I actually agree with Darq that UT or a derivative needs a tactical gametype or to promote/reward tactical gameplay more. Tactical play was a very strong aspect of UT's success: Sniper and Zark servers offered players the choice of "camping" style play, and they came in droves. Sniper maps were some of the most fun I've ever had in UT. They may not be for everybody, but that kind of gameplay brings much higher numbers because it is a more casual style of play overall - but there are still frenzied run and gun situations mixed in.
As far as my earlier comments regarding how the campaign was designed for the consoles - It is not shortsighted... it's the truth.. Again, I have nothing against campaigns and they can work well, but if you looked honestly at the one we got you'd realize that it has very little to do with the series and was written to make the game appeal to Gears players - why do you think they played up the "from the studio that brought you Gears of War" aspect so much? Then Jeff said something to the effect of how it was the smarter thing to do businesswise. The promotion, maybe.. but the story was a dud and didn't work the way they did it. But I disagree with the other guy who says to let the story die.. the concept I wrote for the continuation is an example of how to save face and actually make the story work, rather than "forgetting it happened".
I also disagree with Malcolm not making a good boss. He's not the hero of the game anymore, and while Reaper is pretty lame, they could do some things to save him like un-emoify him a bit.. make the character progress. Make him lose the dress and goggles. Less about "revenge" and more determined to uncrown Malcolm simply because he has no honor anymore. Make malcolm more dispicable like revealing he uses some underhanded tactics to gain an advantage in the tournament. There are often characters that start off likeable and "go bad" later. Xan is good for a villain, but hasn't been developed. In a game, the player should have a reason to hate the final boss, and with UT3 we have a set up already... work with it.
As far as my earlier comments regarding how the campaign was designed for the consoles - It is not shortsighted... it's the truth.. Again, I have nothing against campaigns and they can work well, but if you looked honestly at the one we got you'd realize that it has very little to do with the series and was written to make the game appeal to Gears players - why do you think they played up the "from the studio that brought you Gears of War" aspect so much? Then Jeff said something to the effect of how it was the smarter thing to do businesswise. The promotion, maybe.. but the story was a dud and didn't work the way they did it. But I disagree with the other guy who says to let the story die.. the concept I wrote for the continuation is an example of how to save face and actually make the story work, rather than "forgetting it happened".
I also disagree with Malcolm not making a good boss. He's not the hero of the game anymore, and while Reaper is pretty lame, they could do some things to save him like un-emoify him a bit.. make the character progress. Make him lose the dress and goggles. Less about "revenge" and more determined to uncrown Malcolm simply because he has no honor anymore. Make malcolm more dispicable like revealing he uses some underhanded tactics to gain an advantage in the tournament. There are often characters that start off likeable and "go bad" later. Xan is good for a villain, but hasn't been developed. In a game, the player should have a reason to hate the final boss, and with UT3 we have a set up already... work with it.
Last edited: