-Right

Wtf no jogi hud in this release?

But...I've ALWAYS used 0.3 for Windows??? I did had to get it out of the 'test' folder at the time...

Still has the hud bug for the gfx I use:
http://img806.imageshack.us/img806/6193/fodquake03hudproblem.jpg

weapons @ right are not visible; they're breaking up (invisible for the most part). I've addressed this at the time and also mentioned that the test version of 0.3, that I always use, does NOT have this problem.

I tried it on Windows briefly. I tried to /map dm4 and was told I was missing qwprogs.dat. You think a quakeworld client would include qwprogs.dat automatically. The options menu is the one from 1998. Why would I want to use this on Windows instead of ezquake?

I am very happy to have another Quakeworld client to choose from though! Keep up the good work.

I'm not sure fodquak has build-in server like ezquake has, i could be wrong though.

fodquake has built in server but its currently broken (which it says if you try to use the Single Player menu).

fenris: I also know that a new menu system is something bigfoot has on the todo list.

But anyway, who needs a fancy menusystem? I'd rather have a better server browser (as fodquake has) compared to ezquake, for instance.

Excellent client I have to say.

Why to use somthing new when the old works excellent?They spend alot of time I know but it looks useless we still got support from ezQuake devs.

ezQuake has a goal of being easy to start and use and also to offer all interesting features from other QW clients. This comes with a price that for some players we have "too many features" and some features are not the best quality.

fodquake has a main goal (I believe, feel free to correct me) of implementing features with care and have a clean code, plus support more platforms. They can rethink features already done in ezQuake and implement them better. In some cases (like with linux sound code) ezQuake can benefit from this by porting fixed stuff back to its own code base. Maybe, some day, the same thing will happen with Server Browser too.

So I think there is a place for both clients, and fodquake should not try to be "another ezQuake", but it should stick to its goals, as they make sense. Complaining that this client is not like ezQuake or that it lacks some of its features is a bit pointless.

Fodquake is really smooth. Also, i made a benchmark and with the same cfg fodquake is faster by 28-38% depending on a used demo.

+than Ezquake

HUD, teamplay scripts, weapon scripts?
Some of the things fodquake needs to be a viable/playable solution for any serious QW'er today I think.

HUD - cl_compacthud 1 Sure, a fully configurable HUD would be nice.
Teamplay scripts - slackers_tp.cfg seems to work besides $colored_armor thingy, i still use some old sta tp cfg though because of cute colour boxes .
Weapon scripts - There is a +weapon command which does its job fine.

scr_compacthud 1, ok

_alot_ quicker on my old outdated machine, want to try it with a decent fodq cfg, anyone has one to share?

I think it's great to have more clients! ezQuake FodQuake FTE !

I havent played qw for a long time but am gradually beginning to make a slow comeback. I only own a netbook (runs linux) and have been trying out ezQuake/nquake and mqwcl. Fodquake is alot faster than both, although im not (yet) up to date on how to best run qw on linux and/or a netbook so im not sure if my judgement is the best. But my impressions of fodquake are very good so far.