QuakeWorld Today: ezQuake


These are the results of ezQuake User Experience Poll we have been running during January and February 2010.

The raw answers are available for download at the bottom of this page. What follows is a summary of the answers.

We have attached a short comments to those graphs that seem to be worth commenting.

For example the very first graph, representation of answers to the question how often the person plays QuakeWorld does not need no comments. The answers are distributed nicely around the center and the center also would be what would anyone expect to be an average answer. For such graphs, there will be just the graph itself and no comments.

How often do you play QuakeWorld?

Not playing at all now1510%
A few games per month3020%
A few games per week5536%
Almost every day4026%
At least once a day117%

When did you start playing QW regularly?


How old are you?

less than 2064%
41 or more11%

What was the first QuakeWorld client you used for regular playing?


Which other QuakeWorld clients you also used for regular playing?


As for the "Other" answer, lots of people supplied answers like "Qizmo" or "NFProxy" which are not clients, but only proxies. Other answers contained for example Tenebrae or Qrack which are both (Net)Quake only clients without QuakeWorld support.
However we forgot to put option for QuakeForge, QuakeWorld client that doesn't get as much exposure as it should. Total three users typed that in the Others field.

What was (is) the biggest obstruction for you in switching to ezQuake from other clients?

Here very typical answer was related to difficulties with creating new configuration specific for the user, also lower performance (higher HW requirements) were mentioned quite often, more than we would expect.

Different mouse feeling was also mentioned a few times, mostly in comparision to MQWCL.

"None" was also very common answer here.

Do you use ezQuake for regular playing now?

Do you use ezQuake for other purposes (demo watching, spectating, QTV observing, movie creating)

Do you use other QuakeWorld clients than ezQuake?

Yes, Regularly64%
Regularly only for a specific purpose (demo watching, observing, movie creating)85%
Not at all12281%

What kind of features you always welcome most? Pick 1 to 3 things at most.

user interface improvements5740%
possibility to customize everything you see on the screen5740%
new graphics effects3222%
scripting, small handy variables allowing fine-tuning performance in every possible aspect5841%
easier configuration4834%
bugs being fixed8862%

Here the important message for us is that bug fixes (even if they don't fit into "features" category) are very important for our users. It might suggest that the overall quality of the client maybe could be improved a bit more.

Do you use Server Browser?

not at all6140%
only to look for players53%
for favourite servers I have aliases, for rest I use SB107%

More than half of the users use Server Browser only rarely or not at all. We would like to get this changed in the future. As also some of the following questions suggest, the quality of Server Browser has a potential to be improved quite a lot.

We will for sure soon do some changes to the server browser, for example the GUI will hopefully be changed so that using SB is faster and easier.

Do you use new (mqwcl) Head Up Display?

There are still lots of users not using the MQWCL highly configurable HUD. We are constantly thinking of ways on how to make their switch as easy as possible. Nice default HUD is one of the problems that still needs to be resolved.

Do you use the HUD editor?

In other words 60% of those who actually use MQWCL HUD also use the HUD Editor. Given that thise feature is relatively new (well, not that new), we think this is quite good result, maybe could be improved with some improvements to the HUD editor.

But as there are users who do everything in the console, we cannot hope to get this number anywhere near 100%.

Your preferences and satisfaction - How satisfied are you with the server browser?

Another result that suggests SB should be improved.

Your preferences and satisfaction - How satisfied are you with the HUD editor?

Also HUD Editor could use some improvements.

Your preferences and satisfaction - How satisfied are you with the menus?

Satisfaction with menus also is not "top", but compared to the previous two questions, perhaps it can be said the users are generally satisfied with the menus or at least think they are "ok".

Another interesting observation made here is that in average players who rated themselves as "rookie / beginner" valuated their satisfaction in average very same as all the people who answered this poll.
On the other hand players who started with QuakeWorld in last 3 years rated the menus a bit better than the rest. It seems like players who are rather expected to need the menus (new players) rate them better than those who typically don't need the menus so much as they are used to the configuration for some time.

Your preferences and satisfaction - Is "mouse responsiveness and video smoothness feeling" important to you?

The result couldn't really be more clear here. Game responsiveness must be absolutely the top requirement QuakeWorld players have.

We think that with support of independent physics, RAW mouse input (in_mouse 3), or cl_vsync_lag_fix 1, priority changing, CPU yielding - there are lots of ways how one can fine tune their settings.

Your preferences and satisfaction - How satisfied are you with "the mouse responsiveness and video smoothness feeling" in ezQuake?

We are not sure here whether users do see some ways how the responsiveness could be improved even a bit more or they lack some simple guides on how to fine tune everything on their specific (HW / SW) configuration.

But perhaps it can be said our users are satisfied with the mouse responsiveness of ezQuake.

How satisfied are you with MVD observing tools (teamfrags extra_spec_info, teamholdbar, radar, extended scr_autoid...)?

I don't know what it is3020%
I don't need them3523%
They need to get improved43%
They are too hidden from normal user3423%
I use them and I like them3121%
Give me more of them1711%

This is perhaps example of feature that offers a lot but isn't yet incorporated into the client as smoothly as it could be. We should perhaps think of better default settings that would allow more users take benefit of such semi-advanced features.

What is your stance towards gameplay changes? (Mark any combination of answers you want)

This game doesn't need any, it's just perfect as it is5538%
It just makes players too annoyed, so no changes are the best way2114%
A few very small changes wouldn't harm anyone4128%
A few more crucial changes would make this game more enjoyable for me1510%
I am open to reasonable gameplay changes and I accept the risk that I won't like some of them5034%
I don't care, just keep my rocket launcher, shaft and the speed!1611%

A sneaky question which only partially relates to ezQuake. The "No changes" asnwers make 52% of the answers, "Yes to changes" (from small to larger ones) was marked in 72% of the answers. As multiple checks could be made here, the sum is above 100%.

If we split the answers in more detail, about 38% of answers were pure "No" (game is perfect / no changes are the best way / both) so the other half - about 63% of players can accept some (larger or smaller) changes.

Another interesting observation is that when we filtered the answers to only people from "div1-2" skill area, the pure "No" answers have risen to 44%.

Which screen resolution you use for playing?

less than 640x480117%
more than 1024x7686342%

This will be commented on lower below.

Do you use software rendering? (ezquake.exe)

This will be commented on lower below.

What is the type of your display?

TFT 5:42617%
TFT 16:10 / 16:96241%

Your PC class

low-end (CPU 1.5 GHz or lower + adequate GFX card)117%
mid-end (Single core CPU above 1.5 GHz + adequate GFX card)4328%
high-end (Multi-core + adequate GFX card)9764%

The separated results are not so interesting as when we put them in relations together. Some of us expected that low-end PC will be the main reason to use software rendering binary and also to use low resolution (below 640x480).

None of that is true!

There are ZERO players who have low-end PC and use software rendering.

There are ZERO low-end users who use resolution 640x480 or lower.

The most outstanding example is the only user of "software + less than 640x480" who stated that his PC is high-end class.

This is a clear indication to us that using software rendering or low resolutions is nowadays only about habit and not about hardware capabilities.

New feature(s) you'd like to see most in next release

Mostly users do want new graphics effects, models support or some specific menu improvements.

Existing features or bugs that you'd like to see fixed or improved in future versions the most

Here the answers were very specific and all of them will be reviewed by the developers. Thank you all especially for these, they are really valuable. You can check them in the full table download.

Have you been missing some option in some question that appeared in this survey? Note it here

Again very specific input.

Anything else you'd like to say?

This will also be reviewed internally by all the developers :)

What main thing(s) should we do to make ezQuake even more friendly or attractive for newcomers?

Mostly things we all know about - making this game able to start without pak1.pak, easier menus, tutorials, leagues for rookies, match finding for rookies.

What skill do you think you are?

Looks like wide spectrum of players answered this poll.

What other FPS games you've played often lately?

What other games do you play?

You all play lots of modern games! That's why we're even more glad you stay with QuakeWorld :)

Anonymized full answers (.xls)

We would like to thank everyone for their answers. We got a better picture of what needs to be done in ezQuake or in QuakeWorld in general. We think that you all helped to push QuakeWorld to be a better game in the future!