CliffyB wants to make a PC exclusive arena shooter

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Leo(T.C.K.)

I did something m0tarded and now I have read only access! :(
May 14, 2006
4,794
36
48
Screw it all, let's fucking team up with Romero and make Daikatana KickBalls Forever.
No but really maybe that should really happen.
Either way this somehow sounds more like Cliff again instead of how he was before he left Epic, as I suspected many of his speeches must have been "manipulated" by some forces, wonder who is he refering to though, if to people like mark rein or those newcomers when saying he doesn't need someone to tell him this doesn't sell and they need to make those decisions and that and..
 

Rambowjo

Das Protoss
Aug 3, 2005
5,073
5
38
32
Tapeland
Honestly, Bulletstorm had great gunplay, the weapons were fun, visually the game was fun to watch take place. The problem was the story, the characterization, the marketing and of course the level design, as is the problem with nearly every single player FPS since CoD4.

I'd love to hear why Tribes Ascend failed tbh. I have it a good try when it went public, but gave up after flying around aimlessly for a few hours and never being able to accomplish anything.

As is the problem with any failing arena shooter if you join late in the action, you will get your ass handed to you by the few diehard players. A good way to get into Tribes is to initially learn the classes in deathmatch on densely populated servers, then switch to CTF with lower player numbers after you get used to the gameplay.

Tribes Ascend failed because Hi-Rez did not listen to the players until it was too late, they had poor level designers and they did not give players the tools to make their own maps or modifications. Looking at TF2, one of the only succesful class based CTF arena shooters in recent time, should've shown given them a hint about how to interact with the player base.
TA was very much plagued by Hi-Rez's need to have complete control of the game, so that they could earn money on the free-to-play model. In order to properly enjoy the game, you either had to pay for weapons, or grind a lot of ingame currency (XP) in order to purchase upgrades and (at times) better weapons.
Eventually, Hi-Rez decided that TA was too expensive to maintain, so they gave the players the ability to pay a one time fee (about 40 dollars I think), which would give them instant access to all weapons and classes, and they changed the upgrade system, so that you passively gained upgrades as you played, instead of having to pay ingame currency.

tl;dr TA was ruined by a terribly managed F2P scheme, overall bad game design decisions and the need to control every aspect of the game, denying the players any control.
 
Last edited:

UBerserker

old EPIC GAMES
Jan 20, 2008
4,798
0
0
I was mainly referring to the 8th-grade-level humor in the game, as was the article I posted. Games like Bulletstorm like to assume that all of us are 13 years old and will still laugh at dick and fart jokes.

Oh absolutely, I totally despised the dialogues and EA probably pushed them more for that (I recall also some retarded ads).

Still standing firm on my opinion on the gameplay - solid "new" concept but still they could have done much more like adding a JUMP feature and no weapon holding limits.
I liked also the whole "travel throughout the world" thing as you could see the next levels' environments in the skybox. It was like a throwback to Unreal with the Sunspire being visible in the distance. That said it was so horribly linear.
 
Last edited:

Crotale

_________________________ _______________
Jan 20, 2008
2,535
12
38
Anywhere But Here
No, but Bulletstorm definitely appealed to the 14-year-olds with it's humor and the article writer was pretty spot-on about that. You can't deny it. It wasn't as cringe-worthy as DNF was, but it was pretty bad.

Did you even read the article? (Obviously not.) The guy even said that CoD was part of the cancer that is killing gaming, but that was a problem for another article to discuss.

I'm not denying the immature humor, but the devs didn't sugarcoat it, now did they? We saw that type of humor in all the trailers, so it should not have been a surprise to anyone. Sure, there are plenty of reasons why the game didn't sell well, but look at the guy's mention of Alan Wake. It sold a paltry 145K copies in the first couple of weeks. It took over two years to move sales to the 2 mill mark, and back in the first year, was allegedly pirated over a million times. Success isn't always in the sales. While the idiot mentions this, he acts as though gamers somehow deserve better games than Bulletstorm even they they don't always prefer to buy what are considered to be critically far better games than the top sellers.

It makes little difference that BS sold rather horribly. I am more concerned with the CoDs that are mostly rehashed same old same old that rake in millions each iteration. I don't necessarily think it is the developers who should be getting lambasted here, but gamers in general. Perhaps both, if you want to be "fair" about it.
 
Last edited:

Zur

surrealistic mad cow
Jul 8, 2002
11,708
8
38
48
Ok, just ignore my super-innovative idea. One day, First Person Fuckers will see the day.
 

DarkED

The Great Oppression
Mar 19, 2006
3,113
17
38
38
Right behind you.
www.nodanites.com
Success isn't always in the sales.

Say whatever you like - Units shipped is a pretty fucking good metric :rolleyes:

I am more concerned with the CoDs that are mostly rehashed same old same old that rake in millions each iteration. I don't necessarily think it is the developers who should be getting lambasted here, but gamers in general. Perhaps both, if you want to be "fair" about it.

Definitely both. Since gaming has become less 'uncool' and more popular, and game companies began valuing money more than the games themselves, gaming (like any other form of entertainment) has largely devolved into an industry that must target the mainstream with every release to maximize profits. On the same token, a lot of gamers realize this is happening but they buy the product anyway. Or, a lot of them are just too new to gaming (or simply too stupid) to realize there is anything better out there. A large part of that is multiplayer and the social aspect - that is why the CoD franchise will continue to sell by the millions. "My friends got it, so I should get it too, even if it is the same old shit we got last year."

There are exceptions to the rule; tons of great indie games with totally new concepts or gameplay elements, etc. And a bunch of those have been massive success stories despite piracy and a console market that is not necessarily easy to tap into. Starbound sold more than $1,000,000 worth of pre-orders and devs were saying in the official IRC channel for Starbound (#starbound on Freenode) that it moved $2,000,000 worth of units in the paid-beta's first day. (Unfortunately, I don't have a source for that last stat. I just happened to be in there when they were talking about how well the game is doing.)

I have been noticing a trend recently where CoD fanboys are actually bashing Ghosts and finally realizing that every new installment is just a rehash of the last one. They're about eight fucking years too late (anyone remember the WW2 shooter craze?) but at least the penny is finally beginning to drop for this new generation of gamers.
 
Last edited:

Crotale

_________________________ _______________
Jan 20, 2008
2,535
12
38
Anywhere But Here
Say whatever you like - Units shipped is a pretty fucking good metric :rolleyes:

Yeah, I worded that completely wrong. What I mean is the initial sales aren't always the best scale for how good a game is going to be. Games that don't sell well initially tend to get painted as being low quality. If initial sales are poor, that means few are playing it or talking about it, which feeds the vicious cycle of fewer players buying or playing the game, and so on. Really good quality games, such as Alan Wake, end up picking up steam in their second wind.

As for your metrics, Epic deemed UT3 a success because it allegedly sold over a million units. Yeah, okay.
 

DarkED

The Great Oppression
Mar 19, 2006
3,113
17
38
38
Right behind you.
www.nodanites.com
Yeah, I worded that completely wrong. What I mean is the initial sales aren't always the best scale for how good a game is going to be. Games that don't sell well initially tend to get painted as being low quality. If initial sales are poor, that means few are playing it or talking about it, which feeds the vicious cycle of fewer players buying or playing the game, and so on. Really good quality games, such as Alan Wake, end up picking up steam in their second wind.

That's a bit more realistic way of looking at it, yeah. I like to consider total sales of a game when judging it's relative success. Development cost is also a factor in that - if a dev team only spends $50,000 on development and makes back $250,000, I'd still consider that a success :D

As for your metrics, Epic deemed UT3 a success because it allegedly sold over a million units. Yeah, okay.

It definitely wasn't successful when compared to the previous games in the serious, and the community wasn't nearly as active, but monetarily it really depends on how much money they spent developing UT3. Not the engine (because that has made massive amounts of money via licensing and UDK) but the game content for UT3 itself. Does anyone have a figure for that?

Looked at another way, UT3 may have been a huge financial success anyways because it was essentially a tech demo for UE3 and UDK.
 

N1ghtmare

Sweet Dreams
Jul 17, 2005
2,411
12
38
Where least expected
Bulletstorm's innovations were held back by the linear level design. Every time you play you get virtually the same experience.

I feel the same thing will happen to the new Wolfenstein. Watching the game-play footage, they are trying to market it as a throwback, yet they have no idea it will fail because they are choking the run-and-gun gameplay with hand holding. In the gameplay video your dude navigates through a linear set of a rubble-filled parking lot after a car-bomb detonated while dodging a robot-dog (that's a lot of hyphens for a sentence).

Except instead of having the entire parking lot somewhat open and the player has to avoid the dog themselves and make it tho the entrance through their own means, they designed that portion to be a very linear progression through the rubble with scripted "avoid the robot dog" moments. They missed a great opportunity to introduce a new enemy and it's combat style.

It reminds me of being chased by the antlion queen in the underground tunnels of HL: Episode 2. There were a few different paths and places to hide, giving you a different experience for each skill level and play-through. The sequence of events was the same, but the player had to do the navigating. Half-Life 2 is not very open, but the player is still left to decide what to do.

So we will have to see if Cliffy B can avoid the drain of inspiration and hand-holding that keeps games simple and easy. Single Player generally is not the main focus of a arena-style shooter, but we will have to see if he can come up with anything interesting. Can he find his old spirit and design a good multiplayer level? Can he design a good level that has some color in it (aside from grey and brown)? Can the game be over the top and awesome without the dude-bro attitude?
 

Bi()ha2arD

Toxic!
Jun 29, 2009
2,808
0
0
Germany
phobos.qml.net
I'd love to hear why Tribes Ascend failed tbh. I have it a good try when it went public, but gave up after flying around aimlessly for a few hours and never being able to accomplish anything.

It was ruined by the dumb unlock system that comes with the free to play mechanic. Srsly, if you were to buy all the weapons, you'd pay way more than any retail game costs.
That, and they ketp nerfing spinfusors and buffing autos and fucked up the class balance. When a pathfinder is worse at capping flags than a soldier, you are doing it wrong.
 

Renegade Retard

Defender of the newbie
Dec 18, 2002
6,911
0
36
TX
Visit site
...and they ketp nerfing...

^^^This

This is my problem with free-to-play/pay-to-win games like TA and Super Monday Night Combat, the constant tweaking of the game, the classes, and the weapons. For those who aren't going to shell out $$$ for the best upgrades, you are constantly having to learn and relearn how to play the classes and items you have access to just to stay competitive, while little boys with mommy's credit cards mow you down with overpowered weapons.

I got tired of working hard to know the limits of my class/setup and how to best utilize it to be competitive, only to have it completely changed on the whim of a developer. After a while, I just gave up.
 

dragonfliet

I write stuffs
Apr 24, 2006
3,754
31
48
41
I found that the gameplay was pretty generic. It was easy and the QTEs/scripted play sequences weren't all that interesting.

I'm sorry, what? The gameplay was generic? Where are all of these other games in which the primary goal is to string together a combination of kicks, pulls, slams, shots, etc. in a unique order, kicking people into the air, juggling them while headshoting someone else and then finishing them?

The look was generic (UT meets gears), the story was bland, the writing was atrocious and the sense of humor was insulting, but the gameplay was pretty fresh and interesting.
 

Capt.Toilet

Good news everyone!
Feb 16, 2004
5,826
3
38
41
Ottawa, KS
I have been noticing a trend recently where CoD fanboys are actually bashing Ghosts and finally realizing that every new installment is just a rehash of the last one. They're about eight fucking years too late (anyone remember the WW2 shooter craze?) but at least the penny is finally beginning to drop for this new generation of gamers.

To add to this glorious glorious turn of events. Activision has ever been so keen to announce CoD made a billion dollars in xx amount of days since I believe MW2 was released. For Ghosts? NOTHING. Only article is one that came out a week or so after release that mentioned it sold a billion dollars to retailers. Not the same thing Activision so stop spinning it like it is.

It might take a few more titles but I think CoD is finally getting ready to take that 3-4 year hiatus it needs.
 
The problem with Bulletstorm is that it blew its wad too early. By the last two chapters I was done with the "innovative" gameplay, maxed for upgrades, and simply bored with the mechanics. The multiplayer did nothing for me. If you've played the demo then you've seen what you're doing 90% of the game. None of the story elements really helped, as I felt like I should have had eight cans of opened mountain dew and a kayak oar next to me in order to justify the experience. The main villain...ugh. I remember finding some satire elements funny at the time, like a boss fight that ends seconds after it begins because the big bad monster trips and falls into a vat....but at the end of the day, the games I replay and enjoy for years actually let me fight the big bad monster.

In terms of Cliffy B....look, I just think the guy should keep making games.
 
Last edited:

-Jes-

Tastefully Barking
Jan 17, 2005
2,710
19
38
DM-HyperBlast
(anyone remember the WW2 shooter craze?)

I remember every goddamned kid on the net screaming about how CoD was the best fucking thing since sliced bread.. Despite the fact that for the most part it was virtually indistinguishable from it's predecessor MoH:AA.

And then CoD2 happened. I was already pining for a game market crash then.
 
Last edited:

Leo(T.C.K.)

I did something m0tarded and now I have read only access! :(
May 14, 2006
4,794
36
48
MoH:AA - Money on Hold: Astalavista Asshole?
CoD - Cash on Delivery?