in case anyone cares

http://www.worms3d.com

they sport a nifty FULLY destructible 3d engine...and supports overhangs and tunnel structures... tho it may not be as detailed as alot of newer engines, I think if they continue to work with this technology alot of interesting things could be done.

Also delving into the topic of not mapping for newer FPS games. It really does boil down to the tools available. sure new engines reguire alot of more work to be put into maps to create something equal to or better than the games release, but if versatile and stable tools were available doing so would be a hell of alot easier... but what do I know 

I`ve had a chance to play UT now - just DM botmatch but I`ve given it a good go. I`m not very impressed. As a game in it`s own right it would be really good BUT as a direct sequel to an already great game I find it lacking. Basically the same game with better graphics (albeit not always used where they will be noticable in MP), the same weapons, some extra tricks (that are too complex to bother with while fighting), silly pills and the replacement of one of the coolest MP gamemodes with bloody football. I`m not sure WHY I would play this instead of UT??

And the maps...I`ve only walked through the DD, BR, and CTF maps - THEY at least seem consistently good and often make much better use of the new engine. CTF-Lavagiant2 seemed particularly stunning. But for DM....there seems to be an obvious bi-polar theme. Either they are boring indoor arena maps or sprawling outdoor theme maps, with very little inbetween. Overall not as good - and not nearly as many - as the original UT. Plus the new engine only works well in a few...although those few are quite inspiring.

DM-Antalus - very nice, this is what they should be doing with the engine - where it looks great, plays well, and the terrain features actually make a gameplay impact. One of the best IMHO.

DM-Asbestos - yawn boring. Okay theme but entirely forgettable.

DM-Curse3 - Ugh, cramped and confusing. Okay theme though, if patchy design aesthetics.

DM-Compressed - good, solid gameplay via the obvious but very effective design. Again more theme would have been good.

DM-Flux2 - hmmm almost there. Reasonable theme and interestingly play but needs more interaction between in and out.

DM-Gael - A rocket arena map. Wow. Next. Quick. It`s boring me already.

DM-Inferno - dramatic and exciting design, not so convinced about the gameplay but still a very worthy map for it`s distinct style.

DM-Insidious - Another arena. Nice atmosphere in this even if it only reaches it`s full potential at those vats. Once again forgettably symmetrical gameplay.

DM-Leviathan - Yet another arena...at least the theme`s a bit better. Not at all memorable though.

DM-Oceanic - okay for this sort of map, decent design, could have done with a stronger theme.

DM-Phobos2 - good and well detailed but lacks the purity and directness of Phobos due to the complex bloated nature.

DM-Plunge - not a patch on Morbias. Garish lighting, too many jump pads, too sprawling and bloated. Okay but again lacks the essence of it`s predecessor.

DM-Serpentine - hahaha what the fuck? A box map with a maze in the bottom? What is this Q1 DM newbie map time or something. Maybe it`s supposed to be a concept map or something but surely loathsome to any self-respecting player.

DM-TotoraForest - ahhhh yes. Utterly brilliant in every way except the underuse of the upper levels in botmatch. The map of UT DM as far as I`m concerned.

DM-TrainingDay - more boring and not as well themed as the UT intro maps. 

...why not delve into it in the actual topic? 

[quote]I`m not sure WHY I would play this instead of UT??[/quote]

You said it all right there...

I agree almost completely with your comments/observations for every map. Antalus is the best of the lot, TokaraForest is something to behold but the size ruins the fun for me. Most of the weapons feel all but useless over such huge spans.

Id sum up the DM maps of UT2003k as follows, just because you can do something... does not always mean that you should. Firstly,I am thinking about the scale of the maps. Secondly, the over-use of detail makes them all look very cluttered and over designed. 

any one know of software openGL implementation ?
like mesa GL, but compiled win32 dll

url please 

I would send them to hellscrag but a lot of the maps you reviewed have already been reviewed there. But I`m sure they could serve as an added opinion or something. Not sure if that`s quite what you want though. 

Microsoft and SGI both do an opengl dll.
http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/nuclear/274/ 

I agree totally.

I also think they made the flak cannon far less interesting. The overdone flak trail just ruins it... 

The newer worms games have taken a persona or image that just seems goofy and uninteresting to me. Tacky.

And one thing I`ve noticed about 2d games making the transition to 3d is that it almost always fails. The physics and looks and controls are just so worthless. It`s like they don`t quite know what to do with this new-fangled "thiiiiird dimention".

Mario 64 did it right. It went downhill from there. 

did a good job of capturing some of the elements of the metroid series: exploration, platform jumping, lots of secrets, and moody, alien environments. It wasn't 100% good in all those respects (i think the atmosphere/feeling fell short in some of the zones.) 

goofy... (worms series) its just earlier versions of the series were in simple pixel animated wormies...

wazat: have you played any of the "toony" worms titles? I thought it looked downright stupid at first... but after playing, Team 17 knows their shit...

imho its only real downfall was the awkward online play setup, similar to a battle.net scenario... I would much enjoy a method to directly connect to another players IP and just go from there... hmmm mebbe I should pester them about it for the 3d version

^_^ 

http://coolplayer.sourceforge.net/
doesnt eat resources like winamp3
MAD mp3 decoder (some say its the most quality one, with 24 bit soundcard support)
check the page for other info and player itself (300kb only !) 

Some more I tried recently (pretty much starting a game, going "yuk" then quitting):

Warcraft3 - cartoony, ugly, outdated looking and lacking in atmosphere.

AOM - nicer graphics and effects but too bright, too cartoony, with no attempt at immersion. The map editor looked incredibly easy tho.

IGI2 - looked okay but boring real life stuff and no thanks.

Battlefield1942 - uninspiring real life stuff with horrible movement again no thanks.

Next...

Oh has anyone played or tried Project Nomads or Zanzarah?? 

Okay thanks for that, I will wait until I have the reviews to hand and also post on the PU and BU forums to see what people think there. 

You tried enclave yet? Im sure its right up your alley. 

there is a new Q1SP map (matsp2) from Mati available at http://hosting.fpp.pl/mati . Underworldfan, have you checked this ? 

Stolen from tomshardware:

At this point it`s time for the obligatory warning about the GeForce4 MX version, which, aside from the name and the misleading "4", has nothing in common with the Ti boards. From a technical viewpoint, these cards are still built on pre-GeForce3 technology, and it shows in their performance. They lack both pixel and vertex shaders. All in all, it`s fair to say that the GeForce4 MX is nothing more than a modernized GeForce 2 chip with a new memory interface, hardware support for anti aliasing, and a second RAMDAC. 

aguiRe, thanx. didnt see that yet, will have a look soon. :) 

Id say nintendo managed to take all their important series (zelda, mario, metroid) into 3d successfully. 

It`s the budget line board in the 4 series. Duh. Still, it seems like total fanboy geek sillyness to say it "sucks." It`s totally naive in terms of what people have done professional work on in the past, for one thing. It`s a very powerful piece of hardware. Whether it`s the best thing for you to spend your money on, expecially if you`re "serious" or talking about "a few years down the road" is another thing entirely.

I haven`t any problems but I will admit Industri showed its limits. Of course, if I want the wierd shadow thing I can just play Drakan on PS2. 

the point is:

WHY did they take them into 3d?

To improve gameplay?

or to have nice a graphics engine at the expense of gaemplay...? 

1. to improve gameplay.
2. it would be commercial suicide not to.
3. just to piss you off. 

Tomorrow we will finish up cybears maps with crapdm01 02 02, then we will play cheshires maps chesdm1 2 3 4. Stop by #terrafusion at 3pm EST if you want to play. 

I know its very tough to get anyone to express opinions and or speak their mind around here, thus...

I am thinking that $1500 US for a faster new PC just to play a few mediocre games is a waste of my wifes hard earned $$$. I will end up playing Q2 mostly with it anyhow. Also knowing that in 6 months it will be little more that a fancy paperwieght...

I am going to spend my B-day $$$ on a console, I have a PS1 and N64 and am not focused on any particular one of the new systems. I like a wide range of game types. I loved Spyro, Tenchu, Goldeneye, Zelda:OOT, Banjo-Kazooie, Need For Speed... so then, which system has the goods now?

Anyone, anyone? 

3. is the most likely.