refers to #13

Your logic is flawed. If you're talking about "models, maps, and textures", then yes, UT2004 does have better. But if you're talking about "graphics", then don't bring "models, maps, and textures" into the picture. If Sauer had a large team of professional modelers, mappers, and texture artists, and no modifications to the graphical side of the engine were made, of course it would still look better, even if no effects were added.

reply to this message

#15: Re: ..

by demosthenes on 04/12/2008 17:16, refers to #14

I could have sworn I posted about "content != rendering" last night, but now I don't have to!

reply to this message

#16: Re: ..

by Megagun_0 on 04/12/2008 18:44, refers to #12

Whilst all those points are valid, I think that in the end, the gameplay of Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament isn't that big at all, at least not for non-pro players.. I don't really see why any of those points (apart from maybe the movement style) really make a difference in the gameplay of quake and unreal...

You should also consider the target audience of this review, which probably only knows multiplayer gamestyles like Battlefield's, Unreal Tournament/Quake's gamestyle (DM, arenabased, non-huge maps), and the gamestyles of more tactical shooters..
----
Towards the posts about graphics and content: Why should content not be valued in when talking about graphics? To me, it seems that a graphics engine allows the content to look great, whereas content allows the graphics engine to really shine..

By your logic, a hypothetical 2d game I made that supports some basic effects and is able to render at 1680x1050, yet only uses black blocks and green blocks for textures, is graphically superior to, say, Tyrian...

reply to this message

#17: ..

by Acord on 04/12/2008 19:13

Regardless, any publicity that sauer gets is a good thing. For something that's free and super easy to make new content for, it doesn't get enough in the way of publicity love.

reply to this message

#18: ..

by James007 on 04/12/2008 20:09

UT2004 is not graphically better, it may have better models and animations but thats about it.

Sauer has a better lighting system and supports bloom(along with those other options. Sauer has more eye candy when options are maxed then in ut2004 when maxed. I also get higher frame rates in Sauer than in UT2004.

reply to this message

#19: Re: ..

by MovingTarget on 04/12/2008 21:14, refers to #16

There can be a bit of confusion about "Graphics", and "Graphically superior". Most of the time, when people say the latter, they mean how it actually *looks*. However, other people mean how it *can look* and the power of the engine. If you're referring to the first interpretation, then I can see your logic. If you're not, then I have no idea what you're talking about (and neither do you).

reply to this message

   Board Index