[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