I guess you should replace the word "pure" with "simple".

Playing a simpler game is fun just like coding in a simpler language like C is fun.

"because all FPS games are more or less the same game":
I should have said "all FPS games to some degree *REDUCE* to the most basic element of point-and-shoot-fragging.

=== First let me get to the comment of "Wait till you fire up the tutorial and you'll know what I mean." Reply: ===
--First of all you do not need to play the tutorial. So that makes your point moot.
--Second of all the tutorial was annoying I agree... but for approximately 1 minute... after which you actually got to play the game with a bot.
--My third point is actually a question. If the tutorial was SOOO annoying/boring/condescending, you obviously beat the bot perfectly without dieing or even losing health? What's that you didn't? Personally I was happy to have a 5 minute tutorial match by myself... so that I could remember how to play the game and not completely suck when playing live with others.

=== Second let me get to the comment of "Spawn, Load-up, frag... Spawn, load-up, frag." Reply: ===
I agree FPS games have come a long way. Look at the battlefield series, COD series, TF2. Each of them has much more complex team-oriented, and more nuanced goals to achieve rather than just fragging.

However newer FPS games lack in purity. Take TF2. In TF2 there is a pyro class with a flamethrower, the pyro class encourages the player to learn how to ambush but doesn't emphasize aiming skills. In other more recent games, there are other compromises that are more "fun" but less of pure-point-and-shoot-action.

=== Q3 does have an edge in one way that other games don't: ===
Q3 has a very fast smooth gameplay that is oriented towards pure-point-and-shoot. It does that better than any game out there today in that one regard.

=== Off topic - Why I still play Q3-live? Because it helps me get better at the games I play today: ===
I think to some degree all FPS games reduce to some varient of pure-point-and-shoot-action... but nobody ( myself included ) wants to play the same thing over and over and that is why we have different games like the ones I mentioned ( TF2, Battlefield, etc ).

BUT I think if you can woop-ass in Q3... I think you will woop ass in *ANY* online FPS... because all FPS games are more or less the same game.

Two options: (1.) wifi directional antenna (2.) sat-phone sub.

Option 1:
My advice is to get a nice directional wifi antenna. That way when you are in a port you can easily snoop the port for open wifi networks and get free internet. I will list three antennas of interest. They are ordered from best to worst gain ( dBi i.e. how much the antenna amplifies a weak signal )... or in terms of least to most practical ( i.e. how large the antenna is... do you have to mount it ).
(a.) 9 dBi gain, 6x3x3 inches, needs mounting, http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=21852
(b.) 8 dBi, 4.5x4.5x1 inches, needs flat wall, http://www.l-com.com/productfamily.aspx?id=6300
(c.) 5 dBi, 6.5x1.0x0.2 inches, attaches to the back of a laptop, http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=21330

I kind of like the smallest one the most because the datasheet shows it being attached to the back of laptop

---

Option 2:
Sign up for a sat-phone service that serves your part of the globe. Try: Inmarsat/ISat, Thuraya. You might be able to get a DECENT rate on a data plan. Expect a high price for any satellite access.

---

I am really interested in how it works out! At some point I plan on sailing around the world! So I would like to know what happens.

Sincerely,
Trevor

---

p.s. if you REALLY want to be cool go with one of the parabolic wifi antennas! Like this small 14 dBi, 10x10 inch http://www.l-com.com/productfamily.aspx?id=6150 parabolic

My job has about 100 some odd people with 2 IT people. That is like 50 to 1.

We are a lean mean ... IT... fight... ing... machine.