Epic did a masterful job of disappointing their UT fanbase with games that never measured up to UT99 in playability. Piracy didnt kill their pc game sales, they did. Instead of focus on a product that would keep the buzz generated about the greatness of the game, they turned the series into a demo for ther game engine.
I could be way wrong but that is the general sentiment to alot of us that were loyal and poured money into our computers preparing for the next one, hoping it would somehow get back to the game play of the original.

Game developers never last forever... they got their golden days and they sunk to the abyss.

Acclaim, Midway, 3dRealms, Infogramme, Tradewest, Quest...

All these devs have made incredible titles and yet they are gone forever. Seriously, id Software was going the same route.

epic will sink in the pc gaming section seeing how they are treating us... but i don't think they'll do too bad in the console section

Sure Unreal3 engine is quite good...

Too BAD that UT3 game kind of.... SUCKS. They screwed it up. The 2.0 patch fixes a lot of things. They need a UT3.5 and FIX the bloody game... include at least 100map. Out of the 32 maps included UT 3, only 2~3 maps out out WAR and CTF did NOT suck.

And the removal of Vehicle Zoom was completely retarded. We know the game has the ABILITY to do it, because someone made a MOD file (about 50k) that turns it on and makes the game FUN! Seriously, making it difficult to see around the back-end of your Raptor = NOT fun... how are WE supposed to SEE who are are pulling IF WE CAN'T see behind ourselves!! Much less SHOOT what is in front and below us because we Can't ZOOM to a cockpit view! I D I O T S!

I have UT3, it plays good in 1920x1200, I have DL every good map from what FEW servers are out there to a total of 80 or so... And still, UT2004 is still a better game.

Oh yeah... UT3 =

EPIC FAIL

It could have and should have been a better game.

I have all UTs (Yes 2003 too) and I enjoy them all, however while it is true that UT3 was disappointing, I still have fun with it once in a while. Of course, none of them beats the 10 year old original in terms of DM/TDM/CTF/DOM gameplay.

As far as I'm concerned Epic "sold out" long before id Software ever did. UT the original was great, I remember really wanting a PC that could play it but always just ended up playing it my friends house. UT3 was okay (I paid $10 for it on Steam, and frankly would have felt cheated paying any more than $30). Gears looked like it could have been Epic's return to greatness, then Gears 2 came along and pretty much took a dump on that idea (though horde was fun).

Oh and they're whole, "We're going to develop for the PC less because of pirates." is horse crap. Way to smack your original fan base across the face to make an extra buck.

I played the hell out of UT and UT 2003 and 2004; UT3 never appealed to me so I just let it collect dust somewhere on shelf. Too bad they blame pirates for their own failures and look for excuses to go the console way...

I liked UT3. I just love using the boost in the buggy to blow up and run over whatever while I'm jumping out. Of course maps without the vehicals aren't as fun. The last patch fixed alot of stuff that should have been fixed long ago, but at least it got done, unlike Duke .

The original UT is still good too. Of course UT and Q3 were just so far ahead of everything else that was out at the time that it's pretty hard for any game to match that kind of "WOW" factor now.

You just have to leave UT3 sink in . It is a really great title...I too am nostalgic after ut99 but the games are so good that all you can do is update the graphical engine. As much as I enjoyed UT series...Quake3 was better than it's UT counterpart. I love them both

I agree with roofus. UT99 was/is a brilliant game. It is still played today and hasn't aged a bit. Everything Epic had done since has been utter crap. They abandoned and changed everything that made UT better than Quake and the rest.

UT3 ran great, had a few nice ideas, but still a terrible game. They took out the only way to travel decently, dodge jump and then didn't improve on movement at all, so the game was crippled and stale. That and they were too lazy to make a PC version, just a straight console port including GUI.

I've bought UT since the first game. UT3 was better than UT2003... but it was such a disappointment compared to the tech demos (of huge cities) and game types that didn't show up. Beautiful maps that are badly designed and basically not fun to play.

There are now hundreds of users maps, and I've played about 50 of them that are easily fun and better than what came with the game... but game play still sucks with VEC Zoom control. Until they FIX it and make it a standard - it will be another reason that UT3 will continue to suffer. Duh, we have a MOUSE wheel there that isn't being used. Screw the "direct port" laziness... Epic has disrespected the UT name.

Someone should headshot Cliffy B. Not only does he talk nonsense about PC games and gamers he flat out admitted they don't concentrate on PC anymore. He is definitely some kind of marketing robot. We can then rebuild his head if they enable anti-aliasing in UE3.

I don't know too much about Cliffy but what I know I don't like.
I too would like to see a way to make AA work on UE3 games, I recently purchased UT3 on Steam for $10 and have been playing it quite a bit, AA works or atleast it looks like it does. Is it the 3rd Party Dev's that are too lazy/unfamiliar with the engine that are to blame? Reason I ask is games like AA3 and Frontline Fuel of War, AA doesn't/didn't work or caused bugs when it did.

To elaborate on my last sentence, AA3 if you force it on, the HUD disappears, FFOW shadows/fog get messed up, at least with my old 2900 Pro. I haven't played it in quite some time though...so it may work but I doubt it.

Intersting article, and even decided to follow up and read the interviews in the links.

It'll be interesting to see were both id and Epic go in the next few years. I love both companies.

roofus said: "...Instead of focus on a product that would keep the buzz generated about the greatness of the game, they turned the series into a demo for ther game engine."

I hate to burst your bubble guy, but Unreal (which sucked) and Unreal Tournament, like id's Doom and Quake engines, and even Monolith's Lithtech have always been tech demos that were always intended to sell licenses. In fact, there would be no Half Life, No Call of Duty, No anything really if they hadn't done things that way. Time and money are of the essence for these companies. id, Epic, Monolith, and even good old 3D Realms built the industry you see before you with licensing of their engines and technology and even helpful nurturing and cooperation with smaller devs. It's far too expensive and I would say nearly impossible to find genius like John Carmack to write you a 3D engine from scratch everytime you want to release a game. Not to mention it's pretty stupid when you can use existing, off-the-shelf stuff and tweak or modify it to make numerous games over the course of several years before having to go (full time) back to the drawing board for a new engine. I hope things don't change anytime soon either, or we won't be playing any "new" games anytime soon.

By the way, who the hell are all of you people? You all act as if you are all programmers, artists and developers with 15 years of game development experience and 10 AAA titles under your belts. This is an extremely complex business and you all just spout off like you make 3d engines in your sleep. Such arrogance and disrespect... ridiculous.

You miss the point completely majorlagg (big surprise considering how much effort you spent ripping people). I get the money is to be made licensing the engine which believe it or not didn't get past anybody here. My point is they had a built in customer base (pretty large one) that they squandered and instead of blaming themselves, they blame "piracy". Is that so hard for you to understand?

Ripping? I wasn't ripping anyone. I mean no real harm. I just think it's funny that people who couldn't code their way out of a wet paper internet cafe have so much to say about the depths of game development and publishing. Or that anyone even cares at all about what "Cliffy" (who calls himself that anyway?) B has to say about anything. I mean are we really that interested in what that 80's reject, poser surfer wannabe turned mar-hack-eting TOOL douche has to say? Ooops I was ripping just then, sorry there "Cliffy".

(my gosh... it just sounds so... well you know... "fruity").

"Although not quite as successful as Epic Games in regards to licensing its game engine" this may be true, i'm not sure, but all i can say is that i've played alot more games based on ID tech than Epic, however Epic is certainly dominating at the moment, mostly cause they do multiplatform whereas ID only do PC. we will see how long Epic can drag PC Engine tech down to the console level as crytek and valve continue to pave the way for PC.

Yea, you guys forgot to mention Valve with those original developers. They are almost as old as Epic Software, and they are also still an independent studio.

Um...hate to burst bubbles here, but uh...Crytek IS dragging it's engine tech down to the console level with CryENGINE 3 (let's not forget, not long ago, Cervat Yerli said Crytek would be "linking its technology development cycle with console cycles") and Valve's SOURCE engine is about 4,000 years old-- Have you seen the L4D 2 screenshots?? My god! I swear they look a modicum better than a Dreamcast title!

*Sorry... CEVAT Yerli...^

But.. they are making more money off of the console market than they were in the PC market. How is it squandering? It's always good business sense to go where the money is. Yes, it is a slap in the face to fans.. unfortunately most companies aren't in it for the fans, they're in it for the money.

I know what I'm about to mention is a touchy subject with PC gamers, of which I am PC gamer who has built his own PCs for 15 or more years, but also enjoy my consoles. But, how come so many software companies are claiming that piracy is a huge reason they're not developing mainly for the PC or not at all.. yet all PC Gamers say this is BS and because they just fail with their software?

Could it actually be one of the main reasons they actually have stopped developing for the PC and PC-only gamers just wish it wasn't the case?

How come more and more companies say that piracy is a reason they've stopped developing exclusively for PCs, yet PC gamers will never believe it and just say they fail as a company? Could it be that the consoles actually bring them in more money because of the user base/distribution method and because there is less piracy. Not just because they're trying to slap PC gamers in the face and/or are terrible programmers? Maybe piracy is a bigger problem than PC gamers would like to believe it is?

I don't know... I enjoy multi-platform gaming and have never felt the way the die-hard PC gamers do about software developers changing platforms. That doesn't mean I'm right and PC gamers are wrong. Far from it, but I'm willing to look at both sides of the issue. I do know that when I was a broke teenager that it was much, much easier to download a PC game illegally, than it was to copy a console game.. referring to Super Nintendo/Genesis -> PS1 era. I only started playing consoles again towards the end of the PS2/XBox1 lifecycles, because graphics and gameplay were finally getting better in relation to the PC. While still the PC offers superior graphics and better gameplay for certain types of games, there are just some games I'd rather play on a console (fighting games/hack n' slash/action RPG).

I know you can mod a console and copy games illegally as well, but I prefer not to void warranties and now that I'm not a broke teenager, can afford to pay for the games I play on all of the systems (including PC games). However, for most people just grabbing a console from the shelf, or buying a PC from say Best Buy, I would think it's going to be easier to pirate PC games rather than console games. You don't have to mod a PC to play pirated games (just download a crack), you do however either need to buy a modded console or crack it open and mod it yourself.

Whether that matters or not, I do not know. I just get confused why PC-only gamers always shout to developers/publishers "Liars, it's not piracy, you just suck", when so many different companies have stated the same thing about piracy.

@Crom "mostly cause they do multi-platform whereas ID only do PC"
While this use to be true John Carmack's new Tech 5 engine is suppose to be multi-platform including the PS3. He demonstrated it at a Apple WWDC I believe and it is suppose to be very easy to write a game in it and publish it seamlessly to all platforms.

Whatever UT3 blew chunks and the id relationship is nothing but good for id. Zenimax is a smart company and knows not to mess with success.

I don't think anyone's saying piracy isn't a problem, but rather, claims of piracy on PC are often exaggerated by companies who seek to justify the development and deployment of ridiculous DRM schemes that don't have to exist on consoles simply because consoles ARE DRM devices.

That aside, I think the real issue, is that PC gamers are more likely to understand that 'piracy' is far too frequently used as a generic excuse in the justify lack-luster sales of shoddy/poorly optimized/mediocre/or just plain over-hyped PC products. No one shouted that Piracy was the reason for the utter sales failure of Bionic Commando--no no no, the devs, publishers, and reviewers all discussed every possible contributing socio-economic factor, deliberated about market trends, and made mention of possible design flaws that led to the game's fate. But if Bionic Commando was a failed PC exclusive, you could bet your entire net worth that the FIRST statement out of everyone's mouth would be how "piracy is killing PC gaming!!" And regardless of any other factors that might've caused the game's failure, all the talking-heads would crunch as many numbers as possible to demonstrate how it was ultimately piracy --and piracy alone-- that brought down another PC game.

^Incidentally, UT3...? WAAAAYYY overhyped... lovely engine (if you can get past that horrendous, massive pre-loading texture pop-in), and not a bad game... but few gamers in my circle either purchased it OR pirated it... (and the few who bought it waited for the big price drop on Steam)

Here's why (I think) PC's have seen their best days as a gaming platform, and why consoles (possibly) are the inheritors of the once proud PC gaming domain:

Benefit to Users
=================

1. Level playing field.

2. Fewer or NO Cheaters on consoles.

3. No high server costs. (don't cry to me about $50 annually for XBL. that's cheap for what you get. Have you priced a high-end gaming server lately?

4. No community organization(recruiting)and management(drama mediation.)*Paying for the server is one thing, populating it regularly is a whole separate issue.*

5. No separate voice server. (teamspeak)

6. No game choking anti-cheat software (punkbuster)

7. No self matchmaking. (trying to find a worthy clan to play with)

8. No ridiculously high upgrade costs for the life cycle of the
console. (some PC enthusiasts I know are so addicted to PC hardware they have to upgrade monthly with stuff they don't even use or know how to use.)

9. Split-screen.

10. Big screen.

11. Sofa.

12. No crumbs in your keyboard.

13. No hemorrhoids.

14. No lame home office isolation.

Benefit to Devs and Publishers
==============================

1. Consoles are more affordable and accessible to the mainstream. (resulting in more money for games which results in more game sales.)

2. No guess work for hardware requirements.

3. Minimal customer support.

4. Higher total sales thanks to rentals.

5. Captive marketing.

6. Lower costs overall.

Even retailers would probably prefer not to have to carry PC games. They aren't packaged as securely, and they probably suffer a lot of grief and damaged product due to compatibility issues and the like.

If I missed any please feel free to add to this list. Or totally counter it. Debate is healthy.

Benefit to users
=========================
3 High server costs? You need your own server why? Any game worth a damn has there own matchmaking service.
8 The cost of gaming Pc's has been dropping big time thanks mainly to the lower gpu prices.If you have any kind of decent computer to begin with your basically just buying a video card to start gaming.
9 Split screen is crap,use your own damn screen.
10 Big screen can be used for pc too.
11 Sofa,about as comfy as a nice computer chair.
12 No crumbs in your keyboard.....stop eating at the computer?
13 If you wanna skip the hemorroids see #11

Benefit to Devs and Publishers
======================================
1 Yup consoles are more affordable,but they are limited in there range of use.
2 Can't argue that one
3 Same as #2
4 Sure
5 Sure
6 Lower costs sure,but console games are generally lower quality games.It better cost less to make them.

Game types:

Racing games are good on both

Console Strengths

1 Sports,the stronghold of consoles
2 Scroll type games also console strong point
3 Fighting games,mostly because they only get made for consoles.

Pc

1 RTS has always been better on PC and will probably always be,you can just do more with a PC
2 FPS another mainstay of PC's
3 Roleplaying games
4 MMO's