[ut3] Official release date

Matt F matt at credibleinstitution.org
Mon Feb 9 14:41:09 EST 2009


I don't believe him.

Sir Brizz wrote:
> I thought some of you might like to know that Steve Polge just 
> contacted me and told me that the Linux binary has not been abandoned.
>
> Brizz
>
> On 2/9/09 12:31 PM, Sir Brizz wrote:
>> I'd say you had plenty of indications that the game was not going to 
>> live u to your expectations.
>>
>> 1) Epic has always had subpar releases of Unreal games on the first 
>> installment of an engine version. See: Unreal, UT2003/Unreal 2.
>> 2) The demo was released only a couple of weeks before the game went 
>> gold. They couldn't possibly have improved it much in that time.
>>
>> There are even more than that but those are simply the key things you 
>> could have looked at before buying the game.
>>
>> As for it being "RC7", what is that supposed to prove? RC stands for 
>> Release Candidate, so no matter what they released it would have been 
>> a release candidate. If you're talking about the labeling on the meta 
>> info of the disc, are you sure that wasn't a manufacturing mishap? :p
>>
>> If you look at the patch notes for the massive patch that they are 
>> releasing soon, you'll see that Epic HAS been listening to feedback 
>> all this time, despite what the pessimists in the community would 
>> have everyone believe. Epic has always listened to constructive 
>> feedback on their games (at least UT) and this patch proves they 
>> still do, the people that are complaining now are the ones who didn't 
>> give any constructive feedback so their voices weren't heard.
>>
>> Brizz
>>
>> On 2/9/09 12:08 PM, [FnG] Lambik wrote:
>>> [quote "Sir Brizz"]They delivered a functional game. If you bought 
>>> it the way it was packaged, you have no one to blame but yourself if 
>>> it disappoints you.[\quote]
>>>  
>>> It's not only the linux community, but the wide spread of PC 
>>> gamers are complaining about the support that EPIC has shown the 
>>> past year.
>>> The product which was released was not finished, infact I bought a 
>>> S.E. version which was actualy the RC.7  :S
>>> I did not buy it to play it on linux, but even the windows version 
>>> was not the quality we as UT community are use to.
>>> In the past EPIC had released UT versions which at start had 
>>> problems, performance, bugs, etc, but they did fix the urgent 
>>> matters within weeks, and the other stuff after a few months.
>>> That is what this community was expecting with this release too, 
>>> giving support, using the feedback we as UT ppl were supplying to 
>>> improve the game,
>>> giving the ppl the sense they are part of the process.
>>>  
>>> When you take a look at how many servers that are running and being 
>>> used, compare that with any other game of the same level, then EPIC 
>>> should be ashamed.
>>> A successor of UT2k4 should atleast contain the same functionality.
>>>  
>>> So in short to Sir Brizz, *yes we are only to blame but ourselfes*. 
>>> The fact remains that we are entitled to spread the word that EPIC 
>>> has failed to keep their promise,
>>> that they have let down our trust, that our advise is not to buy the 
>>> game.
>>> You may call it complaining, I see it as warning other users for the 
>>> bad quality game EPIC has created.
>>>  
>>> EPIC has proven the following :
>>> "Results of the past are never a guarentee for the future"
>>> just my 2 cts,
>>>  
>>> Lambik
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:45 PM, <ceil420 at gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:ceil420 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Well I'm tired of you acting as though Linux users that bought
>>>     the game just did so with no promise of functionality in their
>>>     platform of choice. They were led to believe they would be able
>>>     to play the game on Linux at or shortly after release. The blame
>>>     for the wasted money may be 80% on the players, but Epic
>>>     themselves also shoulder some of that blame. Especially
>>>     considering their history of Tux-friendliness; particularly with
>>>     this line of games. This isn't Blizzard or EA we're talking
>>>     about, but a company known to support. Linux with past titles,
>>>     and one that promised playability with the latest as well.
>>>     Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>>
>>>     -----Original Message-----
>>>     From: Sir Brizz <sir.brizz at gmail.com <mailto:sir.brizz at gmail.com>>
>>>
>>>     Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:38:25
>>>     To: <ut3 at icculus.org <mailto:ut3 at icculus.org>>
>>>     Subject: Re: [ut3] Official release date
>>>
>>>     Fair enough, My response to your message wasn't really intended to
>>>     target you. I can completely understand people buying the game
>>>     with the
>>>     expectation that the client would get released, I just wish
>>>     people on
>>>     here would use a little more brain power instead of just
>>>     slapping the
>>>     blame on Epic as if they had no involvement in the decision making
>>>     process at all.
>>>
>>>     Brizz
>>>
>>>     On 2/6/09 11:32 AM, David L. Willson wrote:
>>>     > I didn't personally buy the game, but I understand the
>>>     motivation of those that did.  It's important to show approval
>>>     for ISV's that are allowing their customers freedom of choice.
>>>      The best way to show that approval is to buy their stuph.  I
>>>     think it's important to wait until the cross-platform goal is
>>>     achieved, but I understand the desire to reward Epic's promise
>>>     or intent.  I wanted to, too, but because I've been in software
>>>     a while, I thought it better to wait and reward achievement.
>>>     >
>>>     > David L. Willson
>>>     > Network Engineer
>>>     > MCT, MCSE, Linux+
>>>     > tel://720.333.LANS
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > ----- Original Message -----
>>>     > From: "Sir Brizz"<sir.brizz at gmail.com
>>>     <mailto:sir.brizz at gmail.com>>
>>>     > To: ut3 at icculus.org <mailto:ut3 at icculus.org>
>>>     > Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 11:26:53 AM GMT -07:00
>>>     US/Canada Mountain
>>>     > Subject: Re: [ut3] Official release date
>>>     >
>>>     > Well, this post:
>>>     >
>>>     > http://utforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=584654
>>>     >
>>>     > Was made 5 days before the game shipped, and indicates that
>>>     the Linux binary was not ready (something that could have easily
>>>     been inferred from other forum posts around the same time).
>>>     >
>>>     > And, I'm sorry if you're trusting, but, frankly, the Linux
>>>     binary could come out in 5 years and they wouldn't have lied.
>>>     They never gave a timeline, and if you assumed that it was about
>>>     to be released, you were fooling yourself into it.
>>>     >
>>>     > I agree that the binary should be out by now, but I'm not
>>>     involved in Epic's business so I don't know what is holding it
>>>     back. Recent posts by Ryan Gordon suggest that the binary is
>>>     practically (if not completely) done, but it's likely stuck
>>>     behind the same legal hurdle that it was before. What is Epic
>>>     meant to do about that?
>>>     >
>>>     > And it just doesn't change the fact that Epic didn't do
>>>     anything but give you consolation that a binary would come out
>>>     at some future point, and based on that you made the decision to
>>>     buy the game. You still bought the game knowing that what you
>>>     were buying it for did not exist yet. That was your decision,
>>>     not Epic's.
>>>     >
>>>     > Brizz
>>>     >
>>>     > On 2/6/09 11:20 AM, David L. Willson wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     > There's that fine line again, Brizz.  Epic (your car dealer)
>>>     didn't say "should be".  They said, originally, that it "would
>>>     be" in the box.  Then just before release they said, "OK, it's
>>>     not going to make it into the box, but it will be released."
>>>      Not "should be", but "will be".  Which led some trusting souls
>>>     to buy the game on faith, led other, less trusting souls to
>>>     wait, and then led trusting and non-trusting souls alike, to, at
>>>     some point, say, "Well, what the ~fuck~, Epic?"
>>>     >
>>>     > David L. Willson
>>>     > Network Engineer
>>>     > MCT, MCSE, Linux+
>>>     > tel://720.333.LANS
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > ----- Original Message -----
>>>     > From: ceil420 at gmail.com <mailto:ceil420 at gmail.com> To:
>>>     ut3 at icculus.org <mailto:ut3 at icculus.org> Sent: Friday, February
>>>     6, 2009 11:16:02 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
>>>     > Subject: Re: [ut3] Official release date
>>>     >
>>>     > Except that we originally weren't told 'in the future'. The
>>>     dealer told us the GPS was included. The dealer lied. At least
>>>     admit _that_ much.
>>>     >
>>>     > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     >  From : Sir Brizz
>>>     > Date : Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:08:33 -0700
>>>     > To :<ut3 at icculus.org <mailto:ut3 at icculus.org>>  Subject : Re:
>>>     [ut3] Official release date
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > Yes, Linux is not suitable for games. Actually, Linux is fine
>>>     for games, games are simply not made for Linux. So if you're a
>>>     PC gamer, anything but Windows is not a choice (and if you say
>>>     Wine works great, I'll slap you).
>>>     >
>>>     > Now, I do have to admit a little guilt in responding here,
>>>     because I knew all you guys like to bitch and moan anytime
>>>     someone comes in here that doesn't agree with you, but sorry.
>>>     The reality of this situation is that you are bitter and want to
>>>     blame someone other than yourselves. This is really more like if
>>>     you called up the dealership, asked if the car had GPS, told no
>>>     but it should be released free at some point in the future,
>>>     bought the car anyway and then proceeded to complain that the
>>>     GPS was still not out after a year. You bought the car despite
>>>     the fact that it was missing the one thing you wanted it for,
>>>     you're the one to blame in that scenario.
>>>     >
>>>     > Brizz
>>>     >
>>>     > On 2/6/09 10:39 AM, [FnG] Lambik wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > The person that told 'It has GPS in it' happens to be the
>>>     salesperson, and then yes you can expect to have GPS in it !
>>>     > Not sure what kind of point you're trying to make, but seems
>>>     to me your only business here is to stir thing up,
>>>     > as you have state to play games on windows only.(Linux not
>>>     suitable ??)
>>>     > Pre ordering a game has the risk of getting something that
>>>     isn't quite what you expect of it, but in this case there has
>>>     been promised support for linux OS aswell.
>>>     > Epic has the reputation to support linux on all UT series,
>>>     which has formed a good basis of trust, which they have broken,
>>>     and that is why ppl are upset with EPIC.
>>>     > That is something they have every right to.
>>>     >
>>>     > Lambik
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Sir Brizz<
>>>      sir.brizz at gmail.com <mailto:sir.brizz at gmail.com>>  wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > For what? They didn't market UT3 as having Linux binaries
>>>     included or available.
>>>     >
>>>     > The problem here is that Epic never guaranteed anything. I
>>>     appreciate you wanting brand new boxes or whatever your case may
>>>     be, however that doesn't change the fact that you bought
>>>     something that didn't include the sole thing you bought it for.
>>>     Can you imagine, taking this same thing to a more terrible and
>>>     surely less appropriate analogy, if you bought a car because
>>>     someone said it had GPS in it, never test drove it, and realized
>>>     after purchasing it that it didn't have GPS in it? Would you
>>>     blame the person who told you or yourself for not looking into
>>>     it more?
>>>     >
>>>     > I understand that people wanted and were expecting and
>>>     (possibly) promised Linux binaries and are upset, but, frankly,
>>>     you DON'T have anyone to blame but yourself if you paid the
>>>     money for it already. Did Epic make you spend that money? YOU
>>>     were encouraged by what they said, YOU made a decision, and YOU
>>>     spent the money.
>>>     >
>>>     > Brizz
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > On 2/6/09 10:14 AM, Luiz Gustavo Angelo wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     > Epic could be sued by this, couldn't ??
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Matthias Bach<
>>>      marix at marix.org <mailto:marix at marix.org>>  wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > Hi!
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > On Friday 06 February 2009 17:57:02 Sir Brizz wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     > And for those of you whining about how you bought the game and
>>>     haven't
>>>     > played it because there is no Linux client, sorry but maybe
>>>     you should
>>>     > have waited to buy it until there actually was the only thing
>>>     you were
>>>     > buying it for? That seems like the practical thing to do in any
>>>     > situation. You are missing the point. When I ordered the game
>>>     there had been a statement
>>>     > by Epic that there would be a Linux-Installer on disc, as it
>>>     had been with
>>>     > 2K4. Later they said it wouldn't be on disk, but available on
>>>     the day of
>>>     > release. Therefore, as I kind of like to have nice game boxes
>>>     that I can show
>>>     > of, I did not bother to cancel my preorder. The problem is
>>>     that I trusted Epic
>>>     > to keep to their promises.
>>>     >
>>>     > Did you buy Prey the day it came out hoping that Ryan Gordon
>>>     > would release a Linux binary for it, too? No I didn't, because
>>>     nobody promised that Prey would be ported. When it
>>>     > finally was ported this was a pleasent surprise.
>>>     >
>>>     > If you want to be a thrifty
>>>     > consumer, then be thrifty. And if you aren't thrifty, don't
>>>     whine that
>>>     > you made a mistake and try to blame it on Epic or anyone else.
>>>     You don't
>>>     > have anyone to blame but yourselves. Maybe I have, but then it
>>>     is not for expecting Epic to make a port, but for
>>>     > trusting Epic to deliver the software I ordered.
>>>     >
>>>     > Personally, I'm sure a Linux binary will eventually come out
>>>     for UT3 and
>>>     > when it does I will probably use it. Maybe it will, after all
>>>     it's already supposed to be done. The real question
>>>     > is, will their still body to play against. Will the engine
>>>     still be something
>>>     > competitive to base your mods on? By the time it will probably
>>>     take one could
>>>     > just as well start writing an own engine ...
>>>     >
>>>     > Regards,
>>>     > Matthias
>>>     >
>>>     > ---
>>>     > To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
>>>     ut3-unsubscribe at icculus.org <mailto:ut3-unsubscribe at icculus.org>
>>>     > Mailing list archives:
>>>     http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?64
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>
>>>
>>>     ---
>>>     To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
>>>     ut3-unsubscribe at icculus.org <mailto:ut3-unsubscribe at icculus.org>
>>>     Mailing list archives: http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?64
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>




More information about the ut3 mailing list