PDA

View Full Version : Movements almost intact...


iddQd
11th Dec 2004, 01:14 PM
The Movements aren't fully intact. There is an issue that those who dodge and jump around alot, especially when they duel, will notice. In u2xmp you can actually start a dodge before you hit the ground.

Example:

I perform a double jump, just before i hit the ground i press dodge left and when I hit the ground I press dodge left again. This will make my character dodge instantly when he hits the ground. In utxmp you can only start performing the dodge once you've hit the ground, it is a thing built in UT2004 that u2xmp didn't have, like the boost dodge.

This issue applies most to skilled techs who combinds movement and aim when duelling. It should also consern other classes since when players want to move fast foward they might want to do this:

Dodge, normal jump, dodge, normal jump, and so on.

But as I said this is ALOT harder in utxmp and takes more time. Please check it out yourself and see if you have noticed it. It is not that I want it so I can always dodge instantly after hitting the ground, it it more like a thing that makes dodging much easier in generall.

iddQd
12th Dec 2004, 06:23 AM
Bump

FMI please confirm that you've atleast read this, I think it's important!

Creig
12th Dec 2004, 06:45 AM
Yes I can comfirm this. There seems to be a delayed dodge reaction. This is does exist. It may be something that can not be changed do to the ut2k4 engine. I am not sure.

Richteralan
12th Dec 2004, 05:18 PM
I don't do bunny hops so I not fullly aware of this ;)

Kaio
12th Dec 2004, 05:29 PM
Bump

FMI please confirm that you've atleast read this, I think it's important!

Yap, that is very important.

Richteralan
12th Dec 2004, 05:40 PM
ok after further played for the dodge,
it IS actually slower and not responsive than u2xmp.

IndianPsycho
12th Dec 2004, 06:22 PM
FMI please confirm that you've atleast read this, I think it's important!

We read every thread.

Sir_Brizz
12th Dec 2004, 06:45 PM
It's not important.

The only reason you think it is is because it was that way in U2XMP. Play styles will conform to the game, not vice versa.

SwiftPaladin
12th Dec 2004, 07:10 PM
It's not important imo
Edited...
Brought to you by I am Always Right Foundation

Sir_Brizz
12th Dec 2004, 07:14 PM
everyone on the other side of the issue says it the same way :p

the fact is that a game should not cater to the people who play it just because they whine about it. For every one person that whines there's a hundred that don't give a crap. All the time people spend whining they could be giving constructive criticism or playing the game.

FurociousFa
12th Dec 2004, 07:42 PM
I think it may be apart of this, but often in the middle of fights people (enemy for instance) will float around the landscape shooting and stuff and jumping then back to floating.. the walking/running animation not being shown or?

Yukkoman
13th Dec 2004, 12:08 AM
Its important coz its a conversion, right, and the special everything with old u2xmp is the uniqe movement to start with that NO other game I know of has, including every single bit of special way to get around the map or to specific locations, either its wall dodgeing or bunny jumpin or flashjumping, it all has to do with skills from the player to even be able to be used, thats what makes the diff btw the skilled one from the n00b that just walk around like in quake like games there it feels like all you need is good aim.

Here in XMP you can still be good with a bad aim coz you might got a superb movement that really anoys the enemy you face that makes him miss his shoots on you giving you an advantage even that your aim aint the best.. just my 1cp..

And thx IndianP, for the confirmation that you guys read every thread.. =)

Sir_Brizz
13th Dec 2004, 08:29 AM
I would argue that it's not important for the same reason. The "superb" movement in U2XMP definitely wasn't something that kept new players around (especially over the past few months when everyone supposedly "mastered" the movement). Additionally, I would say the movement is around 95-98% accurate to U2XMP as it stands, and the only things I would say need fixing are some of the jump heghts and the jitteriness on some static meshes and hills.

Also, alot of things that have to do with the "skills" of the player (especially those that distinguish supposed "skilled" people from noobs) are considered EXPLOITS. I think that movement speeds were ridiculous in U2XMP considering that nature of each of the classes. For example, gunners were never meant to be arti carriers but in U2XMP recently that's practically the only people you ever saw carrying artis (tons of armor, and dodging speed let them move pretty much as fast as any other class).

Naib
13th Dec 2004, 08:40 AM
I think that movement speeds were ridiculous in U2XMP considering that nature of each of the classes. For example, gunners were never meant to be arti carriers but in U2XMP recently that's practically the only people you ever saw carrying artis (tons of armor, and dodging speed let them move pretty much as fast as any other class).

I played defence for 12m, and i would guess 95% of the attacks were by rangers and sometimes techs. The only times I saw a gunner was when the other team was having a lot of problems getting past our defences. Even then the gunner would not be trying to get an arti, but just take down the turrets so the ranger could get in.

As far as speed, without using conc jumps even the fastest gunner has no hope of keeping up with a good ranger

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 08:43 AM
Brizz, please find some one that suports your thoughts. By reading these forums you seem very alone with thinking u2xmp is gay and ut2004 is yay.

Yukkoman
13th Dec 2004, 08:53 AM
lol @ sir brizz, we old gamers kinda liked u2xmp and its gameplay, and why do you think fmi even started the conversion, coz they liked u2xmp as well, why not make inputs of whats not like u2xmp if they now are tryin to do a total conversion, plz all your negative thoughts on u2xmp and it ways quite dont mix.. its ok that you dont agree with us, but hey we love xmp, and you aparently dont..

Im out..

_Dark_Rusty_
13th Dec 2004, 09:01 AM
Brizz, please find some one that suports your thoughts. By reading these forums you seem very alone with thinking u2xmp is gay and ut2004 is yay.

instead of over simplyfying this to extremes and going for the old u2xmp vs ut2004 debate how about at least attempting to mount an intelligable arguement more towards the point of this topic? please d not make me waste time reading thoughtless posts such as this. The issue is not which is better nor which of the two you stand by.

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 09:22 AM
Its not like Brizz hasn't made his unique points before. I've already made my point and that is that dodging was generally easier to do in u2xmp since in the ut2004 engine there is a little fix against this that seperates the gameplay slightly. In the current build UTXMP uses UT2004ish dodging while it should be more U2XMPish, shouldn't it. I and many others think its important and Brizz think it's not cause he "hates" U2XMP.

EDIT: And lets make one thing clear, it's NOT an exploit damnit, and even if it is its now a part of U2XMPs unique gameplay. Boost jumping is also a bug, why did FMI bother to bring that one to UTXMP when Ut2004 engine prevents it when playing Ut2004? BECAUSE IT MADE U2XMPs UNIQUE GAMEPLAY which SHOULD STAY!

This thing with it beeing easier to dodge just didn't fit the UT2004 style of playing and therefore there is a fix preventing it in that engine while it DOES fit U2XMP. Why should this fix that is suposed to work for UT2004 apply for UTXMP when UTXMP tries to ressemble the gameplay of U2XMP?!

Keasis
13th Dec 2004, 09:27 AM
I would argue that it's not important for the same reason. The "superb" movement in U2XMP definitely wasn't something that kept new players around (especially over the past few months when everyone supposedly "mastered" the movement). Additionally, I would say the movement is around 95-98% accurate to U2XMP as it stands, and the only things I would say need fixing are some of the jump heghts and the jitteriness on some static meshes and hills.

Also, alot of things that have to do with the "skills" of the player (especially those that distinguish supposed "skilled" people from noobs) are considered EXPLOITS. I think that movement speeds were ridiculous in U2XMP considering that nature of each of the classes. For example, gunners were never meant to be arti carriers but in U2XMP recently that's practically the only people you ever saw carrying artis (tons of armor, and dodging speed let them move pretty much as fast as any other class).


Hearing you talk, I sometimes wonder if you ever actually played u2xmp.

Keasis
13th Dec 2004, 09:30 AM
Oh and btw, I posted this in another thread, but it applies to this thread aswell.
It seems the movement is somewhat bugged, with animations getting stuck. I'll quote:

There seems to be some kinda 'freeze' in the air which delays the landing. This is especially clear when using 3rd personview. You'll see that after a dodge, the animation freezes, and although you'll be able to move, the models stays in the last position. Only after you 'landed' (delayed) the animations start again, and you can dodge again.

:)

Sir_Brizz
13th Dec 2004, 09:59 AM
Its not like Brizz hasn't made his unique points before. I've already made my point and that is that dodging was generally easier to do in u2xmp since in the ut2004 engine there is a little fix against this that seperates the gameplay slightly. In the current build UTXMP uses UT2004ish dodging while it should be more U2XMPish, shouldn't it. I and many others think its important and Brizz think it's not cause he "hates" U2XMP.
I would like you to show me anywhere I have said anything remotely close to that other than instances in which you have inferred that is how I feel. Your pointless rambling is nothing more than dribble. You ought to try not saying stupid things just because you think you are right and I am wrong. There are people who agree with me (and most of them just don't give a crap) but most people start whining about how I must love UT2004 better than U2XMP because I think the movement is JUST FINE versus changing the stupid dodging.
And lets make one thing clear, it's NOT an exploit damnit, and even if it is its now a part of U2XMPs unique gameplay. Boost jumping is also a bug, why did FMI bother to bring that one to UTXMP when Ut2004 engine prevents it when playing Ut2004? BECAUSE IT MADE U2XMPs UNIQUE GAMEPLAY which SHOULD STAY!
BY YOUR DEFINITION OF >EXPLOIT< THE ABILITY TO TYPE GOD IN THE CONSOLE IN-GAME WOULD BE FINE AS LONG AS IT WAS BUILT IN TO THE GAME AND MOST GAMERS DIDN'T GIVE A FLIP. How is boost jumping a bug? In fact, please explain to me how you came to the "realization" that boost jumping is not in UT2k4? I can do it just fine... it must just be you.
This thing with it beeing easier to dodge just didn't fit the UT2004 style of playing and therefore there is a fix preventing it in that engine while it DOES fit U2XMP. Why should this fix that is suposed to work for UT2004 apply for UTXMP when UTXMP tries to ressemble the gameplay of U2XMP?!
Being able to dodge before you even get to the ground? I don't know about you, but I can't strafe to the left in mid air. Not that that makes much of a difference, but the "2k4 dodging system" (as you call it) is much more realistic than the U2XMP one is. And the difference is about 1.2seconds.

I don't even know what you are rambling about. The dodging in UT2004 is the same as UT2003 except the jump heights are lower. The dodging in U2XMP was BASED ON THE DODGING IN UT2k3.

Still, what you are telling me is that if you can't dodge immediately when you hit the ground in UTXMP it is no longer XMP because that little facet of the movement made up the entire game and it better be changed back or UTXMP will be UT2004 and not XMP.

Keasis--
:nag: What a well thought out post... Hearing you talk I sometimes wonder if you ever play video games.

Silver Sequence
13th Dec 2004, 10:16 AM
I agree that the style of dodge, hop, dodge, hop was one of the optimal ways to move in u2xmp. On the other hand it is not true that is it impossible to move well in utxmp. At first I was disapointed with the movment because I couldn't string together an unlimited number of jumps, but now that I'm used to it I find that it's just as easy to dodge enemies. The thing is learning how to optimize utxmp movment. The thing that I would like to see changed, instead of the waiting til you hit the ground before you can jump/dodge is the delay between hitting the ground and being able to dodge again. I think this delay is the time between when you feel that you've fully landed and the animation lands. This delay seems to be caused by the "floating" at the end of the dodge and boost dodge animation. I don't think the problem is in the new movment, I think it's in a subtle difference between utxmp and u2xmp dodging. Utxmp dodging doesn't seem to be even speed, you dodge quickly, but the landing part seems a bit slow as though you lose momentum. On the other hand the dodge in u2xmp was all the same speed. You can see this difference if you are trying to sniper dodging enemies in utxmp because they don't move at at constant speed.

Sir_Brizz
13th Dec 2004, 10:25 AM
I agree that the style of dodge, hop, dodge, hop was one of the optimal ways to move in u2xmp. On the other hand it is not true that is it impossible to move well in utxmp. At first I was disapointed with the movment because I couldn't string together an unlimited number of jumps, but now that I'm used to it I find that it's just as easy to dodge enemies. The thing is learning how to optimize utxmp movment. The thing that I would like to see changed, instead of the waiting til you hit the ground before you can jump/dodge is the delay between hitting the ground and being able to dodge again. I think this delay is the time between when you feel that you've fully landed and the animation lands. This delay seems to be caused by the "floating" at the end of the dodge and boost dodge animation. I don't think the problem is in the new movment, I think it's in a subtle difference between utxmp and u2xmp dodging. Utxmp dodging doesn't seem to be even speed, you dodge quickly, but the landing part seems a bit slow as though you lose momentum. On the other hand the dodge in u2xmp was all the same speed. You can see this difference if you are trying to sniper dodging enemies in utxmp because they don't move at at constant speed.
I don't think it's a big deal, but I agree that I would like that much of the U2 movement back. I do think it's ridiculous to think that not changing it would break the game, even if it would be nice, though.

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 10:32 AM
Whats your defenition of a boost jump? Mine is double jump, wall jump, double jump... letting you do a long ranged and high uber jump. It exsisted in UT2003 but not UT2004 since it was considered a bugg or exploit. But FMI has implanted it to UTXMP carelessly if UT2004 has it or not. Why cant this be the same? I mean, it's almost the same thing, an "exploit" exsisting in u2xmp but not in UT2004.

I don't even know what you are rambling about. The dodging in UT2004 is the same as UT2003 except the jump heights are lower. The dodging in U2XMP was BASED ON THE DODGING IN UT2k3.

Still, what you are telling me is that if you can't dodge immediately when you hit the ground in UTXMP it is no longer XMP because that little facet of the movement made up the entire game and it better be changed back or UTXMP will be UT2004 and not XMP.

It seemes to me that you don't even know what im talking about, install u2xmp try my description in the first post and compare to ut2004.

Yes its still UTXMP in a more UT2004ish way, why bothering making UTXMP at all if we cant correct it after the original. Why are you against this at all, you like the drama? Im quite sure you never used it, if you would maybe you would find it usefull and unique compared to ut2004... please tell me why don't you think its important, right now I've only gotten the impression that you think its a bugg throughoutly and shouldn't be considered being brought back at all.


Brizz ask any old u2xmp player about colors, they would probably think its a good feature. Ask anyone who's more into clangaming, they would say that its usefull to localise certain clanmmates for example to fast find and suport an artifact carrier.

Brizz how about the hud, the old one sucks right and the new one is elite? Imo the new one is just all info compressed into a bigg pile of numbers... man I cant keep check on anything, and Ive asked alot of other players too and they say the same thing.

I think I can find more examples if I look hard enough.

It is as swiftpaladin sais, youve started a know it all foundation and you're holding too hard on it.


Still this is an forum and you have the right to think what ever you want and in the end it's all up to FMI, I hope they make the right decission(s).

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 10:35 AM
I don't think it's a big deal, but I agree that I would like that much of the U2 movement back. I do think it's ridiculous to think that not changing it would break the game, even if it would be nice, though.

I dont think it'll be breaking the game, I just got stuck on you said its not important its a bugg and bla bla bla... yadda hoo etc. It should defenitely be brought back. You even said players left u2xmp cause of "exploits" like this one.

SwiftPaladin
13th Dec 2004, 11:25 AM
I've officially added Brizz with the ranks of phalanx.

gg's.

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 11:52 AM
Then it's kind of funny how you speak against it and then in the end you change your point totally.

gg's.

Sir_Brizz
13th Dec 2004, 12:11 PM
Whats your defenition of a boost jump? Mine is double jump, wall jump, double jump... letting you do a long ranged and high uber jump. It exsisted in UT2003 but not UT2004 since it was considered a bugg or exploit. But FMI has implanted it to UTXMP carelessly if UT2004 has it or not. Why cant this be the same? I mean, it's almost the same thing, an "exploit" exsisting in u2xmp but not in UT2004.
I wasn't sure what your definition is. None of the UT games have allowed you to do a DOUBLE jump->wall dodge->DOUBLE jump. They have allowed you to do SINGLe jump->wall dodge->single jump. This works in 2k3, 2k4, and U2 both, so I don't see what point you are trying to make. The only thing Epic did in 2k4 is tone down the HEIGHT of that jump. They considered it an unexpected feature, as CliffyB OFTEN SAID. I personally don't care if it's in XMP or not. As it stands, there is STILL a bug with it. And yes, I mean a BUG not an exploit.
It seemes to me that you don't even know what im talking about, install u2xmp try my description in the first post and compare to ut2004.
Um. Sorry, but I DO know what you're talking about. I know it's different in UTXMP than U2XMP. What you aren't understanding is that it is my opinion that it makes no difference. If U2XMP had never been written that way, you wouldn't be complaining now because you would be used to it that way. Thus that part of the movement DOES NOT MAKE XMP XMP.
Yes its still UTXMP in a more UT2004ish way, why bothering making UTXMP at all if we cant correct it after the original. Why are you against this at all, you like the drama? Im quite sure you never used it, if you would maybe you would find it usefull and unique compared to ut2004... please tell me why don't you think its important, right now I've only gotten the impression that you think its a bugg throughoutly and shouldn't be considered being brought back at all.
I don't care if it's brought back. What I care is that so many in the community are so vehement that UTXMP be IDENTICAL to U2XMP that they never consider whether a certain difference could be BENEFICIAL FOR THE GAMEPLAY. I never saaw a noob in U2XMP say "wow that guy is moving fast, he must be good" but I did see them say "wow that guy is moving fast he must be a cheater". It was independant of class and it gives new players the idea that it's pretty easy to cheat in the game if you can move that fast.

All I'm asking and all I've ever really asked is that people STOP WHINING and GIVE IT A CHANCE. But too many are "waah waah I can't move 10,000 mph like I could in U2XMP, so this game is busted! Fix now FMI or doom to UTXMP!!! waah waah"
Brizz ask any old u2xmp player about colors, they would probably think its a good feature. Ask anyone who's more into clangaming, they would say that its usefull to localise certain clanmmates for example to fast find and suport an artifact carrier.
Alot of people said the same thing about colors in UT2004. They are unnecessary. I am in a clan, I play in clan games all the time. My clanmates even use the UTcomp colors to complement their name. But I refuse to, and they don't give a crap. Some of my clan mates even stopped using the colors when they realized how stupid it is. There is no need. Can't you tell the difference between {Pee} and {PEE}? Because I sure as freak can. My clan is different because of it's TAG not the stupid colors they use. I recognize who to help by who they are not because their name is gren and pink and mine is blue and red. The colored names argument is REALLY tired. The fact is that it is not necessary by any stretch of the word, and all arguments for it are the same ones that have been used since UT2004 came out.
Brizz how about the hud, the old one sucks right and the new one is elite? Imo the new one is just all info compressed into a bigg pile of numbers... man I cant keep check on anything, and Ive asked alot of other players too and they say the same thing.
Nope, never said that. I gave good reasons why the new HUD is superior to the old HUD, but I never said the old HUD absolutely sucks. It had lots of problems that I feel have been fixed pretty good. The new HUD with proper scaling and transparency will be just fine.
I think I can find more examples if I look hard enough.
I'm sure you can since you seem to feel fine twisting everything I say to make it fit what you are accusing me of. I could do the same to you but I don't have countless hours to waste searching the forums for something so useless.
It is as swiftpaladin sais, youve started a know it all foundation and you're holding too hard on it.
Most people consider anything said on a public forum material that is the posters OWN OPINON. I'm sure I could find several instance where you have said something on these forums and meant it as opinon where it sounded like you would think it was 100% fact. Therefore, judge anything I say pretty much as MY OPINON and not necessarily fact...thanks...
Still this is an forum and you have the right to think what ever you want and in the end it's all up to FMI, I hope they make the right decission(s).
I think they already have.

cyb
13th Dec 2004, 12:31 PM
I don't care if it's brought back. What I care is that so many in the community are so vehement that UTXMP be IDENTICAL to U2XMP that they never consider whether a certain difference could be BENEFICIAL FOR THE GAMEPLAY. I never saaw a noob in U2XMP say "wow that guy is moving fast, he must be good" but I did see them say "wow that guy is moving fast he must be a cheater". It was independant of class and it gives new players the idea that it's pretty easy to cheat in the game if you can move that fast.

I, for one, would like to see UTXMP be identically to U2XMP. Because after one year of playing it, I got used to it and like every part of it.

As for the cheating part, even I got called a cheater/speed hack user. Why? All i was doing was using my run-key and my jetpack properly. So instead to blame the experienced players, because they know how to use all available options of fair play in the game, look at the beginners too, who call everyone a cheater, when they could do they same things by just playing the game a bit more and learing it.

iddQd
13th Dec 2004, 12:42 PM
I wasn't sure what your definition is. None of the UT games have allowed you to do a DOUBLE jump->wall dodge->DOUBLE jump. They have allowed you to do SINGLe jump->wall dodge->single jump. This works in 2k3, 2k4, and U2 both, so I don't see what point you are trying to make. The only thing Epic did in 2k4 is tone down the HEIGHT of that jump. They considered it an unexpected feature, as CliffyB OFTEN SAID. I personally don't care if it's in XMP or not. As it stands, there is STILL a bug with it. And yes, I mean a BUG not an exploit.

Well in ut2003 you didnt perform the boostjump exacly the same but it works the same way, in ut2003 you find a wall and you do this: left, jump, left, jump (if the wall is to the right) really fast and you'll perform a extra big jump, this was removed in ut2004 but somehow followed to the u2 engine.

I didn't start this as a whine it was better before waah waah, Im cool with improvements as long as theyre good. I just pointed out that they did miss something that made it feel kinda stiff to dodge, if they fix it or not is their problem.

Alot of people said the same thing about colors in UT2004. They are unnecessary. I am in a clan, I play in clan games all the time. My clanmates even use the UTcomp colors to complement their name. But I refuse to, and they don't give a crap. Some of my clan mates
ven stopped using the colors when they realized how stupid it is. There is no need. Can't you tell the difference between {Pee} and {PEE}? Because I sure as freak can. My clan is different because of it's TAG not the stupid colors they use. I recognize who to help by who they are not because their name is gren and pink and mine is blue and red. The colored names argument is REALLY tired. The fact is that it is not necessary by any stretch of the word, and all arguments for it are the same ones that have been used since UT2004 came out.

Now you're talking UT2004 again, why not compare this with u2xmp?

Yes I could prolly "make up" more of those, and It won't matter what I write since you got your own opinion and your own little world of how this game should look or not.

It was a fun fight, lets just drop it cause we're not getting anywhere.

.pot.OptimusPrime
13th Dec 2004, 01:21 PM
I think most U2 rabbit rangers would åppreciate Matrix-like movement with infinite levitation, wall jumping, somersets and running in the ceiling. Let us not be bound to boring rules of realism and physics sh*t, letīs be free to do whatever we desire COZ THIS IS UNREAL, mates. :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: *Jagarna Borna gig*

Sir_Brizz
13th Dec 2004, 02:08 PM
Well in ut2003 you didnt perform the boostjump exacly the same but it works the same way, in ut2003 you find a wall and you do this: left, jump, left, jump (if the wall is to the right) really fast and you'll perform a extra big jump, this was removed in ut2004 but somehow followed to the u2 engine.
I know that. You're missing the point. The only reason this IS in UTXMP is BECAUSE IT IS IN UT2004. And even at that, there is STILL a bug with it. Additionally, Unreal 2 XMP used the UT2003 Engine, which explains why the boost dodging was in it on such a grand scale in the first place.
I didn't start this as a whine it was better before waah waah, Im cool with improvements as long as theyre good. I just pointed out that they did miss something that made it feel kinda stiff to dodge, if they fix it or not is their problem.
I can understand that, and I'm not going to guess, but many people who have been complaining thus far are the same people that were complaining in the threads before the release. Nobody will give any of it a chance, because they are so stuck on it being U2XMP not UTXMP.
Now you're talking UT2004 again, why not compare this with u2xmp?
Because UTXMP is on the UT2004 engine now, for one. For another, because name coloring is the same whether I compare it between UT2004 and U2XMP or U2XMP and Quake3 or UT and Nerf Arena Blast. It doesn't matter what I compare it to, it's equally annoying in all of those instances. Also, everyone that is whining about colored names not being in UTXMP are using almost identical arguments to the people that were whining that colored names were being removed from UT2004. So there IS a direct correlation, whether you see it or not.

Jurai
16th Dec 2004, 03:48 AM
OMG, seriously, how can he say it doesn't matter and it isn't a big deal??? Surely being able to dodge and move quick compared to a being as slow as hell and easy to hit DOES matter, since it completely changes the game........least iddqd knows what he's talking about...

[Shadow]Aksen
16th Dec 2004, 04:03 AM
Brizz, i think you are misunderstanding something. People want the game to be playable and fun, so they are offering suggestions. Dodging does not feel natural, so we are saying so. You seem to be suggesting that instead, we just don't say a word.

FMI is trying to create a game. Right now we are beta testing it. Along with finding bugs, we are giving them our feedback on gameplay. Having an enjoyable, natural movement system is important.. and if people feel something needs to be tweaked, or that a compromise should be met, they should damn well say so. For you to stand up in so many threads and yell at well meaning players, it just really pisses me off. There are always bad guys on both sides of the fence... but for you to sling mud at every single one of us, well it just gives me a headache. Quit calling everyone a "whiner" and act like a ****ing adult.

[Shadow]Aksen
16th Dec 2004, 04:07 AM
and optimus, quit thinking we're just trying to alter the game so we can pwn people. In U2XMP I got ownt plenty of times and enjoyed it... xmp had a unique brand of fun that I have never ever found in any other game. I have spent the last year on the game, and enjoyed every moment of it. I, and others like me, are just trying to get the good times to continue in UTXMP. UTXMP shows plenty of promise,a nd I am enjoying it immensely. Coming here and speaking my mind on the game helps FMI aquire an understanding of what different people in the community want. You coming and berating everything that moves helps nothing.

|pure|Destruction
16th Dec 2004, 04:52 AM
foshizzle bizzle

Sir_Brizz
16th Dec 2004, 11:13 AM
Aksen']Brizz, i think you are misunderstanding something. People want the game to be playable and fun, so they are offering suggestions. Dodging does not feel natural, so we are saying so. You seem to be suggesting that instead, we just don't say a word.
Yes these are really constructive suggestions :rolleyes:

"UTXMP has the most ****** movement ever! FMI change it back! **** you Brizz you are stupid you don't know what you're talking about you must have never played XMP!"

You know that has been going on. I want the game to be playable and fun too, and I'm not suggesting people not say anything about it. But when 10 threads are started all COMPLAINING about the movement, there is something wrong with that. And when people IN THIS THREAD are now saying elsewhere that they are getting used to the movement, what does that say? It says I was right all along, that if you give the movement a chance it won't feel so bad. I agreed several times that there was a bug with landing and dodging again, but nobody cares when I agree they only care when I disagree.
FMI is trying to create a game. Right now we are beta testing it. Along with finding bugs, we are giving them our feedback on gameplay. Having an enjoyable, natural movement system is important.. and if people feel something needs to be tweaked, or that a compromise should be met, they should damn well say so. For you to stand up in so many threads and yell at well meaning players, it just really pisses me off. There are always bad guys on both sides of the fence... but for you to sling mud at every single one of us, well it just gives me a headache. Quit calling everyone a "whiner" and act like a ****ing adult.
pot/kettle/black.

.pot.OptimusPrime
16th Dec 2004, 12:15 PM
I agree with the point that ranger is somewhat stiff when compared with the U2īs ridiculously slick one. Although the difference is pretty minimal and appears only in hardcore dodging.
There was this atm closed thread of ranger being underpowered which revealed a really frightening misunderstanding of gameīs concept. Some people (of whom Jurai was the worst) claimed between the lines that owning others with ranger is the absolute nirvana and culmination point of skill developing. Other classes couldnīt be as leet and people with other than ranger shouldnīt be respected for this. I play mostly with gunner but still I find owning with ranger rather easy. The amount of extra fingerwork isnīt so signifiicant when compared with gunner. Actually I think surviving with fat ass bomber is much harder in terms of dodging and dexterity. It was so easy to avoid being killed when I could just hang half of the time in the air.

(I havenīt played UT version so much but these remarks touch the both version equally.)

Emmet Otter
16th Dec 2004, 01:23 PM
My main concern are the characters jump height. Their heights are rather low. Its really hard to just out of the underground area in sunsetbeach.

toky
17th Dec 2004, 04:57 AM
Ranger floats like a fairy when you dodge, almost on the verge of hovering. Not sure if anyone discussed the ranger dodge animation yet.

8)

FurociousFa
17th Dec 2004, 05:58 AM
.pot.optimus if you haven't played it so much, how do you know it toughes it out equally? to dodge away from attacks and such the gunner has a large advantage over the ranger as it is.

Brizz...thanks for telling what is and isn't "right", elitish prick.

toky
17th Dec 2004, 06:19 AM
In U2XMP the ranger can jump in a very small circle around a gunner. The idea is you get 4 dodges off before a gunner gets 1. The idea being the gunner looses track of you, so you can either run or fight. Mmm looking somewhere and you always can dodge there..........

UTXMP the pistol is under powered (headshots will be deadly;) Plus you can’t dodge like U2. The sniper riffle can be very good, but sometimes it cant register anything. Firing three shots at a stationary target sometimes does nothing :(

Just WALLJUMP Sunsetbeach! :P Jump too the wall jump off the wall pressing corresponding arrow too direct where to go. However my wall jump success rate went up with UTXMP, yet i sacrifice about a third loss of control compared too U2XMP.

The key too being a good ranger is being fluid. UTXMP doesn't allow that right now :(

Nekrataal
17th Dec 2004, 09:02 AM
Mh actually I do find this debate a little too detailled. It is important to see the relevance of things and I see a lot of points that are more important than that especially when my feeling is that ppl moan because they havent had enough practice yet. It might be harder from a technical point of view but if there are experts they will learn to cope with it and differ from all the noobs out there. I guess you all get along pretty fine with the new dodging style ... dont you ? Who fears to be a noob ? ;)

I dont think a conversion or port MUST BE 100% like its predecessor. It should be better of course ... so FMI might change dodging but if they do it will you moan because you have get used too the new dodging style ;)

Sir_Brizz
17th Dec 2004, 09:10 AM
Brizz...thanks for telling what is and isn't "right", elitish prick.
Please show me where I said I was right in any of the posts I made about issues in the game.

kthxbye. "elitish prick" :rolleyes:

toky
17th Dec 2004, 09:36 AM
Mh actually I do find this debate a little too detailled. It is important to see the relevance of things and I see a lot of points that are more important than that especially when my feeling is that ppl moan because they havent had enough practice yet. It might be harder from a technical point of view but if there are experts they will learn to cope with it and differ from all the noobs out there. I guess you all get along pretty fine with the new dodging style ... dont you ? Who fears to be a noob ? ;)

I dont think a conversion or port MUST BE 100% like its predecessor. It should be better of course ... so FMI might change dodging but if they do it will you moan because you have get used too the new dodging style ;)

The impression I got from the time I first heard about UTXMP going to be 100% like its predecessor. Thus, why beta 1 will only help us achieve that goal.

Plump
2nd Jan 2005, 07:21 AM
This is a stupid argument, its pointless to argue over who's opinion is right. As an old skool UTer I much prefer having to land then dodge and am against being able to dodge on land in the way you describe. For me, thats just like bunnyhopping in q3, but hey that was never intended when it was first started either.

Anyway this is for FMI to decide, there are reasons on either side and your attempts at trying to prove your opinion to be right are pointless.

Gumby
2nd Jan 2005, 09:43 AM
Please show me where I said I was right in any of the posts I made about issues in the game.

kthxbye. "elitish prick" :rolleyes:

er well ok then...

It says I was right all along, that if you...

TBH the dodge landing thing is a pretty big booboo as far as the fluidity of playing is concerned... As well as the no jump/duck combination anymore sadly :( And the ranger still needs more boost :( And the tech :(

ericOner
3rd Jan 2005, 09:31 AM
Um. Sorry, but I DO know what you're talking about. I know it's different in UTXMP than U2XMP. What you aren't understanding is that it is my opinion that it makes no difference. If U2XMP had never been written that way, you wouldn't be complaining now because you would be used to it that way.

if.....if......fact is u2xmp was written this way. and the community
that grew along got used to it and wants the gameplay and especially the movement as it was in u2xmp, cause utxmp should be a total conversation!


Thus that part of the movement DOES NOT MAKE XMP XMP.


IT DOES!!!

Sir_Brizz
3rd Jan 2005, 09:42 AM
TBH the dodge landing thing is a pretty big booboo as far as the fluidity of playing is concerned... As well as the no jump/duck combination anymore sadly :( And the ranger still needs more boost :( And the tech :(
No actually it's not.

I've seen people playing just as well as they ever did in U2XMP in UTXMP...and pretty much ZERO of them say anything about the dodging anymore. Why? Because it's something you get used to. Hence:
Thus that part of the movement DOES NOT MAKE XMP XMP.
It can't because there are too many people NOT WHINING ABOUT IT.

I agree about the jump duck, although I have made it through windows people are saying they can't make it through on Rampant (especially the front windows) by tapping jump not holding it. The jumping problem (not enough boost) I agree should be fixed.
if.....if......fact is u2xmp was written this way. and the community
that grew along got used to it and wants the gameplay and especially the movement as it was in u2xmp, cause utxmp should be a total conversation!
You're right...except UTXMP is a TC of XMP NOT U2XMP. Granted they are keeping alot the same between the two (which everyone is already lucky to have), but that doesn't mean every little thing you find to whine about on a consistent basis is going to be kept the same. My point still stands, if U2XMP had never come out, or had come out in a different form, people would be whining about UTXMP not being like that, or not whining at all. If some of these people had their way, UTXMP would BE U2XMP sans innovation. Many of the people that WERE whining (since even many in this very thread have stopped giving a crap about the movement) were pretty much ignoring the good that could come from the way it is and instead finding "the problem" (as defined by them) that the game had. Many of those same people have gotten used to the movement, and don't really care at this point. Good for them I say. IMO (since some people can't get that), the game was about 1% noob friendly before. Some of the changes that have occured have, IMO, made the game more like 15% noob friendly. Anything under 25% is usually bad, although any ground we can gain over what it was in U2XMP (because you HAVE to admit, the game was pretty much not noob friendly over the past 8 months) is a GOOD THING.

ericOner
3rd Jan 2005, 09:55 AM
OMG Brizz

first of all: no U2XMP = no UTXMP....................got it?

and movement is an important part of the game, so its NOT
a little thing to whine about! ;)


edit: tell me a noob-friendly FPS-multiplayer!!! :lol:

cyb
3rd Jan 2005, 10:00 AM
the game was pretty much not noob friendly over the past 8 months
the reason that the game was not 'noob-friendly' was the missing / f***ed up master server.

Sir_Brizz
3rd Jan 2005, 10:33 AM
OMG Brizz

first of all: no U2XMP = no UTXMP....................got it?
No because XMP is a concept, not a game. And while it might be true that UTXMP's creation is based entirely upon U2XMP, that does not change the fact that the game is based on a concept which IS XMP, and that concept is not defined by the movement. I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that you could look at a design document for XMP (not U2XMP) and find that what is being whined about was even mentioned. It was the way it was because that's how it was in Unreal 2, not because that is how it was defined for XMP.
and movement is an important part of the game, so its NOT
a little thing to whine about! ;)
How? If the movement were ORIGINALLY different, than you would want it that way, ad nauseam. If that's true (which it has to be), then movement plays a very small role in the gameplay.
edit: tell me a noob-friendly FPS-multiplayer!!! :lol:
noob-friendly within reason (imo, around 25%)? Okay.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein
Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
Call of Duty
Call of Duty: United Offensive
Unreal Tournament 2004
Unreal Tournament 2003
Unreal Tournament
Unreal
Quake 3
Battlefield 1942
Battlefield Vietnam
Unreal 2 (SP, not MP)

more??

I would even go so far as to say that HALO and HALO 2 are MORE noob friendly than XMP has been.

cyb: I'm talking about even BEFORE the Master Server went down, so maybe I should have said 10 months.

Gumby
4th Jan 2005, 01:45 PM
I've seen people playing just as well as they ever did in U2XMP in UTXMP...and pretty much ZERO of them say anything about the dodging anymore. Why? Because it's something you get used to. Hence:


Your clouded mind is missing the point... It's not about the playing, it's about the coding not being right... I'm not on about the feel, i'm on about the f00k up when you land - you don't land you float and stick. Oh noes you'll have to go into 3rd person (which we all know you think is the most horrendous act of cheating ever) to see it... :rolleyes:

The main point here is you (Brizz) predominantly play UT2004, the rest of the people are regular players of U2XMP (among other things), and you are trying to argue against them why? XMP is a game - if it was included in UT2005/6 on the pull down menu along with iCTF and such, then I for one would accept it as concept.

Furthermore, why is the only way you back up your ideas/suggestions/opinions with more of your own ideas/suggestions/opinions or by repeating yourself. What does this achieve bar increasing you post count?

Sir_Brizz
4th Jan 2005, 02:13 PM
Your clouded mind is missing the point... It's not about the playing, it's about the coding not being right... I'm not on about the feel, i'm on about the f00k up when you land - you don't land you float and stick. Oh noes you'll have to go into 3rd person (which we all know you think is the most horrendous act of cheating ever) to see it... :rolleyes:
I've already admitted that THIS is a bug and should be fixed several times. Perhaps your clouded mind is missing MY point. This thread was started BEFORE that bug ever surfaced. It was started because you can't hop->dodge->hop->dodge and fly across the map 10 times faster than you can run across it. I DON'T THINK THAT IS A PROBLEM. The landing bug is different from not being able to do this.
The main point here is you (Brizz) predominantly play UT2004, the rest of the people are regular players of U2XMP (among other things), and you are trying to argue against them why? XMP is a game - if it was included in UT2005/6 on the pull down menu along with iCTF and such, then I for one would accept it as concept.
You don't know what I predominantly play. And additionally, (here will be a hard one for you to understand) IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I PREDOMINANTLY PLAY. Maybe you played Diablo 2 for four years before you played XMP, does that mean that your input was pretty much scrapyard garbage and should have been completely ignored? NO. Games are tuned to THE PEOPLE WHO PLAY THEM, not to the people who think they are the ones who know everything there is to know about the game. How successful do you think ANY game would be that didn't listen to some portion of the community whether they "predominantly" played some other game or not? The goal is to get people to PLAY YOUR GAME not to have the same quality and size of community you had before. If that was the goal, you would see every game remade identically to itself with updated graphics all the time...and guess what. You don't.

People like you need to get off your high horse and realize that UTXMP is an attempt to get a COMMUNITY for XMP (the concept, not the game). FMI is not going to accomplish that goal if they discount people's opinions because they "predominantly" play some other game. Every sinlg eone of my points has pretty much nothing to do with UT2004 except for the playerbase. THIS IS A MOD FOR UT2004! It is going to attract UT2004 players. It won't be hard for them to leave the game if the only people who gave input, were listened to, and play the game are people who think they are the only ones who know XMP.

Also, XMP is a concept. Every game is a concept. Waterworld (the movie) is a concept. What you see is an IMPLEMENTATION of a concept. LORD OF THE FREAKING RINGS IS A CONCEPT. Any of those things could have been made differently, and changed the whole outcome of their quality JUST BASED ON THE CONCEPT. Waterworld could have been a ten time emmy winner, and lord of the rings could have been a flop. XMP could have failed even more miserably than it did. UTXMP is more of a RESURRECTION than a port. As I have said many times, it may end up being UT2003-UT2004, but it could have been TF->TFC AND STILL BEEN XMP.
Furthermore, why is the only way you back up your ideas/suggestions/opinions with more of your own ideas/suggestions/opinions or by repeating yourself. What does this achieve bar increasing you post count?
Maybe because I have repeated myself a thousand times, and you and several others recycle each other's points just as much as I recycle my own.

Perhaps it's because the people reading my posts seem to have ZERO reading comprehension skills (or they just don't want to use them). How about instead of looking back and reading just my posts you go back and read ALL of the replies and realize that I got attacked on the same issues repeatedly. How else can you defend yourself against that than by repeating yourself? My points are pretty clear to me. Other people are able to understand them. Why can't the same five people that keep replying to my posts figure it out?

cyb
4th Jan 2005, 02:40 PM
Also, XMP is a concept. Every game is a concept. Waterworld (the movie) is a concept. What you see is an IMPLEMENTATION of a concept. LORD OF THE FREAKING RINGS IS A CONCEPT. Any of those things could have been made differently, and changed the whole outcome of their quality JUST BASED ON THE CONCEPT. Waterworld could have been a ten time emmy winner, and lord of the rings could have been a flop. XMP could have failed even more miserably than it did. UTXMP is more of a RESURRECTION than a port. As I have said many times, it may end up being UT2003-UT2004, but it could have been TF->TFC AND STILL BEEN XMP. :confused: :stick:

Sir_Brizz
4th Jan 2005, 03:27 PM
Indeed... :rolleyes:

Gumby
4th Jan 2005, 03:36 PM
A concept is akin to an idea... Games are akin to themselves...

You support yourself by bringing in balanced aguments and quoting references / sources that support your idea. Not through repetition. You do that in a dissertation and you fail. You do that in court and you get laughed at by the judge.

People like you need to get off your high horse and realize that UTXMP is an attempt to get a COMMUNITY for XMP (the concept, not the game).

ROFLMAO :lol: *cough* hypocrite

Perhaps it's because the people reading my posts seem to have ZERO reading comprehension skills (or they just don't want to use them). How about instead of looking back and reading just my posts you go back and read ALL of the replies and realize that I got attacked on the same issues repeatedly. How else can you defend yourself against that than by repeating yourself? My points are pretty clear to me. Other people are able to understand them. Why can't the same five people that keep replying to my posts figure it out?

Get over yourself m8

Anyhoo time to call it quits. I for one am just gonna wait until the end of the whole process to play it anymore. GL HF

_Lynx
11th Jan 2005, 11:46 PM
Well in ut2003 you didnt perform the boostjump exacly the same but it works the same way, in ut2003 you find a wall and you do this: left, jump, left, jump (if the wall is to the right) really fast and you'll perform a extra big jump, this was removed in ut2004 but somehow followed to the u2 engine.
Sorry to interrupt your conversation, but U2XMP is completely torn apart from U2 Engine. U2 used... eh... v829 out of the box, and U2XMP was built from the scratch with just importing some elements like, particle system and assets and it used v2226. So, I suppose that's because at that point 2 games took two different roads. UT kept evolutioning and U2XMP stayed at his 2226. Just FYI.

Sir_Brizz
12th Jan 2005, 11:47 AM
A concept is akin to an idea... Games are akin to themselves...
Ummm...games are made out of ideas...:tup:
You support yourself by bringing in balanced aguments and quoting references / sources that support your idea. Not through repetition. You do that in a dissertation and you fail. You do that in court and you get laughed at by the judge.
Good thing I'm not in court or giving a dissertation. I'm talking to a group of people about a subject on which there are no references or sources. Somebody wrote the books. Did they have to give references and sources to support what they discovered?
ROFLMAO :lol: *cough* hypocrite
Last time I checked it was these people that started railing on me and not vice versa. I might have been "tearing apart" their ideas, but I was never initially attacking them personally.
Get over yourself m8
Get over what? The fact that the so-called "pro" community for XMP disagrees with me and then the only argument they have is "Why do you keep repeating yourself when we ask the same questions and make the same accusation repeatedly?" "Why do you want UTXMP to be different than U2XMP? If you ever played U2XMP you would know it should be identical! Did you ever even PLAY U2XMP?" My posts are a direct result of the people I am catering to. If they can't figure out what I'm saying after I repeat myself several times...well that's their own issue.
Anyhoo time to call it quits. I for one am just gonna wait until the end of the whole process to play it anymore. GL HF
So you joined the "Screw FMI I'm not playing UTXMP ever again until the Gold is released...and if it's not identical to U2XMP I'm never going to play it again" bandwagon? Personally, I would have thought you of all people would have been above that.

Gumby
12th Jan 2005, 01:03 PM
That was like soooooooo posted last week... ;) *speak to the hand* lol

Last time I checked it was these people that started railing on me and not vice versa
er yeah... hmmm... :P

Anyhoo time to call it quits. I for one am just gonna wait until the end of the whole process to play it anymore. GL HF

So you joined the "Screw FMI I'm not playing UTXMP ever again until the Gold is released...and if it's not identical to U2XMP I'm never going to play it again" bandwagon? Personally, I would have thought you of all people would have been above that.
"play it" being the arguing game... nvm ;)

Anyhoo WHO CARES :D Chill and enjoy life and enjoy the game :) Coloured names has made me happy for the moment :)

NRK
13th Jan 2005, 02:29 PM
OMG Brizz no one is making XMP for YOU. And enough talking about right and not right points. And enough accusations of whining. If you can say others to stop talking i can also say you to SHUT UP. Yes, others are complaing about the game, but you are complaining about the people, and thats much worse. Thats not going to help for game in ANY damn way. Find something to do. Maybe make some "right" game. Oh, well, you cant... So maybe find some job where you could use your "proving others wrong" skills to earn actual money. People ARE different. I thought you know that. So they are thinking DIFERENTLY. And if you think others are going to agree with you even if you might be right, you are mistaken.

I post rarely, so thats it.

Sir_Brizz
13th Jan 2005, 04:27 PM
I love how you apparently don't read either.

I don't want XMP catered to me. I just don't want it catered to all of you either, which is very obviously what you all want. If you (and anyone else) can't deal with the fact that someone that enjoys XMP does not agree with you, that's your own stinking problem. And in line with that, my opinion of how XMP should and could be is just as important as any of the rest of yours. So if all you can do is get angry at me because I disagree with you...well...

GET A SHRINK.

Gumby
13th Jan 2005, 08:14 PM
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=152561&page=2
linky :)

I don't want XMP catered to me. I just don't want it catered to all of you either, which is very obviously what you all want.
I'm sorry but that made me laugh.

Translated:
I don't want XMP to be desired by the XMP community. If i can't have my way neither can you :p"
Before you flame this - look up a word called 'sarcasm' ;)

This is a bug thread... Not a spam one ;)

Sir_Brizz
13th Jan 2005, 10:26 PM
I don't want the same thing to happen to XMP as happened to UT2003, which is what is happening.

Gumby
14th Jan 2005, 08:28 AM
What - you mean about the dumbed down sequel ;)

Sir_Brizz
14th Jan 2005, 01:11 PM
No I mean about caterin the game to "pro"s so that new players can't stand a chance in the game. The same thing happened in 2k3, Epic listened to the "pro" community and changed everything in 2k3 for them...and lost their entire player base. In 2k4 they decided to listen to the COMMUNITY and they had a much more successful game.

Gumby
14th Jan 2005, 01:52 PM
Was being sarcastic :p

Ya i see what you mean tho :)

Sir_Brizz
14th Jan 2005, 02:24 PM
And just for the record it really is more of a concern than anything. I just feel like many of the viewpoints on this thread are so one-sided that if I don't voice my own opinion about stuff that FMI will get the wrong idea about what is going to work for them. They can make it exactly like U2XMP if they want, but I would hope they do it for the right reason and not just because the entire "pro" community is clamoring for it.

Gumby
14th Jan 2005, 02:29 PM
Just out of curiosity, why did the jump and duck get taken out (it's still there but just turned off)?