Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Review

Last response: in Video Games
Share
October 11, 2007 3:07:00 PM

Review written by Travis Meacham.

Activision and Splash Damage engage in some fan service with a Quake-ified follow-up to Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. Does Enemy Territory: Quake Wars break the mold or is it just another team-based online shooter?

http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2007/10/11/enemy_territory/
October 11, 2007 4:01:27 PM

The vehicles getting damaged from the default weak guns sucks imo, the Hyperblaster and GPMG maybe, but the AR or Lacerators shouldn't do as much as they do to vehicles, or structures. It's like the armor is made of jell-o.

Atleast I haven't seen any TK'ing for vehicles, it is probably partly that, and partly for the weird default vehicle controls, like "1" for flares, 2, 3 switch weapons and G for entering (took me forever to get, I don't like looking in the control options).

I love playing Strogg, can't stand the GDF for some reason (look like a knockoff of C&C's GDI).

The other night, I saw what looked like a friendly running away from 2 guys that were chasing him, so I mowed down the 2 chasers and BAM backstab! LOL, I got him back, I never forget who knifes me. Disguise is so fun.
October 11, 2007 6:46:23 PM

from the article:

"What I Compared It To: The Battlefield games were on my mind but I also made comparisons with upcoming games like Team Fortress 2 and Call of Duty 4. While those games are smaller in scale than Enemy Territory: Quake Wars it was the infantry combat I was considering. Obviously Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory and Quake multiplayer are evident in Quake Wars but I was considering more contemporary titles."

Honestly, I played the demo and came away with the strongest comparison to UT2004's (and before it the original UT'99) 'Assault' game type. The only differences... and I mean the ONLY differences was that UT does not have classes or any achievements, but the achievements are lame w/o persistence. Other than that, they are identical in every way. (and UT still has better animation ;)  )

While that is not a problem per-se... (UT2k4's 'onslaught' was a distilling of battlefield and it is great) That was the least successful and least played UT gametype online. It requires so much teamwork (as mentioned, hard to find) and on some maps you can get really bored as a defender. Even with UT2k4's assists that try to point you in the right direction (for n00bs) was not very good at getting new players into it.

Couple that "been there, done that" feeling with the "lame-ness" of the weapon/vehicle feel (much like the article's mention of lame explosions) and you have a game that gave me an overwhelming "meh" feeling.

Not trying to come off as a UT fanboi... I do love the game but also love bf2 and the others you mentioned in the article. QW just is not doing it for me is all... and thought the lack of that assault comparison needed to be pointed out. I have not played assault in more than 2 years and yet that was the first glaring similarity that hit me.

rock on.
Related resources
October 12, 2007 5:33:06 AM

Quote:
the animation is what detracts from the experience. The player movements are a little stiff and don't blend together very well.


Great game but i agree. From what i understand, smooth animation was sacrificed for accurate hit detection.


Quote:
Paul Wedgewood: Yeah, but ultimately the most important thing is that what you shoot is what you hit, and that's more important than having really smooth animation. We're faced with the choice of giving you a smooth gameplay experience with really good hit-registration and really good player-prediction and really good networking, or something that is heavily interpolated and gives you the impression that everything's running really smoothly, except that vehicle isn't really where you think it is and that animation isn't really playing and half of the game is client-side prediction.



October 13, 2007 1:19:16 AM

very fun game, may be buying it soon, love the demo.
October 15, 2007 1:54:51 PM

10/10
Yeah the reviewer is more of a newbish kinda gamer.
For adults who like comprehensive team play this game is it.
Bioshock got a better grade and it got boring within two weeks.
This game is not going to get boring for a long time with all the great maps and weapons that will come in some patches.
I don't understand how Bioshock can get a better grade when this game has about 10x better replay value, it is hands down without question the better game.
October 15, 2007 4:36:58 PM

Token_Z said:
10/10
Yeah the reviewer is more of a newbish kinda gamer.
For adults who like comprehensive team play this game is it.
Bioshock got a better grade and it got boring within two weeks.
This game is not going to get boring for a long time with all the great maps and weapons that will come in some patches.
I don't understand how Bioshock can get a better grade when this game has about 10x better replay value, it is hands down without question the better game.


Why do movies get reviewed hmmm?
October 15, 2007 4:58:39 PM

Token_Z said:
10/10
Yeah the reviewer is more of a newbish kinda gamer.
For adults who like comprehensive team play this game is it.
Bioshock got a better grade and it got boring within two weeks.
This game is not going to get boring for a long time with all the great maps and weapons that will come in some patches.
I don't understand how Bioshock can get a better grade when this game has about 10x better replay value, it is hands down without question the better game.


In Travis' defense:
1) He's not a newbish gamer, trust me.
2) I wrote the BioShock review, not Travis.
3) Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.
October 16, 2007 2:21:14 PM

You gave it a higher review then i would of, the game play is ok at best, i think they would of been better off making a new version of Wolf-ET.
They tried to add two well known names together and hope quake people would like it but doesn't look like that happened.

The biggest draw backs i had with it.

1) No VOIP , don't know why they thought people didn't want it but they will be adding it down the road.

2) In-game streaming ad's, no one likes being forced to look at billboards with intel or some fast food place every time they spawn. (real ad's will never fit in first person shooters only racing/sport games)

3) vehicles didn't feel real at all and pistols cause damage to them, air vehicles can't fly that high to avoid tanks camping the mountains.

The best thing i liked about SplashDamage is they will talk to gamers unlike most game developers.
October 16, 2007 2:58:15 PM

Huh, what ads? I've only seen ads relating to the game, fight the Strogg invasion sorta things. Ads only seen in the USA? (like 2142?).

Yep, the vehicles that can fly suc, im good with em, but 1 rocket, tank shell, pistol shot, your dead, flares recharge fast, but aren't that great against pistols lol. freaking tanks going higher on mountains than the air vehicles can fly lol, had that issue in the beta2 alot. I just don't fly anymore, I rarely take a vehicle (Icarus owns though).
October 17, 2007 1:48:17 PM

All the billboards in Quakewars will soon be (if not already) streaming ad's, last time i played the billboards had GDF soldiers on them.

Its just like BF2142 if you seen its in-game streaming ad's.

!