So... New Features?

leilei said:

upaint so i can make skarj's and warcow's with my personel unique color's

Click to expand...

+1 A model paint utility in and of it's self would definitely be a rockin artistic addition to the editor.

I'd like to see a 3rd fire mode for the flak cannon that detonates four shells right in front of you creating a cloud of shards that deal 4 flak shells worth of damage. Requires a load up period (think alt fire on rocket launcher) will kill the person firing it if they move into the cloud.

You're asking for parameters, so you can provide subjective arguments. If you want definitions, grab a dictionary.

I have no desire to teach game design via a forum.

Honestly Arnox, after 3 titles, and a massive modding community, it's hard for me to imagine what "new stuff" there is to conceive. I'm only really interested in refining the good stuff. I'd actually rather see less stuff in the game for the sake of less community division, but I know that's not likely.

First of all. I am a dictionary.
That you actually think you can quantify a quality product separate to it's end result is somewhat appalling. The end result of minimizing scope to maximize quality (what you seem to be promoting) in a game with as broad a fan base as UT is alienating (and as a result losing) large segments of the fanbase.

-AEnubis- said:

...
I have no desire to teach game design via a forum.
...it's hard for me to imagine what "new stuff" there is to conceive...

Click to expand...

I have no desire to learn anything from anyone who is so stuck inside the box they think that everything has been done ergo no need to try. If you are in fact in game design I would suggest something more in line with that mentality of yours... Like politics.

It's not a matter of being stuck inside the box. I'm sure there's plenty of new things that can be come up with, it's just a matter of understanding my own short comings in not being the one to come up with them.

I'm analytical, and have apparently unpopular opinions on subjectivity. I see it as subsequent of being more objective than most.

No on argues the quality of gold. It's a numerical degree of purity. It's quantified. Some people don't like the color, though.

Cars can be perfectly balanced, typically this is why (despite being more expensive, and dangerous) some cars are produced with mid engines. This wont' stop people from preferring rear engine cars, if that's what they are used to.

Human interpretation may change perspective to a degree, but it is an element which can be eliminated from an equation. The only question remains is whether or not you can remove your personal bias to see it.

New Features I would like to See (yeah, I know these are not really game-play features...):
1. The engine/rendering capability to "scale" the lightmaps applied to the meshes/bsp so that Dark Match could be a gametype/mutator rather than having to remake whole new maps without lighting (that way all you would need to do is iterate across the light actors and adjust them, and then adjust some lightmap blending strength variable).
2. A simple triangle/tesselating square mesh editor in the Level Editor (I think the HL2 editor had something like this) that could be used to make simple one-off surfaces/models so that things like cave entrances and cliffs could be smoothly transitioned/connected together without having to go back to the modeling program. (heck, might as well see if they can get Mete to update Milkshape3D and include that too)
3. Add Animated Model Collision low level code that would allow players to wander around on moving animated models without falling through them (similar to how you fought enemies on those large mechanical spider things in Halo 2 or 3).
4. Include AI navigation code that could handle/transition between both pathnode and poly based navigation methods. Include a "dynamic pathnode" system that could be used by AI on moving objects (like an animated model, see#3, or large InterpActor/Mover).

Offtopic- features I would like to see stay or roll-over from the last UT game(s)!
1. Mutator "code hooks" to allow for easy game content manipulation and swap-out
2. Use the same first person model hand-rig as UT3 so that weapons animated for UT3 could be ported by their authors to the new UT4. Also allows for per species/player model hand models!
3. All of the skeletal animation functions including combining/cooking animations from existing ones (and the capability to link new anims on the fly just like in UT2k4).

Sounds like some Jedi inspired ideas.

JK could have had better weapon balance, but the combination of force powers (plasmids), melee (sabers) and guns was done well there. Shame everyone wanted to do saber only duels.

-AEnubis- said:

No on argues the quality of gold. It's a numerical degree of purity. It's quantified. Some people don't like the color, though.

Click to expand...

Actually, as a former geology student, yes people do argue the quality of gold. So much so we have a system to measure said quality. They are called Karat's. But hey whatever helps you sleep at night.

In the context of a in-your-face FPS game like unreal, less will never be more, and the people always demand more. If you have any knowledge of marketing you should know this.

Though in case anybody has forgotten I do hope they build a quality platform. I simply have no allusions about the game's potential popularity being directly linked to the amount of fans they bring back in and keep.

Karats are the exact numerical degree of purity I'm referring to.

Handstands and forward rolls.

Give me Deck16, CTF-Face (99), DM-Ariza from the original Unreal, and CTF-Lavagiant, and really, you already have my money. It's hard to fuck that up, isn't it?

edit: Oh shit, how could I forget CTF-Hydro16? That too.