Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

By Quintin Smith Published 23 April, 2007

Feeling the Strogg arm of the law.

There's a war on. A fistful of beleaguered Global Defence Force infantry are huddling behind a crippled Mobile Command Post they need to deploy further down the road. The engineer they desperately need to get it moving again has taken a long distance railgun round to the chest and is lying incapacitated in the open a dozen yards away. The medic can't run out to help him because the radar his allies had flown in tells him a Strogg Constructor saw fit to call in an anti-personnel turret from orbit and deploy it just up ahead. Its eight automated plasma cannons would turn him into a smear before he'd got his defibrillators charged up.

But all is not lost. A covert ops troop has just made his way to the bodies of the Strogg assault group that got wiped out by some artillery fire. He's stolen a uniform and is currently making his way towards the turret with the intention of disabling it with an EMP grenade. Overhead a Strogg Hornet attack craft has spotted him, but the Ananasi copter it's duelling with isn't letting up. The Hornet pilot breathes a sigh of relief as the covert ops steps on a mine at the last second. Then he gasps air in again as he sees a GDF Titan tank crest a hill and rumble down towards the fray, flanked by fresh soldiers on a pair of Husky quad bikes.

For a game which maxes out at 16 players per team Quake Wars produces an unreal quantity of carnage. The havoc is relentless, it's cinematic, and it's largely due to two things.

'Enemy Territory: Quake Wars' Screenshot 1

Vehicle cockpits have a cute little monitor with the names and locations of your passengers.

One, the focused front. Despite having big maps (which, thanks to Quake Wars' megatexture technology, run exceedingly smoothly) any fighting that's going on is almost always happening in the same area. This is because maps consist of strings of objectives that have to be taken one at a time. For example, Refinery, the new map we played set in North Africa started, with the GDF escorting an MCP through a suburb, then them hacking a shield generator in a city centre and finally advancing into an oil refinery to blow up some Strogg machines. Over the twenty minutes the match lasted we'd ended up in every corner of the map but we were never, ever alone. Even the optional sub-objectives like capturing a forward spawn point or hastily assembling a bridge were always just on the outskirts of the current flashpoint - there was always a chance for someone on the other team to spot what you were doing.

So you've got up to 32 vicious, angry players funnelled into one area. Making carnage from there is easy - you just give each and every one of them the firepower to topple a Third World dictator. Take the Strogg Oppressor class. As well as possessing a rapid-fire Lacerator rifle and a pistol, he packs grenades that create force fields, grenades that call in a huge, we mean huge laser from orbit and shrap grenades. He can also summon an anti-infantry Rail Howitzer, a Plasma Mortar or the mighty Strategic Strike Gun from orbit, and once these have touched down they can be fired at targets miles away. And of course he has the option of commandeering any of a half dozen Strogg vehicles, like the Icarus jetpack or Hog buggy that comes complete with an energy 'ram' on the front that activates when it speeds up that lets it turn tanks into roadkill.

'Enemy Territory: Quake Wars' Screenshot 2

Well you'd pull a face like that if you'd been snuck up on by a man with metal trousers.

Let's have another example. The GDF Covert Ops troop packs a sniper rifle (or a scoped assault rifle if you'd prefer, you brute you), smoke grenades and EMP grenades that knock out any Strogg deployable or vehicle for 30 seconds. If 30 seconds isn't long enough then you've got the option of getting up close and hacking. Covert Ops can also have a radar airlifted in that'll show up nearby Strogg on everyone's minimap and give Engineer-created turrets a helping hand. Best of all is the 3rd Eye Camera, a surveillance device that can be planted on anything and detonated with impressive force. Sneak into the Strogg base, put it on your vehicle of choice then wait for an eager and freshly respawned Strogg to get into the driver seat and put his life in your hands.

All this is to say nothing of the mass of upgrades your class gets throughout a three-map campaign, from flak jackets for the soldiers to a launchable repair arm for the Strogg Constructor that lets you fix things from a distance. Just make sure your hovering, disembodied arm doesn't get shot out of the sky.

Even vehicles are being done with more colour and depth than we've ever seen. As well as being destructible both cosmetically (losing wing mirrors, aerials and so on) and seriously (wheels or hover pads getting shot out) players have a greater degree of control. The default control scheme is the same across all vehicles and has digital stabilisation, which is there to prevent wannabe hotshots from leaping into aircraft, immediately crashing them, then mumbling something about them being for boners and never trying one again.

'Enemy Territory: Quake Wars' Screenshot 3

The Strogg are just horrid. Disgusting. Freakish. We love 'em!

However, advanced control schemes are available for anyone who wants to push their game. These schemes are nowhere near as intuitive but feature everything you'll need to pull off cooler trick jumps, handbrake turns, donuts and the like. We're struggling to think of ways it could all be useful in a combat situation but then that's what obsessive clans are for.

All this chaos coming from a handful of players just feels a little more satisfying than it would with a server of 32 or 64. As well as just having more power at your personal fingertips it feels less cold. There's more room for rivalries and bonding and more chance to be the hero. It works.

But what's really interesting is that Quake Wars has been designed to work well when you can't even fill the server. Splash Damage was born out of online games that drew the attention of the hardcore, which means training constantly, which means it's tedious to always have to get together a big team. Thanks to the focused front you can play Quake Wars 3 on 3; it's just a little slower, a little more tactical, and a lot more personal. We spent all day playing this game and can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that it's great, and it's finished, and all they're doing now is spit-polishing. If you still haven't settled on any games to be excited about this summer then you should know this is a very safe bet.

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars is due for release "when it's done" (retailers suggest 25th May, but no concrete date has been announced yet) on PC via Activision. PS3 and Xbox 360 versions are scheduled to follow later this year.

Picture of Quintin.

About Quintin Smith

Read more articles from Quintin by visiting the Quintin Smith archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (54) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • HoriZon #1 5 years ago

    Cant wait !

  • Tomo #2 5 years ago

    25th May?! Fuck yes. I didn't realise it was so soon.

    Exams are over the following week too... awesomeeeee.

  • PuffyPipe #3 5 years ago

    Give me some strogg love baby! yeah!

  • Tomo #4 5 years ago

    And it sounds awesome from that snipped too.

    Do we know what specs it's going be wanting?

  • JediMasterMalik #5 5 years ago

    YAY!!

    Will get!

    Can't wait!

  • revlob #6 5 years ago

    16 players?!

    I expected at least 32. I'm disappointed.

  • Nova5lag #7 5 years ago

    Remember when I said I would kill you last?... I lied

  • Tejstar #8 5 years ago

    Is this date confirmed then?

  • malarky #9 5 years ago

    That's not quite right, we're working on balancing the game for 12 players per side. Quentin played on a server with 9 players per side, and I can guarantee you that playing with 24 players on a server is a frantic enough experience for anyone :)

  • TripSkyway #10 5 years ago

    Cool, really want to play this. ET was one of my all time favourites.
    Edited by 1 at 23/04/07 @ 14:32

  • zuljin #11 5 years ago

    Somebody has seen Commando a little too often.

    Although I wouldn't have realised unless I've seen it too many times too.

  • BillGaitas #12 5 years ago

    Commando, so many memorable quotes...

    25th may ... what about the minimum requirements, have they been announced?
    Edited by 1 at 23/04/07 @ 14:43

  • asphaltcowboy #13 5 years ago

    Damn, what version to get?!

  • Errol #14 5 years ago

    Only 8 players a side?

    Wtf?

  • Whizzo #15 5 years ago

    Well as the PC version is out next month and will no doubt get some mods built for it there's only one choice really isn't there?

    Really looking forward to this, hopefully it'll give the Battlefield series a kick up the arse as well to up their game too.

  • Errol #16 5 years ago

    Is there some sort of global stats system?

  • Saladin #17 5 years ago

    Sounds perfect for LANs, to be honest.

  • Salaman #18 5 years ago

    Errol, yes, I think some stats system is implemented. I read about 8 previews (from this list here and I'm sure one of them mentioned clan stats were going to be implemented which gave you numbers on a plethora of stuff.

    So it sounds promising. Not sure if this is the same as what you meant.

  • Salaman #19 5 years ago

    MM ... from my experience with ET. If it works OK for 3v3 it will work for 2v2 as well.

    It'll only be a matter of time as well before the community starts spewing out lots of custom built maps. It's bound to include some geared at smaller play.

    I'm glad it's this playable with 8v8. I currently play with a group of people I've been playing with since RtCW and we've gone from over 30 in strength to about 8-10 actives, so although getting a big server filled up is not usually a problem, the quality of the game suffers with lots of pubbies on. I prefer an 8v8 with my skilled team mates on TS with me over an anonymous 32 people fragfest with no team work going on whatsoever.

    I'm quite excited about this now. Only one month!?
    Is this date official or just some guestimation by the EG editorial team?

  • Feet #20 5 years ago

    Oh baby. I can't wait, sounds like they've kept alot of stuff that made ET great. I have pre-ordered and I'm so happy Splash Damage have done a good job! ^_^_^_^_^_^_^

  • Garibaldi #21 5 years ago

    "16 players?!

    I expected at least 32. I'm disappointed."

    I must confess I just lost interest in the preview after learning it was 8v8, I'm sure it's still fun but I want the battles to feel like *war* rather than a mild skirmish.

  • rudedudejude #22 5 years ago

    Still havn't got my ID pre-order thing, not heard a peep from play.com :( :(

  • Feet #23 5 years ago

    Surely there will be maps with 16 v 16 as an option though. I got the impression they were just talking about this play through on this map specifically. If it is 8 v8 max I'll be a touch dissappointed too.

  • peak_performance #24 5 years ago

    From earlier interviews I remember SD stating that "no" maximum player limit would be enforced - servers would be able to set their own limits. They've also said that the maps are balanced for 16-24 players.

    I wonder if EG has gotten it wrong, and gone for the maximum player limit for the 360 version, which is 16 players?

  • Tomo #25 5 years ago

    Well, I prefer smaller server amounts. I think this could do with 64 player support for massive damage but I much more enjoy smaller 16 player servers. It keeps the game tighter, lag down and is better for community growth I've found in previous games online.

  • malarky #26 5 years ago

    The game supports 32 players max, not 16.

    -malarky @splashdamage.com
    Edited by 1 at 23/04/07 @ 17:15

  • DUFFKING #27 5 years ago

    RTCW ET just became a massive skilless spam fest with large player counts. 8 a side FTW.

  • El_MUERkO #28 5 years ago

    Quake Wars shows ID cant make an engine clever enough to handle 20+ players.

    16?

    16!?!

    We had 16 players on larger maps years ago!

    So we get wing mirrors that break. pfft.

    I'll take large scale tank battle in ArmA over outdated gaming restrictions given a new lick of paint.

  • Whizzo #29 5 years ago

    Has everyone complaining about player numbers got malarky on ignore or something?

    The article is WRONG.

  • Gurgeh #30 5 years ago

    @El_Muerko "Quake Wars shows ID cant make an engine clever enough to handle 20+ players"

    You do know Quakeworld supported 64 player servers almost 10 years ago? The issue is more about gameplay than engines.

    And yes the article is wrong - this game will support up to 24 players.
    Edited by 1 at 23/04/07 @ 16:44

  • StarchildHypocrethes #31 5 years ago

    Hmmm.

    I had been looking forward to this, but then I was informed that we had transported back in time to 1998 and so could only have 8 players to a team.

    That's rubbish.

    Edit: Ok, so someone says it's actually 32, but still after 64 player goodness on BF it's still a bit crap.

    Edit 2: Or maybe 24 according to someone else. Any other suggestions?
    Edited by 2 at 23/04/07 @ 16:46

  • Slim #32 5 years ago

    It sounds an awful lot like UT Assault mode doesn't it? Assault is fun for a bit of a change, but not really a mode with any longevity.

    Can anyone who's played both comment on the difference?

  • Saladin #33 5 years ago

    Sounds good to me, to be honest. This game sounds ready-made for LANs, and who cares if there's 32 players on a server if the game is more focused?

  • Gurgeh #34 5 years ago

    AFAIK the maps are designed for 12 players per team but the engine can handle more (providing the server and net connection is up to it).

  • Ryuken #35 5 years ago

    "For a game which maxes out at eight players per team Quake Wars produces an unreal quantity of carnage."

    I always heard 32 players max as well, which seems a much better number for a vehicle-based shooter.

  • Xerx3s #36 5 years ago

    Remember when I said I would kill you last?... I lied

    Arnold playing as that matrix guy. What do I win?

  • richardiox #37 5 years ago

    May 25th? Woohoo! Thought the pc versh was delayed along with the console versions. Great news, cant wait.

  • Metalfish #38 5 years ago

    @Slim

    I guessing the differences would be in the way that wolfenstien was a lot like assault on most maps, but tended to play better having been designed for purpose.

  • zuljin #39 5 years ago

    @Xerx3s
    "Arnold playing as that matrix guy. What do I win?"

    I didn't know there was anything to win... Hey I mentioned Commando bout 25 posts up!!!

  • GitSomE_UK #40 5 years ago

    25th May! WOOHOO!

    /Bank holiday weekend gone

  • peak_performance #41 5 years ago

    @StarchildHypocrethes
    Considering that malarky apparently works at Splash Damage he should know. 32 it is then. Furthermore, considering that 32 players is the normal BF2 server limit and that those 32 players will be fighting at one place all the time in ET:QW it should prove more than enough :)

  • Roccus #42 5 years ago

    This article contradicts itself, it says "12 players per team" (i.e. 24 players) and then says 16 players fighting it out in the next paragraph.

    Splash damage have stated that the PC is 24 players (although purely for gameplay reasons) and the the console version are 16 players.

  • Machetazo #43 5 years ago

    This sounds fan-fooking-tastic. I predict a Quake Wars/Halo 3 conflict (on the Xbox side, obviously) with QW the likely "victor", as I think this is likely to keep people engaged for longer, with far less downtime - the man cannon (people-skeeter, as I refer to it) is unlikely to keep the action flowing, as well as QW's role/task system.

    There's surely room for both, though. May 25 for QW is being really optimistic.

  • reality_cheque #44 5 years ago

    Do we even have a vague idea of the 360 version release date? Can't afford to upgrade my PC this side of ever.

  • Shrike #45 5 years ago

    Large amounts of players do not a good online team shooter make. Team Fortress? UT? The original Enemy Territory?

  • Carrybagma #46 5 years ago

    Surely having the three 'best games evah made' on the 360 is of huge significance? Perhaps it means the end of the world, or first contact, or the coming of the Messiah?

    We three kings of Orient are;
    Bearing gifts we traverse afar,
    Gears of War, Halo and Quake Wars,
    Exclusively on XBOX 360.

    O star of wonder, star of light,
    Star with royal beauty bright,
    Bungie leading, Halo3 proceeding,
    Guide us to thy perfect light.

  • YourMessageHere #47 5 years ago

    I'm really wary about this. For a start, ID seem to have been incapable of anything but nice engines since Quake II; Q3, RtCW, Doom3 and Q4 were pretty awful, although I'll admit I've not bothered with ET. Also, I don't see this being all that revolutionary, more a BF clone that focuses on smaller numbers, probably in order to allow console ports, and has a few amusing gimmicks. Granted, it could be great, but I'm far from hyped. So far as I can see this needs some phenomenal map design to be both small enough to be continually fun for 24 players and big enough to contain the variety and openness that will make vehicles good and useful.

    BTW It says "For a game which maxes out at 12 players per team". This is not 16. Read better.

  • Salaman #48 5 years ago

    I'm not fussed. There were plenty of RtCW servers around with 64 players and it was just chaotic mayhem.
    Same on ET. You get massive amounts of players in and it's just twitchy fragfest-o-rama.

    based on how they focus the fighting on the consecutive objectives some maps may get crowded with more than 12 or so a side.

    I'm happy with smaller numbers being able to provide you a good game.

    It's all a bit early to say though isn't it? Why not wait, buy the game, go online and then come back with an informed opinion rather than screaming murder now.

  • Whizzo #49 5 years ago

    Just for you YMH, a quote from higher up in the thread :
    The game supports 32 players max, not 16.

    -malarky @splashdamage.com    < br />
    The article originally said it only supported 16, it's getting closer to the correct figure but it's not quite there yet...

  • bioreit #50 5 years ago

    @ everyone criticising ID for this (implied criticism or direct)

    You DO realise that this is being developed by Splash Damage, not ID right? I mean - we even have Malarkey from the team giving us information!

    But noooooo, we all have to go "8 players? That is teh non-r0x0r5!" and "ID?! Pfft! I can code better games in my sleep and I didn't even know how to bind circle-strafing to keys back in Quake!"

    Please guys, I know it's hard, but give the gerbils a little run on the old thinkin' wheel before committing your brain vomit to words.

  • espy #51 5 years ago

    Quality over quantity. You don't need 64 players because the rolling front system works. Most players are always near each other. No silly driving around alone for minutes looking for people like in BF. 32 players is more than enough when you consider that most of those 32 will be in permanent contact. Other games may have 64 players, but a large percentage of those will always either be dead, in transit across huge maps, lost, camping a mile away from the action, doing silly stuff with helicopters or frantically trying to get someone to follow their orders.

    And really, what kind of a measure is the player number anyway? BF has 64, but the incentives for teamplay are so weak it very often simply does not work on public servers, because everyone ignores the objectives and expects one of the other 31 teammates to deal with them. I'd rather have less players, but working as a team (which is something ET intrinsically provided, years ago, on publics, without voice comm) than huge numbers of uncoordinated people that all go off on their own.
    Edited by 1 at 23/04/07 @ 22:51

  • manuel_garcia #52 5 years ago

    If nothing else, this thread shows exactly who bothers to read the actual articles and comments properly before wading in :)

  • Vandrius #53 5 years ago

    That was quite possibly the most glowing preview I've ever read.

    I wonder how much they paid for it... cause it probably sold them an extra few hundred copies :-)

  • richardiox #54 5 years ago

    Wonder if we will get a demo in the next few weeks?