Steve Polge about UT3 Expansion Pack

Leo(T.C.K.) · Dec 7, 2008

UBerserker said:
The Adrenaline should riot in peace.
Invulnerability PowerUp is too cheap, and removing it with the Impact Hammer is very troublesome.

While it is too cheap, Invul existed in older games such as doom, etc too...
And there was no way of removing it....and dm in these games can be freaking fun also...but still if invul annoys anyone, it can be removed by some mutators, just like for example at uteamfix mod for Unreal exists possibility of removing invisibility and amplifier in the options......

GreatEmerald · Dec 7, 2008

Bishop gantry said:
Well there is one way to put all divergence fans under the same roof the same game and could be applied to UT3 and have everyone still play the same game.

Light class
Small, fast, nimble, agile however dosent carry as much ammo for their weapons dosent use as much armor and have lower baseline health. would appeal to those who like bouncey and trick gameplay.

Medium class
Normal movment can do some extra jumps, carries baseline ammo can wear standard armor has standard health and standard armor, can do a few tricks but is slightly slower and somewhat compensates it with standard armor and health.

Heavy class
Slow movment limited to simple jumps and dodging, carries extra ammo uses heavy armor and has increased health, essentially has traded away speed and mobility for survivability and firepower.

Throw in a good Singleplayer with Cooperative features and everyone is happyily under the same roof again playing the way they want to play...

Congratulations, you have just thoroughly described Unreal II XMP!

WHIPperSNAPper said:
On that note--why couldn't the game have backwards compatibility for at least UT99 maps? How hard would it be for the UT3 engine to load up and run a UT99 map--just simple BSP and textures mostly. (Maybe it wouldn't be so easy, but it sure would be a nice feature.)

Interesting idea, but... After playing maps of UT3 quality, and loading a UT99 map, many people would be like Where the hell am I?!. Those maps are just too simple and don't flow with the overall UT3 design.

rAt.8^].bAg;2223146 said:
I didn't miss it, I just sold U2 after I finished it.

You missed the fact that it's free for people who ever had Unreal II...

rAt.8^].bAg · Dec 7, 2008

GreatEmerald said:
You missed the fact that it's free for people who ever had Unreal II...

ORLY? I sold my copy about a week after it first came out. Was U2XMP available then?

Benfica · Dec 7, 2008

GreatEmerald said:
+1 for the first paragraph, -1 for the second. They will try and do UT4, they are popular just because of the Unreal series. But, of course, they might as well do U3 or UC3.

Man, they are popular now because of GoW

I'm really afraid that this is the last one, they are disapointed with UC2 and UT3 to say the least.

The problem is: how can they do a popular and successful sequel that really creates the same online activity as TF2 or L4D (I'm not even bother to dream about CoD) ? What will work? They just don't know what works anymore, they try and try.

IMHO they need well though and detailed guidance from all sorts of fans. I've seen dozens of different preferences, most are compatible and would improve the game for everyone, when I try to discuss others I feel that I'm trying to fight some uphill battle

GreatEmerald · Dec 7, 2008

rAt.8^].bAg;2223190 said:
ORLY? I sold my copy about a week after it first came out. Was U2XMP available then?

Then? I'm not sure. But it's available now.

Benfica said:
Man, they are popular now because of GoW I'm really afraid that this is the last one, they are disapointed with UC2 and UT3 to say the least.

The problem is: how can they do a popular and successful sequel that really creates the same online activity as TF2 or L4D (I'm not even bother to dream about CoD) ? What will work? They just don't know what works anymore, they try and try.

IMHO they need well though and detailed guidance from all sorts of fans. I've seen dozens of different preferences, most are compatible and would improve the game for everyone, when I try to discuss others I feel that I'm trying to fight some uphill battle

True, they should listen to what people say instead of just doing what they *think* is good. I'm sure that if they did what Fullbleed suggests, UT3 popularity would grow in minutes. I would play it too.

Sir_Brizz · Dec 7, 2008

Benfica said:
Man, they are popular now because of GoW I'm really afraid that this is the last one, they are disapointed with UC2 and UT3 to say the least.

Why should they be disappointed with UC2? Most Xbox gamers agree that it is an awesome game and it got very high scores. They should be happy with that one regardless of how well it sold.

The problem is: how can they do a popular and successful sequel that really creates the same online activity as TF2 or L4D (I'm not even bother to dream about CoD) ? What will work? They just don't know what works anymore, they try and try.

The problem is, it is likely more to do with the subject matter than that they don't know what they are doing. I've said it numerous times in this thread (I think?), multiplayer only sci fi action games ARE NOT POPULAR right now.

GreatEmerald said:
True, they should listen to what people say instead of just doing what they *think* is good. I'm sure that if they did what Fullbleed suggests, UT3 popularity would grow in minutes. I would play it too.

They do listen to what people say, to a certain degree they implement it as well. The whole change in movement style from UT200x to UT3 is the result of community interaction.

The fact of the matter is, though, that the great majority of the community has terrible ideas that would ruin the series completely ( I, myself, am probably included in this on a number of ideas I have had). Epic has to be reasonable about what they add or change.

FullBleed's post is good because it deal almost entirely with things that needs to be fixed/improved, not things that could be left the same with virtually no community backlash. They can't leave the DemoGuy problem alone. That will leave the game in ruin. They can't leave the UI the same, nobody will come back. These changes are things that people see on the surface, and if they are left alone will only seem to reiterate to them that the game hasn't improved enough for them to come back. The game needs a cosmetic overhaul. It needs some of the obvious and easy to replicate problems fixed. If they aren't, we can't expect anyone to come on back or join us for the first time.

TheIronKnuckle · Dec 7, 2008

Benfica said:
Man, they are popular now because of GoW I'm really afraid that this is the last one, they are disapointed with UC2 and UT3 to say the least.

The problem is: how can they do a popular and successful sequel that really creates the same online activity as TF2 or L4D (I'm not even bother to dream about CoD) ? What will work? They just don't know what works anymore, they try and try.

IMHO they need well though and detailed guidance from all sorts of fans. I've seen dozens of different preferences, most are compatible and would improve the game for everyone, when I try to discuss others I feel that I'm trying to fight some uphill battle

what joo talkin about? UC2 is a kickass game and was reviewed as such. Why would midway be disappointed with it?

Benfica · Dec 7, 2008

Sir_Brizz said:
Why should they be disappointed with UC2? Most Xbox gamers agree that it is an awesome game and it got very high scores. They should be happy with that one regardless of how well it sold.

*sigh*

The problem is, it is likely more to do with the subject matter than that they don't know what they are doing. I've said it numerous times in this thread (I think?), multiplayer only sci fi action games ARE NOT POPULAR right now.

I used to agree with this...

Still, you can't make your point more credible by writing in CAPS. What does it matter the multiplayer only, the UT franchise is also single-player since there's a campaign or tournament, there's bot support and custom content. And what the hell are GoW, Halo, UT2004, Portal, World of Warcraft or Fallout 3 besides sci-fi?

TheIronKnuckle · Dec 7, 2008

Halo, GoW, Fallout 3: NOT multiplayer only.
Portal: NOT multiplayer at all
World of Warcraft: NOT sci-fi

Sir_Brizz · Dec 7, 2008

Benfica said:
*sigh*

Sorry, but I believe it probably sold well enough

You can't make your point more credible by writing in CAPS. What the hell are GoW, Halo, Portal, World of Warcraft or Fallout 3 besides sci-fi?

I wasn't giving it "more credibility", I was emphasizing those words

And all of the game you listed (with the exception of World of Warcraft, which is not a sci-fi game but a fantasy game) have "elaborate" single player games packages with them. I did specify online only in my previous post, but I see you preferred to skim over it instead of read it

Benfica · Dec 7, 2008

Sir_Brizz said:
Sorry, but I believe it probably sold well enough

lmao, did it sell well or didn't it? Capps thinks it didn't

TheIronKnuckle said:
Halo, GoW, Fallout 3: NOT multiplayer only.
Portal: NOT multiplayer at all
World of Warcraft: NOT sci-fi

And all of the game you listed (with the exception of World of Warcraft, which is not a sci-fi game but a fantasy game) have "elaborate" single player games packages with them. I did specify online only in my previous post, but I see you preferred to skim over it instead of read it

I read it, but the point is moot, UT is not a subset but it's _all_ those, it has potential to beat them, however it can't reach their popularity. If people tend to play UT only offline, that's fine, however the sales were disappointing even with so much flexibility

There is even a portal gun and MMO mods for UT2004! And I'm old skool

I consider WoW also as sci-fi , sci-fi doesn't need to be in the future, human related, showing technology, etc... But on this part I'm nitpicking, it's irrevant really.

Leo(T.C.K.) · Dec 7, 2008

rAt.8^].bAg;2223190 said:
ORLY? I sold my copy about a week after it first came out. Was U2XMP available then?

I don't understand how people can behave like that towards any game like you do.....
It is mostly said that U2 offers no more fun after you complete it...it's wrong, in fact there are several hidden easter eggs and game was more fun for me on the second play, or better not, I mean rather third play, because that's actually time where you properly learn all weapon functions and how to use all pieces of thje arsenal, even the weakest ones and I raised difficulty as well (even more than menu allows).
Or made certain parts harder, such as finishing every tosc with normal weapons first, pickup his hand and then finish him off completelly with it, but always to make his hand fall, that way the game is a lot more challenging and not a piece of cake.

UBerserker · Dec 7, 2008

TheIronKnuckle said:
what joo talkin about? UC2 is a kickass game and was reviewed as such. Why would midway be disappointed with it?

Not many copies were sold, I think it did far worse than UT3.

LG1X · Dec 7, 2008

Maybe UC and UT just will never be popular on consoles and Epic should realize this and that no matter how good and optimized it is for consoles it wont be bought. Gears of War 2 just released for consoles which means UT3 will sell even less than it previously was on consoles. Unreal Tournament never took off on the PS2 either, it became a bargain bin game quickly.

The only marking Epic has with its console market is gears of war, I bet the majority of pure console gamers who buy gears of war have no clue that Epic developed the game although the logo is right on the case.

Dark Pulse · Dec 7, 2008

WHIPperSNAPper said:
On that note--why couldn't the game have backwards compatibility for at least UT99 maps? How hard would it be for the UT3 engine to load up and run a UT99 map--just simple BSP and textures mostly. (Maybe it wouldn't be so easy, but it sure would be a nice feature.)

Problem is, it would be very difficult. UE1 uses stuff like brush rotation that isn't understood by successive engines - that's why you can't just straight import a UT99 map into UT2004 without doing Transform Permanently.

Also, UE3 isn't zone-renderer based, unlike UE1 and UE2. There's no such thing as ZonePortals, AntiPortals, etc.

Grobut · Dec 7, 2008

Epic should just stop trying to make UT for the Consoles, and focus on the PC, where it has an installed playerbase, fans even, and many more will buy it just for the engine and tools alone, seriously, what good have they gotten out of trying to make UT for the Consoles? they have been trying since UT, even UT2k3 was planned for the Xbox, but none of the Console versions have sold well, perhabs it is time to face the fact that Console players are not into UT, and that it should stick to the PC where it has had success in the past, where its fans are.

But sadly, with the way Epic is talking now, i fear they would rather kill off the franchise than make anything thats PC exclusive at this point..perhabs the expansion will be, but i have my doubts, and it would be likely to be the last thing they make PC only.

Benfica · Dec 7, 2008

It wasn't (only) GoW or making UT3 for consoles that damaged or made it being rushed.

They have to support the engine. I can live with one of the reasons quite well: it was a matter of U.S. and world security (at what extent is debatable but that's not the point). They had to support UE3, the US Army and the America Army game: http://www.epicgames.com/press_releases/army_press_release.html

Sir_Brizz · Dec 7, 2008

Benfica said:
lmao, did it sell well or didn't it? Capps thinks it didn't

I don't know if it did or not, but surely Capps idea of "selling good" is probably selling as well as GoW, which I'm positive it didn't.

I read it, but the point is moot, UT is not a subset but it's _all_ those, it has potential to beat them, however it can't reach their popularity. If people tend to play UT only offline, that's fine, however the sales were disappointing even with so much flexibility

Except that you're wrong.

What is playing offline in UT? It's playing online with bots instead of real people. What is the single player campaign? It's playing online with bots instead of real people. The other games you mentioned have a backstory, a plot, cinematics (either run or played), natural level progression, interesting story elements within the game, and have a definite end.

They tried to add a "real" campaign like that to UT3 to offset this, because obviously they realize it as well, people want well fleshed out SP and MP in the same game, and UT has NEVER had that.

People don't care about flexibility, in general. They care what they get when they open the package and put the disc in their computer/console. If the default game doesn't hold their interest (for whatever reason), why would they care about anything else the game can do?

There is even a portal gun and MMO mods for UT2004! And I'm old skool I consider WoW also as sci-fi , sci-fi doesn't need to be in the future, human related, showing technology, etc... But on this part I'm nitpicking, it's irrevant really.

Sure, but the rest of the universe calls medieval stuff fantasy and futuristic stuff sci-fi.

Benfica · Dec 7, 2008

Sir_Brizz said:
I don't know if it did or not, but surely Capps idea of "selling good" is probably selling as well as GoW, which I'm positive it didn't.

http://interviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/1917/Unreal-Tournament-3-Mike-Capps-Video-Interview/p1/
If he isn't happy and thinks it behaved below expectations, it's his decision what to do with the Unreal franchise.

Except that you're wrong.

What is playing offline in UT? It's playing online with bots instead of real people. What is the single player campaign? It's playing online with bots instead of real people. The other games you mentioned have a backstory, a plot, cinematics (either run or played), natural level progression, interesting story elements within the game, and have a definite end.

They tried to add a "real" campaign like that to UT3 to offset this, because obviously they realize it as well, people want well fleshed out SP and MP in the same game, and UT has NEVER had that.

Nope, I'm talking about any offline, you are talking about SP and storyline like bioshock.
1) UT always had single-player, it can and should have a compelling storyline. They claimed that most people don't even go online, that's why they tried to make it better, they just weren't successful;
2)there's instant action as you said for casual players. It doesn't matter if it's only with bots, it's enough for lots of players, each to his own
3) I obviously played online the most, however even an online player likes community content for which you can't find people to play with: I played myself with ChaosUT2, Unwheel, Monarch's vehicles, the Portal gun and tons of other stuff. Now I sometimes play UT3-Dom. Other guys buy UT just to play mods;
4) Mapper and modders tend to like and support offline gaming, most maps have bot paths

Sir_Brizz · Dec 7, 2008

Benfica said:
http://interviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/1917/Unreal-Tournament-3-Mike-Capps-Video-Interview/p1/
If he isn't happy and thinks it behaved below expectations, it's his decision what to do with the Unreal franchise.

It's partly his decision.

Nope, I'm talking about any offline, you are talking about SP and storyline like bioshock.
1) UT always had single-player, it can and should have a compelling storyline. They claimed that most people don't even go online, that's why they tried to make it better, they just weren't successful;
2)there's instant action as you said for casual players. It doesn't matter if it's only with bots, it's enough for lots of players, each to his own
3) I obviously played online the most, however even an online player likes community content for which you can't find people to play with: I played myself with ChaosUT2, Unwheel, Monarch's vehicles, the Portal gun and tons of other stuff. Now I sometimes play UT3-Dom. Other guys buy UT just to play mods;
4) Mapper and modders tend to like and support offline gaming, most maps have bot paths

We are talking about two completely different things here. Why are you even bringing this up?

I specifically stated that online only sci fi action shooters are not popular right now. Everything you have said only emphasizes that point. I'm not talking about World of Warcraft, I'm talking about take the storyline out of Halo, and nobody will buy it.

I don't care if offline is an option or if people play it, that doesn't change the fact that not a lot of people bought any UT games after UT.

Steve Polge about UT3 Expansion Pack

I did something m0tarded and now I have read only access! :(

Khnumhotep

Don't eff wid Gkublok

European Redneck

Khnumhotep

Administrator

What the hell is this "ballin" thing?

European Redneck

What the hell is this "ballin" thing?

Administrator

European Redneck

I did something m0tarded and now I have read only access! :(

old EPIC GAMES

New Member

Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.

Комиссар Гробут

European Redneck

Administrator

European Redneck

Administrator