Steve Polge about UT3 Expansion Pack

[Leo(T.C.K.)]

Originally Posted by T2A`

I realize that they want to like it. Whether or not they truly do is another concern.

However, my opinion still stands. For a game to be THE BEST EVAR I would think it'd need to provide a degree of fun that others do/have not.

What good is UT3's supposedly awesome gameplay if you hardly get a chance to enjoy it due to its lacking online presence or its terrible netcode or whatever else is inhibiting the fun? Certainly as far as fun derived from the title, UT3 has got to be the worst simply due to the lack of players and plethora of bugs, right?

And if it's provided the least fun, how can it be the best?

Maybe I'm unique in this viewpoint, but UT3 was never fun for me. While the gameplay may have been a step in the right direction, since it was less fun given all its other issues, I'd rather go play a less balanced game that offered more fun.

/shrug

As for Midway, if they go under completely before the expansion release, Epic will probably find another publisher. They've already got the extra content made; not releasing it would mean all that time invested for no monetary recompense.

At the very least it'll end up as paid-for DLC on the 360.

It hasn't provided least fun, for me the core gameplay was the best fun, bugs are things that are for me completelly aside (or for any real gamer), or....well I don't se UT2004 being the most fun game either, it has shallow gameplay, UT3 shines big time over that one and probably UT2004 would be the best title for you according to your logic.

Maybe that's also why I enjoyed Daikatana, I didn't see it being that horrible game as it was made out of, the reviews and all. It had to be one of the buggest games ever made though in its original release.

And it's not that I want to like it, it's that I like it.......the thing you talk about wanting is this psychology phenomenon, but it's the completelly opposide, it's actually you that want to hate it, because of the bugs and the bugs being the only real point which can or could the players agree with (and there we are stuck in the middle between these two and it is still about this psychology). Yeah, but hell, it doesn't matter for me....so there you go.......

[Benfica]

And if there's no UT 4 or UT3's situation doesn't improve, it's the end of the community, players or modders, MSUC, building portfolios, sometimes get paid or even get a job, or creating just for the fun of it. Which btw is a much better model than the Linux/OSS where people don't even keep the copyright, corps use their work, and now when these devs lost their job or would really appreciate some extra income to resist the economical crysis, they get the big FU.

And you may start thinking about converting beyondunreal on an old folks retirement home...

[FuLLBLeeD]

This is what I'd like to see:

First off, I'd like them to put most of their attention towards the PC version. I understand Epic wants to make the game multi-platform to sell more copies (and I'm pretty cheesed off the consoles get UT but PC doesn't get Gears 2) but whatever. UT is mainly a PC game, please polish the hell out of the game then worrying about porting it to consoles.

And now, the list.

64 Bit client!

A new UI. This is priority number one. It's a pretty safe bet they have changed this though, because if they haven't then that's just stupid.

Better Web Admin and server browser

Bux Fixes:
-Fix Demoguy! This should be priority number one!
-Fix the "grunt" sound bug. I shouldn't hear a male grunt when I shoot a female, Krall, or robot
-Optimize the engine
-Fix vehicle and Warfare bugs
-Optimize netcode. Not holding my breath here because UT netcode has always been notoriously bad.
-Fix hit detection. Goes with above, but I'd like them to work on this a bit. UTComp helps alot, but there is still a pretty good chance your shot is going to be a dud.
-Fix the shock combo. The explosion animation and the actual hitbox for the explosion aren't 1:1. Shock combos feel very "off" as a result.
-Get rid of the increased head hitboxes for the Sniper Rifle when you're crouching. It's retarded.
-Fix the rest of the bugs that are in that massive thread on the UT forums.
-Why is everything so quiet? The older UT's are very noisy! If someone is loading up rockets or chucking Flak I should be able to hear it!

Gameplay:

The movement and weapons are perfect, except for a few things.

-Enforcer alt fire is very inconsistent and wonky. It's really hard to use it.
-Flak alt pretty underpowered atm.


Vehicles:
-Fix the Hellbender rear turret so that it is like 2k4's turret.
-Increase the blast radius and splash damage of the Cicadia, or increase the speed of the actual missiles its shoot. At present time it is VERY hard to target infantry with this thing.
-Fix the horrible hit detection on the Darkwalker. At present time (1.3) you cannot kill someone by laser beaming them when they have been knocked down.
-FIX VEHICLE AUDIO issues. Holy crap why is everything so quiet?
-Nemesis is a bit OP.
-Fix Manta exploit.

Warfare and VCTF:
-There should be a classic ONS option.
-Why is there no AVRiL ammo on the maps? Throw weapon is considered a bug now (which I agree with Epic on, actually), so you're basically limited to 5 missiles per life on certain maps. This is really stupid.
-Balance Axon vs Necris more.

DM:
-More maps! Less crap like Biohazard and Demios and more quality maps like Deck and ShangraLa.

Include all MSUC content and CBP3 volumes one and two on the disc.

Competitive mode:
When set, it makes all the textures low res and everything so you can get an extra 20 frames or whatever. Competitive players love this and I hate playing FPS maps because I actually have the hardware that can push this game (many other do too). You shouldn't have to lower global map graphic quality, it should be a client side thing.

That's all, will add more as I think of it.

[T2A`]

Originally Posted by Leo(T.C.K.)

...and probably UT2004 would be the best title for you according to your logic.

I played UT2004 far too much since release for it to be fun anymore. Especially since what it's turned into is nothing like it was back when I truly enjoyed it. Now it's just TAM and newnet wankery -- mostly a bunch of 'tards pretending they're 1773 even though all the real talent left ages ago.

Also, your "real gamer" point is weak. That's the kind of justification console fanboys use to continue to spend billions on crappy games (that then get ported to PC and don't sell, thus causing more developers to jump off the PC train). See: GoW. It's not bad, but does it deserve the heaps of praise it gets? Just like Halo, no.

What UT3 does right doesn't make up for everything it does wrong for me and many others. That doesn't make us "fake gamers." It simply means we'd rather play unbroken games that provide actual fun. You know, what games are supposed to do.

For me that game is currently CoD4. It has completely replaced any UT on my gaming radar because it's fun, lacks bugs, and is easy to get into. It's not perfect, but what game is? If the UT3 expansion sucks (like I expect it to), UT will officially be a thing of my past. D:

[Sir_Brizz]

Originally Posted by T2A`

What UT3 does right doesn't make up for everything it does wrong for me and many others. That doesn't make us "fake gamers." It simply means we'd rather play unbroken games that provide actual fun. You know, what games are supposed to do.

This is really the meat of it, and why people don't play it. Just because a game has "perfect" gameplay doesn't mean you'll keep playing it if it's a huge PITA to get to that point.

[UnrealGrrl]

Originally Posted by T2A`

This point of view is one I don't understand.

"Despite being clearly inferior to previous products for reasons X, Y, and Z (and then wrapping around into the start of the alphabet... twice) and having no online player support, it's still the best."

How? How is this possible? Is it a matter of applying possibilities as if they were reality?

"If UT3 didn't suck it would be the best of the series."

That makes a little more sense. I think. D:

whats so hard to understand? imnsho - UT3 PLAYS the best in the series. by far. imnsho, UT3 looks better than any in the series. by far. Transalation: I like it the best in the series.
I would have liked it better if Epic had found a way NOT to release the game before it was done. I would have liked it alot better if the game was more easily moddable for me. I would have liked it ALOT better if more ppl were playing. . .
Bottom line, I like all versions of UT but imnsho it's still the best in the series, despite the many problems. and i hope that this major expansion helps in all the areas it needs it.

[rAt.8^].bAg]

Originally Posted by FuLLBLeeD

DM:
-More maps! Less crap like Biohazard and Demios and more quality maps like Deck and ShangraLa.

Include more maps like Fearless too.

As for Deck, I'm so goddamned sick of it I could puke. They should have left it in 2k4.

[iron12]

Well to say it's the best in the series is just a matter of opinion of course. There are things I like about each of its different iterations. UT99, very much liked the gib action. I don't think that's been matched in the others. UT2004, liked the ONS. UT3, I'm trying to like it maybe the expansion will help.

It would be cool if the expansions had some of the CTF maps from UT99. You know the ones that weren't symmetrical. If I had mapping skills I would make them myself.

[UBerserker]

Originally Posted by rAt.8^].bAg

Include more maps like Fearless too.

*Without the Invulnerability pickup.

[Grobut]

Originally Posted by Sir_Brizz

This is really the meat of it, and why people don't play it. Just because a game has "perfect" gameplay doesn't mean you'll keep playing it if it's a huge PITA to get to that point.

Exactly, and this point actually carries alot of weight thease days, most of us live pretty stressfull lives, when we come home and want to unwind by blowing up some pixels, a game that is a chore to deal with just wont get played, even if its gameplay is really good, we will choose to launch another game instead that just plain works.

Gaming is about having fun, thats what we want from any game, nomatter what our tastes or concept of fun is, thats what we look for, but there is one sure-fire way to kill that fun, and thats by making the game a huge hassle to deal with, be it serious bugs, bad controls, terrible optimization, draconian DRM that hassles us, interface problems, not beeing able to find games, if it doesen't work and work well, we'll play something else that does.

Gameplay is a matter of opinion, as are graphics and storylines, most gameplay mechanics too, chances are that nomatter how you spin it, there will be some target audience out there that does like what comes out of it, but nobody likes beeing hassled, nobody likes serious bugs, nobody likes bad optimization, nobody likes not beeing able to scale the game to their hardware, etc etc, and it can flat out kill games, even great ones that holds tons of promise despite their problems, all the promis in the world wont matter if the game doesen't deliver the fun in the end.


Really, making the game work, and work well should allways be the top priority for any developer, its just very sad that game development has painted itself into a corner here, and they have helped create an unrealistic market where its practically impossible to deliver what gamers want, in the timeframe that the publishers/profit margins will allow, most games thease days have to be released in a state where they need patching emediately.. but the patches don't allways come, and they don't allways fix it all even if they do.

[GreatEmerald]

Originally Posted by rAt.8^].bAg

When GOTY first hit I played the hell out of it and loved it. Then with 2k3 & 4, I was annoyed with the floaty-ness and dodging, but I adjusted and really came to love those. Unreal II was fun but too damned narrow and short. Then UT3 comes along and just pisses me off all over again.

You missed U2XMP then. Go here:
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=174183
And here:
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=180686

Originally Posted by UBerserker

Obviously, when UT2k4's servers can count on the bots' presence. UT3 should do the same so it gets more players

UT99 also counts bots Look at what BC did...

Originally Posted by Benfica

Short sighted people that only see UT99 and UT2004 without figuring out the multiple possibilities in between that don't collide or are still good for everyone, are being selfish by putting part of the community away from the series and ****ing up the future of UT.

You live on the lala land if you think Epic is looking forward to do UT4.

+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.

Originally Posted by LG1X

If there is another UT, it will be when unreal engine 4 releases, and expect it to be another multiplatform game if not console only. I honestly think UT should have stood as a PC franchise and UC as a console franchise along with GoW, although I wouldn't have minded seeing a UC on the PC.

Epic can either make UT the way they want or think of all the confusing player bases among the different UT's and make something new that both player bases can come to enjoy. They should have done that with UT3. Instead of turning off UT2K4 fans with UT3 gameplay, they could have implemented gameplay from both UT99 and UT2K4 in a smooth fashion.

I also want to see a UT with a completely new arsenal of guns, not just the same guns with new skins which has basically been the case for years now.

I don't think Epic would do such a thing. PC was always where Unreal series was aimed at - if they released a UT for consoles only, then they'd start a huge mess and tons of spam and whining about that. And after some time they would be forced to make a PC version anyway.

+1 for the second paragraph.

I don't want to see a *completely* new arsenal. Through the ages Unreal had these weapons - why would that change? However, I don't think that would have a large impact, as you can see with Unreal II - generally people liked it even with those weapons, but it was simply too short. But they still shouldn't leave out Flak and Shock, those are basically the symbols of Unreal as a whole.

Originally Posted by FuLLBLeeD

This is what I'd like to see:
<...>

Something I absolutely fully agree on.

Originally Posted by rAt.8^].bAg

Include more maps like Fearless too.

As for Deck, I'm so goddamned sick of it I could puke. They should have left it in 2k4.

Deck is the symbol of all the Unreal series. It has been in since Unreal 1 to nowadays, with some (treacherous) absences in UT2003 and U2.

Originally Posted by UBerserker

*Without the Invulnerability pickup.

With Adrenaline.

Originally Posted by Grobut

Gameplay is a matter of opinion, as are graphics and storylines, most gameplay mechanics too, chances are that nomatter how you spin it, there will be some target audience out there that does like what comes out of it, but nobody likes beeing hassled, nobody likes serious bugs, nobody likes bad optimization, nobody likes not beeing able to scale the game to their hardware, etc etc, and it can flat out kill games, even great ones that holds tons of promise despite their problems, all the promis in the world wont matter if the game doesen't deliver the fun in the end.


Really, making the game work, and work well should allways be the top priority for any developer, its just very sad that game development has painted itself into a corner here, and they have helped create an unrealistic market where its practically impossible to deliver what gamers want, in the timeframe that the publishers/profit margins will allow, most games thease days have to be released in a state where they need patching emediately.. but the patches don't allways come, and they don't allways fix it all even if they do.

True. To just install the demo, I had to apply two workarounds, and one patch to the EXE, which was no longer available from their website! That's just insane! And then I simply couldn't navigate because the menu gave me only 15 F/s.

[UBerserker]

Originally Posted by GreatEmerald

With Adrenaline.

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

[Bishop F Gantry]

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...

[WHIPperSNAPper]

Originally Posted by Sir_Brizz

It's ironic that, for a much as people whine about UT3, most of them universally agree that the gameplay is nearly spot on for the game.

The complaints about the UI and server browser drown out the issues with the gameplay, but are you certain that it's accurate to say that just about everyone thinks that they got the gameplay right? I like the feel of the movement in UT3 but the UT3 gameplay has several issues:

No first person view for vehicles--this is a huge problem for flying vehicles like the raptor. (Presumably since most console "FPS" games are third person shooters and since UT3 was designed primarily for consoles, they didn't feel a need for a first person view.)

The indestructable mine pods that the Nightshade vehicle lays need to be removed from the game.

You cannot throw weapons.

You cannot set up keybinds for communication ("cover me!", "Defend the base!", "Enemy flag carrier is here! (location)).

The translocater has limited throws which is a large issue for competitive CTF gaming and one of the primary complaints of the UT99 CTF pro community (who liked the feel of the game play in the Demo and who had looked forward to UT3 until they learned that the retail release = beta demo).

The game does an awful job of switching teams around between maps and of keeping the number of players on each side within 1 player.

Secondary flak doesn't feel right.

[WHIPperSNAPper]

Originally Posted by GreatEmerald

Actually, UT3 going to UT99 style isn't the best way to do it too. UT99 players won't play UT3 anyway as their PCs usually can't manage that and they have a game they like anyway, why would they switch?

Your basis for this claim is...wishful speculation?

Maybe if UT3 had been a more polished production with better gameplay the UT99 players who would have needed better computers would have rushed out to build or buy new computers. The UT99 pro community was excited about UT3 when they played the Demo...but when they found out that the retail release of the game was the same as the beta demo--the same user interface and server browser, they completely lost interest.

Then UT2004 players won't go there as well because you feel like a brick. So they should have continued the UT2004 style hoping to get more players, or, even better: create everything again from scratch!

Oh, some of them were ready to go to UT3, based on what I've seen of people in the Clan Death Warrant UT 2004 community, but they didn't like the game's pathetic production values (user interface, server browser, etc.). Also, gameplay-wise, Onslaught is more fun than Warfare and there's nothing wrong with UT 2004's Invasion-RPG game. UT3 just wasn't very compelling to them for many of the same reasons that it wasn't compelling to UT99 fans.

What Epic needed to do in UT3 was to faithfully replicate the UT99 gameplay and feel, work in the new UT 2004 games (Onslaught, Bombing Run) and improve upon the user interface and server browser of UT 2004. Epic completely failed (epically) in these regards.

[WHIPperSNAPper]

Originally Posted by iron12

It would be cool if the expansions had some of the CTF maps from UT99. You know the ones that weren't symmetrical. If I had mapping skills I would make them myself.

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.)

[UBerserker]

Originally Posted by WHIPperSNAPper

Secondary flak doesn't feel right.

No, it feels right. And learn to use the multi-quote button.

[brdempsey69]

Originally Posted by WHIPperSNAPper

Your basis for this claim is...wishful speculation?

Maybe if UT3 had been a more polished production with better gameplay the UT99 players who would have needed better computers would have rushed out to build or buy new computers. The UT99 pro community was excited about UT3 when they played the Demo...but when they found out that the retail release of the game was the same as the beta demo--the same user interface and server browser, they completely lost interest.

.

Well spoken. In my case, going back to UT99 had nothing to do with hardware requirements. I have 4 PC's that I built myself that can run UT3 just fine. It was lack of polish and configurable options, botplay not configured correctly, bad netcoding, each patch introducing new bugs -- 1.3 broke the ability to have multiple servers broadcast from one machine -- and overall just way too much of a chore to try and bring custom content into the game.

And like you said, that garbage server browser & user interface that had no functionality and all these .ini's that had to be hand edited. Smacks of a console port to me.

[Sir_Brizz]

Originally Posted by WHIPperSNAPper

The complaints about the UI and server browser drown out the issues with the gameplay, but are you certain that it's accurate to say that just about everyone thinks that they got the gameplay right? I like the feel of the movement in UT3 but the UT3 gameplay has several issues:

No first person view for vehicles--this is a huge problem for flying vehicles like the raptor. (Presumably since most console "FPS" games are third person shooters and since UT3 was designed primarily for consoles, they didn't feel a need for a first person view.)

The indestructable mine pods that the Nightshade vehicle lays need to be removed from the game.

You cannot throw weapons.

You cannot set up keybinds for communication ("cover me!", "Defend the base!", "Enemy flag carrier is here! (location)).

The translocater has limited throws which is a large issue for competitive CTF gaming and one of the primary complaints of the UT99 CTF pro community (who liked the feel of the game play in the Demo and who had looked forward to UT3 until they learned that the retail release = beta demo).

The game does an awful job of switching teams around between maps and of keeping the number of players on each side within 1 player.

Secondary flak doesn't feel right.

Well, nbody is saying the gameplay is so broken that it can't be fixed, which is what they were saying in UT200x, so they did something right.

[rAt.8^].bAg]

Originally Posted by GreatEmerald

Deck is the symbol of all the Unreal series. It has been in since Unreal 1 to nowadays, with some (treacherous) absences in UT2003 and U2.

I know that. But after 8,627 plays it gets old.

Originally Posted by GreatEmerald

You missed U2XMP then. Go here:
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=174183
And here:
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=180686

I didn't miss it, I just sold U2 after I finished it.