New interview- CTF-Face will be in UT2007

JaFO · Mar 22, 2006

I'd say Face3,Deck17 & Curse are practically proof that you should never update "classic" maps to new games. The changes in the gameplay (ie : double-jump, wall-dodge, no jump-boots & invisibility-pickups etc) make sure they never quite recapture the feeling that made those 'classics' good/fun in the first place.

Kantham · Mar 22, 2006

Curse is an awfull crap. Way different from Ut99 though.

Monster Kill · Mar 22, 2006

Sir_Brizz said:
I like UT2003 just fine.

Thank you. Exactly.

Selerox · Mar 22, 2006

Inspired by, not copied from.

What made me laugh was that Epic seemed to think that people would think that there really was a difference between Curse3 and Curse4. They're both just as crap as each other.

I would mind the occasional remake is either:

1) They had the same design (with a few tweaks) but the gameplay works with the new game. DM-Deck17 is a prime example, it may have slightly dodgy framerate, but the map plays really well. Aside from a few small points, it's virtually the same map as DM-Deck16][ and it still works.

2) Alternatively, make a new map that was inspired by the original, but has a new design that uses the original as rough template, with the gameplay built to suit the new game. CTF-Oribital2 is a prime example of this type done well. It's very much a different style of map, but the theme is there, and to anyone who knew the original, there are definite similarities there.

I'd rather map remakes concentrate more on maintaining the overall theme and atmosphere of the original than trying to follow the design completely and failing because the new game's movement and dynamics don't fit the old design. If there's enough of the original's layout to make the map noticeably a sucessor to the original and work's within the framework of the new game, then I think it's a sucess.

hal · Mar 22, 2006

JaFO said:
I'd say Face3,Deck17 & Curse are practically proof that you should never update "classic" maps to new games. The changes in the gameplay (ie : double-jump, wall-dodge, no jump-boots & invisibility-pickups etc) make sure they never quite recapture the feeling that made those 'classics' good/fun in the first place.

Or would it be better to say that you should never radically change the gameplay in a series?

Monster Kill · Mar 22, 2006

I'd be fine if the gameplay was more like UT99 or UT2003/04. Just pray to God that they don't do anything stupid like Midway did w/ UC2. It's an okay game by itself but it's not even a freakin' Unreal game. They should keep the gameplay similar to one that's already out. Just load it up w/ features and gametypes and mess. A beefed up UT2004 w/ sweet next-gen graphics would rock my socks.

+ they have to keep the shock rifle looking like it does in UC2. That just kicks ass. :shock:

Bazzi · Mar 23, 2006

hal said:
Or would it be better to say that you should never radically change the gameplay in a series?

No reason to buy more than one game then...

JaFO · Mar 23, 2006

hal said:
Or would it be better to say that you should never radically change the gameplay in a series?

changes in gameplay is what makes a series worth playing/buying.

Perhaps some people like to play Pong or Pacman in 3D with everything rendered in a bazillion polygons, with terabytes in textures, etc. But I at least would like to see the game itself evolve beyond the last.

At the moment the game appears to be heading into the wrong direction.
'Classic' gameplay and 'classic' maps ? No thank you. If I wanted that then I'd be playing UT'99 or even one of the original fps's like Doom or Wolfenstein 3D.

It's a shame that even a company as rich, smart and independent as Epic is incapable and unwilling to truly risc of bringing something new to the genre that is arcade-style fps. Altough the generic publics reaction to UT2k3 is enough proof that perhaps maybe the gamers in general hate innovation as much as they claim to hate EA's strategy for game-releases ...

hal · Mar 23, 2006

JaFO said:
Altough the generic publics reaction to UT2k3 is enough proof that perhaps maybe the gamers in general hate innovation as much as they claim to hate EA's strategy for game-releases ...

The truth.

At least when you refer to a series of games. You kinda expect them to play similarly, but with each iteration improving upon the flaws of the last. UT2003 took UT and made it a different game altogether.

JaFO · Mar 23, 2006

Final fantasy manages that kind of deal quite nicely ...

Quake had sequels that were completely different from each other as well.
Didn't seem to do that game any harm either.

hal · Mar 23, 2006

Final Fantasy is a role playing game and the story is the a good portion of the draw there. Square managed to improve the interface in subsequent outings too.

Quake2 was quite different from QuakeWorld. When Quake2 came out, loads of people stayed behind and played QuakeWorld instead of moving to the new game. Quake 3 brought a lot of people from both camps together. I think you can call them all successes mainly because it was Quake and there weren't too many excellent fps muliplayer games in those days.

Then you have Quake4.

DeathBooger · Mar 23, 2006

Quake 4 would be nice if they actually finished the game before it shipped.

ShakeZula · Mar 23, 2006

Quake 4 would be nice if all other video games were banished from existence along with my memories of them, leaving me with no real comprehension of what a "nice" video game is like.

DeathBooger · Mar 23, 2006

There's nothing wrong with Quack 4 gameplay-wise. It's a lot more fun than UT2004's synchronized shock rifle dance competitions. It's an overall better DM game, but that's it.

Sir_Brizz · Mar 23, 2006

BeerGut said:
There's nothing wrong with Quack 4 gameplay-wise. It's a lot more fun than UT2004's synchronized shock rifle dance competitions. It's an overall better DM game, but that's it.

It's not really. If we were talking about Q3A's DM experience, I would say yes, but Q4 is so much worse than Q3 that I don't think you can even categorize it as Quake.

TheGuyOnTheCouch(SC) · Mar 23, 2006

I've recently tried Q4 online, and I liked it as much as Q3
but no game will ever be better than the unreal series for me
I loved each unreal as it came out, non of them sucked imo

It's an overall better DM game, but that's it.

and how could you say something like that on an unreal forum

gregori · Mar 24, 2006

Hopefully the skybox will be better for Face than Ut2k4, that one sucked,
the original sky box looked ten times better, and more realistic.
I liked the visual theme for Face3 in 2k3, but the gameplay sucked,

Maybe the Sun will be done with dynamic light for this face, so the map eclipses when the Asteroid spins away from the sun.

If there is any way to get sharp cliff like features into terrain maps, that would rock, they used terrain maps that were too smooth in 2k4, making the map look more like a mashmallow than a rocky asteroid!

Delacroix · Mar 24, 2006

I like Face. I like Curse. I like Deck16. But most of all, I like (and miss) Radikus. Please! Someone make sure that when UT2007 comes out, Radikus is released. I really like that map.

gregori · Mar 24, 2006

God,
If I see a Hundred maps in this thing that are Shiny Tech Maps or Rust Factories,

Anyways, It Would Be good to Rankin done with better quality visuals and sound, and with decent contrasting lighting.
It Occurs to me that Epic may have 64 bit colour in there engine there, but could end up only using dull, washed out colours that all look the same,
Use the whole pallete for godsake it's why its there

Industrial themes are done far better with a bit of flair and colour in the original UT, ie DM Conveyer, DM Liandri, DM Grinder, DM Turbine, DM Pressure,
AS Hi Speed, AS OCean floor, DM Stalwart, the list is endless,

The maps could also do with a bit of classsical look this time, with wood and marble textures, huge castle doors and gothic arches, stain glass windows,
The great extent of visual themes in the original UT made the maps memorable. UT2kx and UC2 are nearly all METAL, METAL everywhere!

f.sardis · Apr 12, 2006

hal said:
Or would it be better to say that you should never radically change the gameplay in a series?

you are the man. and here i was thinking im the only one in here who thinks the game should return to its roots.

New interview- CTF-Face will be in UT2007

bugs are features too ...

Fool.

New Member

COR AD COR LOQVITVR

Dictator

New Member

Wearing pink

bugs are features too ...

Dictator

bugs are features too ...

Dictator

Malcolm's Sugar Daddy

New Member

Malcolm's Sugar Daddy

Administrator

Quit cher bitchin an play!

BUF Refugee

Successor of Almarion

BUF Refugee

Member