bit-gamer.net

UT3: Limited Edition unveiled

Published on 28th September 2007 by Joe Martin

UT3 is now confirmed to have no cross platform support as Epic were unwilling to cut content for PC gamers.

Limited Edition packs seem to be all the rage nowadays. If you aren't getting a Limited Edition copy of Oblivion with a free history book and replica septim then you're playing with your toy Big Daddy from the BioShock Limited Edition pack or fiddling with one of the three versions of Halo 3.

Quick to spot a growing trend, Midway has recently released a few bits of news about the upcoming Unreal Tournament 3 game, including an inventory of what's in the limited edition pack.

Slightly more interesting than a free art book though is that there will officially be no cross-platform play for the game and PC and PS3 owners will be unable to go head-to-head with each other. The cut of cross-platform play is, according to an interview over at BeyondUnreal, because of lengthy certification problems with the PS3. Epic was unwilling to hold back content from PC gamers in order to deliver it to the PS3 at the same time.

Midway and Epic have also revealed what will be in the Limited Edition copy of UT3. Apparently, fans of the series can look forward to a metal box with a hardback art book containing concept art from the development of the game. There will also be a bonus DVD containing behind the scenes footage and over ten hours of video tutorials on how to build mods for the game.

The Limited Edition version of the game will be available in in all of Europe and the US, as well as several other important territories. No UK pricing has yet been announced, but in the US the pack will be priced at $59.95.

So, how anxiously are you awaiting UT3? Will you be playing with an Ageia Physx card to get the full experience or will you try to play without? Let us know in the forums.

24 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply

Delphium 28th September 2007, 09:57

Wonder if it comes pre scratched :)

Quote:

Epic was unwilling to hold back content from PC gamers in order to deliver it to the PS3 at the same time.

Thank god!!!

Will prob be playing without Ageia card, unless it truely does show a vast improvement.

steveo_mcg 28th September 2007, 10:17

Wonder if they'll patch in PS3 support for the pc later, would be nice to be able to win now and again.

yakyb 28th September 2007, 10:46

i cant wait to see the differance a physics card makes on a decent game with this much development gone into it i have to say im tempted to get one

mmorgue 28th September 2007, 11:26

Well, if all the card does is add more 3d grit, albeit grit that adheres to the basic laws of physics, then I'll pass...

DeXtmL 28th September 2007, 11:30

Some yet released demo video did not show any stunning phys effect.

samkiller42 28th September 2007, 12:19

Hum, may have to have a look into this, play.com are bound to have it.

Sam

mikeuk2004 28th September 2007, 12:39

Quote:

playing with your toy Big Daddy from the BioShock Limited Edition pack

The big daddys are not toys. They are solid statues that come broken :)

Im still undecided on Unreal, plenty of other games im after at the moment although that might change when its out or if I can play a demo.

kosch 28th September 2007, 12:45

cool when this is this due to come out for PC then?

Xmas rush cash cow?

Zut 28th September 2007, 13:28

Call me cynical, but I have a suspicion that this might be due to the disparity in playability of FPSes between a keyboard & mouse and a joypad. It would be a bit of an embarrassment for Sony if it came to light that PS3 players were disadvantaged compared to PC players due to the control system!

Redbeaver 28th September 2007, 14:06

exactly. why would any serious gamer in their right mind would buy UT for PS3????? i can already imagine PC gamers looking for PS3 noobs to get some free kills... its RIDICOLOUSLY so much easier in PC. no argument there.

pffft im not a very good FPS player but i can frag PS3 players with 1 hand and eyes closed....... :p

capnPedro 28th September 2007, 14:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zut
Call me cynical, but I have a suspicion that this might be due to the disparity in playability of FPSes between a keyboard & mouse and a joypad. It would be a bit of an embarrassment for Sony if it came to light that PS3 players were disadvantaged compared to PC players due to the control system!

Partly. Although UT3 will allow you to use a kb/mouse with your PS3. Only good if your PC can't handle it or something I guess.

It's more to do with patches. Patches for the PS3 version have to be verified/tested/etc. by Sony, so they can't be released as quickly as the PC versions. If at all. You don't want people playing with different versions of the game, so they aren't allowing it.

or that's the general gist of it, anyway.

CardJoe 28th September 2007, 14:14

UT3 for the PS3 will be compatible with a keyboard via the USB port, actually.

wuyanxu 28th September 2007, 14:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardJoe
UT3 for the PS3 will be compatible with a keyboard via the USB port, actually.

but no mouse?

what's the point?

ssj12 28th September 2007, 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
UT3 for the PS3 will be compatible with a keyboard via the USB port, actually.
but no mouse?

what's the point?

it supports mouse and keyboard...

devdevil85 28th September 2007, 17:01

so....what about a PS3 user with a M+K setup vs. a user with PS3 controller ...the M+K user is gonna pwn like everyone that uses a controller....so it's not like they're getting away from the issue of "fairness"....

It sux cause both my friend and I were looking forward to seeing multi-platform gaming (360 vs. PS3 vs. PC) because if a PS3 could play with PCs online using the M+K setup, we would seriously start thinking about a future PS3 purchase, but we'll all have to wait I guess.....

How long do patches/updates take to be "certified" by Sony on a PS3 vs. PC?

capnPedro 28th September 2007, 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85
How long do patches/updates take to be "certified" by Sony on a PS3 vs. PC?

Well the PC patches are written by Epic, then released. PS3 patches need to go to Sony. They then need to change the discs being pressed and release it for download through Sony's equivalent to Live marketplace.

Sony don't want it to mess anything up so it gets some pretty rigorous testing (or so I've heard) but honestly, I don't know for sure. The only person who could answer is Sony.

Aankhen 29th September 2007, 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakyb
i cant wait to see the differance a physics card makes on a decent game with this much development gone into it i have to say im tempted to get one

It won't make any difference to gameplay, since Epic can't afford to alienate the majority of gamers, who don't have dedicated physics cards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redbeaver
why would any serious gamer in their right mind would buy UT for PS3?????

Because any PS3 can play it with all the bells and whistles while you need to spend a lot on a PC that can do the same?

Because every console is connected to a TV, which is likely (not guaranteed, of course) to be much larger than the PC monitor?

wuyanxu 29th September 2007, 16:29

larger than PC monitor doesn't mean higher resolution. a 24inch LCD can easily have higher resolution than a 50inch HD TV

LeMaltor 29th September 2007, 17:07

But isnt TF2 cross platform PC and PS3? That's why its so dumbed down compared with any other TF game :p

CardJoe 29th September 2007, 17:19

PC, 360 and PS3

Aankhen 30th September 2007, 06:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
larger than PC monitor doesn't mean higher resolution. a 24inch LCD can easily have higher resolution than a 50inch HD TV

Indeed it can, which is why I never mentioned resolution. :)

Also, note that "higher resolution" != "better". It is generally better, but there's a point beyond which increasing the resolution simply increases the amount of squinting you do.

wuyanxu 30th September 2007, 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aankhen
Indeed it can, which is why I never mentioned resolution. :)

Also, note that "higher resolution" != "better". It is generally better, but there's a point beyond which increasing the resolution simply increases the amount of squinting you do.

true, true.

but i find at 22inch, 1680x1050 is enough, whereas at 50inch, 1080p is a bit rough on the edges. really, resolution should increase with screensize. so 50inch should at least have something around 1600i.

Aankhen 30th September 2007, 21:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
but i find at 22inch, 1680x1050 is enough, whereas at 50inch, 1080p is a bit rough on the edges. really, resolution should increase with screensize. so 50inch should at least have something around 1600i.

I agree, though 1600i doesn't seem to be adequately large; I figure it goes 22" = 1,680×1,050, 30" = 1,920×1,200, 40" = 2,560×1,600, and 50" is, uh 3,200×2,000 I guess.

devdevil85 1st October 2007, 19:37

Guys, I own a 96" InFocus 720p Projector and I have played a PS3 on it @ 720p and the games looked phenominal and believe me, I have a 19" flat screen monitor running at 1600 x 1200, so I know 'high resolution', too. IMO: Larger = better (but only when the propotion 'size to # of pixels' stays somewhat 1-1.....of course if the screen gets too big (and you only spent half as much as you should on the projector) you will see the pixels, but in my case if you sit far enough back from the screen, all you would see is crisp, clear, large video.....but I do understand you when you say higher pixels = better, but it's really a trade-off on what matters most to you? A larger screen with more noticable pixels/jaggies or a smaller screen with with 'almost impossible to notice' pixels/jaggies? Personally, I would still go with the larger screen due to the "wow factor"...