Quake Champions

Discussion in 'Other Games' started by 185db, Mar 8, 2017.

  1. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    So since quakecon in 2016 we have known about the imminent release of quake champions. This time around, they are looking to create a game similar to quake live, but with abilities. As far as I know, each character has different run speed and max hp/armor values, as well as 1 ability (either passive or activated).

    The goal is to remain true to the original game but add some more modern spice. From trailers, it looks a lot like doom 4. They changed a few weapons, from the website it looks like there is no normal machine gun and no plasma gun; they are replaced with the heavy machine gun (from quake live) and super nailgun (similar to quake 1).

    The reason for me making the post today is because they just opened sign ups for a closed beta, if you are interested in this go here

    You can check out the website here -
    https://quake.bethesda.net/en/

     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2017
    • Old Old x 1
  2. Ed_

    Ed_ Positively Inhumane Poster Contributor

    Steam:

    ye 1v1 me
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Troll Troll x 1
  3. Planetace

    Planetace Mildly Menacing Medic

    Steam:

    ello
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  4. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    Sheeeeit thanks for reminding me about this my guy

    Right, so...

    The beta opens on april 6 and it runs till...(idk) but you can sign up here
    https://quake.bethesda.net/en/signup

    They announced it will be free to play title, but the champions will be behind a paywall (not sure if available with in-game currency?)

    Anyway, it seems like the hero system will be similar to dirty bomb in how you acquire them with matchmaking and modern touches that people cry about now a days

    Glhf
     
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  5. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    Got into beta, game stinks dont play it

    Performance is trash, ive got an i5 4460 and 1060 and not getting constant 144fps on low. Screen shake is awful and when someone hits you you cant see nothin cause so much shake and blood. That and the fact that everyone blends in with the super detailed hyper graphics that work really well in competitive fps games makes it hard to play.

    Be my guest and try it, i was very underwhelmed though
     
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
  6. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    Maybe be accurate and say what the performance is on highest settings???? Most people don't give a single fuck about 144 fps and go for 60.
    Because it doesn't give you an advantage and if you think that you shall be shot.
     
    • Dumb Dumb x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winning Winning x 1
  7. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:


    Alright don't listen to tangy, running ultra on a 1050ti and getting a cool 50-60 fps isn't bad for a modern game.
     
    • Winning Winning x 1
  8. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    Anyone who plays a game for any competitive reason isnt going to be playing it on ultra settings hence why i dont give the benchmark.

    Im not even going to get into 144hz vs 60hz, the evidence is out there.

    Even if you dont have over 60hz, why the hell would anyone play on ultra in a multiplayer game. There is actually a difference between 60fps and 120fps at 60hz because of how rendering works.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2017
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
    • Troll Troll x 1
  9. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    That's really dumb and not true
    There's a difference obviously but it's not going to give you an advantage at all, you can't prove that it does because it doesn't.
    Because if you can run it well and make it look nice why not? If you prefer it at low that's your thing but it doesn't help you play better in most games. And fucking obviously there's a difference, like I said it just doesn't give you an advantage.
     
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Confusing Confusing x 1
  10. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    Ok im not going to continue with this, its actually making me upset how misinformed this is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
    • Troll Troll x 1
  11. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    You're the misinformed one here, friendo. We've had this argument before and you quit just the same lmao
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    I bet you also think lower resolutions give you an advantage too lol
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  13. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    comparing resolution to screen hz is beyond apples and oranges. one impacts input lag, while the other does nothing besides fps.

    60hz has up to more than a frame of input lag than 144hz. 1/60 = .01667 and 1/144 =.00694. this is the maximum render time between each frame. for every one frame of a 60hz screen, you can have about 2.4 frames of a 144hz (144/60), in which your input can be registered and drawn. that equates to 2.4x less input lag. i dont know why your anecdotal evidence beats all, both myself among many many others notice the difference between the two and acknowledge that it gives an advantage.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
    • Confusing Confusing x 1
  14. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    Many others as in like 4 people, right?
    If it gave an advantage more people would be using 144hz monitors dude. It can make it feel smoother but that isn't gonna make you a better player, that 1-2.4 frames isn't gonna make a difference.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  15. 185db

    185db Legendary Skial King

    More people dont use them because they cost upwards of $200.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Old Old x 1
  16. T-Wayne

    T-Wayne Moderator Contributor

    Steam:

    Did you forget you are under Non-Disclosure Agreement when you signed up for the closed Beta, uploading a video of the game while under NDA wasn't so wise. It says that everywhere in the game, even in the loading screens. :laughing:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    I wouldn't know, I would never sign up to play such a shit game
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. thungoc

    thungoc Unremarkable User

    Im not even going to get into 144hz vs 60hz, the evidence is out there.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Old Old x 1
  19. Chance

    Chance Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    The evidence that it's a bit smoother, there is no evidence that it gives you an actual advantage over 60hz players.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. shoo

    shoo Gaben's Own Aimbot Contributor

    Steam:

    this whole argument is dumb as shit
    144hz is not gonna make you a better player and thinking that it will is retarded
    get good at the fuckin game your playing and don't blame your equipment

    144hz is better of course but it's not like you're gonna magically hit more of your shots cause if your aim was shit on 60hz i can assure you that you're still gonna miss your shots.
    if you're good in 60hz you're not gonna instantly be even better in 144hz. It's more of a luxury thing. If you've used 60hz for your entire life you're not gonna feel the few negatives it has over 144hz. The difference in lag is so hilariously microscopic.

    tl;dr if I use 60hz and you use 144hz and i'm better at whatever game we're playing, I'm gonna win.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Old Old x 1