hal said:
But again, you guys single out the maps, when it's really the fault of the gameplay. Rog did a great job with the map, I thought
While I didn’t really like the style of the maps in UT2003/4 I think your right to not really blame the mappers. Don’t forget these are the same people who produced the maps that contributed to the huge success of the earlier games. The maps can’t be made until the gameplay mechanics have been ironed out (movement, scale, weapons etc…) and the maps then have to be designed to these specifications. I guess the theme of the game (shiny metal, hi-tech Egyptian or rusty factory in this case) was also decided in advance, but I’m not sure how much leeway they have in interpreting this.
But….
sinikk said:
I think the worst example of the scale problems and the 'same mesh used everywhere in six different maps' problem is the final boss map, DM-Hyperblast2
The_Head said:
I think the UT200* music was good. but as Selerox said, it dosnt fit
gregori said:
Hyperblast2 sum up for me everything thats wrong with UT2kx.
Maps are the single biggest factor in developing the ‘feel’ of the unreal environment. The scale issues, use of lighting, reliance on very similar static meshes and sound selection just didn’t allow for any real game ‘personality’ to shine through. There were, of course, exceptions –
gregori said:
CTF Maul has a nice visual theme to it despite boring gameplay, i hope that theme returns, on a better map!
Some of the maps did have a lovely, unreal, style/theme to them but didn’t quite capture the atmosphere because the playability was poor. So would sorting out the gameplay help recapture the unreal ambience and believability of the arena’s? Yes and No.
No because you still need the artistic flair in the lighting, textures, static meshes and sounds which I personally thought was a little lacking.
Yes because even with above spot on, if you have faults in the gameplay they will detract from the overall experience. Sorting out the gameplay will probably be the bigger challenge. The different gameplay factors are all linked with each other – changing one WILL have a knock on effect. I think there are some aspects to the gameplay that would have worked with the UT’99 gameplay but don’t quite gel in UT2004. Conversely some aspects work really well in the UT2004 style of gameplay but wouldn’t have worked in UT’99. I think Epic need to rebuild the gameplay completely rather than remodeling that of previous incarnations, then take a look at earlier games, take the good bits from each – see which bits work together and throw out the stuff that doesn’t.
Hmm, that last sentence doesn’t quite get across the point I’m trying to make but I just can’t word it any better at the moment.