No more Bonus Packs! (Its not what it looks like! REALLY!)

[Mr.Magnetichead]

Remember 56k still exists...

But someone on 56k wouldn't be playing online would they?

So they wouldn't need a patch.

Also theres no excuse with programs like Getright and Gozilla out there. Not to mention bittorrents.

 

[Bazzi]

I cannot imagine that you can play Conquest on a 56k connection anyway, way too much data if it's really involving ressource management etc.

 

[Taleweaver]

But someone on 56k wouldn't be playing online would they?

So they wouldn't need a patch.

Also theres no excuse with programs like Getright and Gozilla out there. Not to mention bittorrents.

You know what a patch is, right? It's supposed to fix errors and get some balance tweaks. Offline players need that just as much as online ones.

It's simple, really. Patches and map packs are a completely different thing, and therefore they should be different downloads. If a server upgrades the server but doesn't include map pack X, then you should ask the server admin to include the packs.

 

[{RA}SKYFURNACE]

you people do play current UT2Kwhatever right?

jeebus talk about DL's, join just about any server thats hosted and youll be downloading all night... mutators, crappy custom maps, gametypes, etc...

Yes you have the option to go search out the server domain and DL their server pack IF

The server admin made one for you to DL and isnt lazy.

and

Its up to date. Generally it isnt.



Complaining about DL'ing a patch and bonus pack is just silly in this day and age, esp when its free from epic.

UT has done the Bonus pack & patch thing very well since UT.

Nothing i hate more than a game that wont let you DL when you connect to a server.

 

[Mr.Magnetichead]

You know what a patch is, right? It's supposed to fix errors and get some balance tweaks. Offline players need that just as much as online ones.

Not really.

If you're never going to play against anything but bots why would you need balancing issues?

 

[Taleweaver]

Not really.

If you're never going to play against anything but bots why would you need balancing issues?

I don't get what you're saying. Lots of the patches upgrade the bot AI as well to better simulate the online environment. By your logic, you can just as well say that Epic should toss their entire bot AI out of the window, 'cause the offline players "don't need" to have a balanced game

But that's beside the issue. The majority of the UT2004 players still play offline, which indicates lots of these have no connection, or a bad one -> they really benefit from a smaller download

 

[G.Lecter]

I 100% agree with Taleweaver. Patches (and games) are made for everyone, not only for hardcore online players...

Now let's see it from another point of view: A 1st patch is released with a few new maps in it... Nice: Every server has all those new maps and the patch...
But then a new 2nd patch with more new maps is released, and the problems begin: A patch always replaces the files from the last patch, that means I could install the second patch without having the first and play online without having the maps of the 1st patch. Servers will begin to have different lists of maps... If I want the maps of the 1st patch, I must install it, but If I install this one after the 2nd, I'll have the maps, but the game won't be patched correctly, so I'll have problems online, and I finally would have to reinstall the game with the patches installed in order... That's too confusing for some people , remember the games must be made for everyone...

 

[Mr.Magnetichead]

I don't get what you're saying. Lots of the patches upgrade the bot AI as well to better simulate the online environment. By your logic, you can just as well say that Epic should toss their entire bot AI out of the window, 'cause the offline players "don't need" to have a balanced game

But that's beside the issue. The majority of the UT2004 players still play offline, which indicates lots of these have no connection, or a bad one -> they really benefit from a smaller download

Name me 5 games that have had patches that effect bot AI to a noticable level.

I've been playing games on my PC for 9 years now and on consoles for 17.

I have NEVER played a game out of the box that was so unbalanced or had such bad AI that it needed a patch to be playable.

Patches are made for online players. If they were not you could buy them on disk.

 

[Taleweaver]

Name me 5 games that have had patches that effect bot AI to a noticable level.

I've been playing games on my PC for 9 years now and on consoles for 17.

I have NEVER played a game out of the box that was so unbalanced or had such bad AI that it needed a patch to be playable.

Patches are made for online players. If they were not you could buy them on disk.

Can only name 3 that I know of...feel free to ignore the fact these are the only games I've played long enough to realise the differences between patches...
UT99: after quite some patches I had the feeling of "hey, since when do bots do X?" The most obvious one was the pressure chamber in DM-pressure. After a certain patch, the bots all started pushing those damn switches when you were inside
UT2004: bots had improved AI in just about every patch, mainly for onslaught. I think just about every offline onslaught player can confirm this
Red alert 2: once again, various AI improvements. It's still not even near human quality, but that's a different matter...
I know for a fact that at least UT2003 and starcraft made noticeable AI improvements during their patches (prob. the warcraft series as well), but I haven't experienced these myself.

As for you...I don't since when console games can be patched, but you can be damn sure it's not 17 years. I also like to point out that not all game companies improve their AI code in patches. Just that Epic does it, which is the issue here.
And just where did I made the assumption that AI was ever so bad it was unplayable without patches? When I said 'improved' I actually meant...improved (omg! the simplicity).

Patches are made for online players. If they were not you could buy them on disk.

Good point, and well taken care off. Or didn't you know many game magazines deliver CD's with patches?

 

[Mr.Magnetichead]

Can only name 3 that I know of...feel free to ignore the fact these are the only games I've played long enough to realise the differences between patches...
UT99: after quite some patches I had the feeling of "hey, since when do bots do X?" The most obvious one was the pressure chamber in DM-pressure. After a certain patch, the bots all started pushing those damn switches when you were inside
UT2004: bots had improved AI in just about every patch, mainly for onslaught. I think just about every offline onslaught player can confirm this
Red alert 2: once again, various AI improvements. It's still not even near human quality, but that's a different matter...
I know for a fact that at least UT2003 and starcraft made noticeable AI improvements during their patches (prob. the warcraft series as well), but I haven't experienced these myself.

As for you...I don't since when console games can be patched, but you can be damn sure it's not 17 years. I also like to point out that not all game companies improve their AI code in patches. Just that Epic does it, which is the issue here.
And just where did I made the assumption that AI was ever so bad it was unplayable without patches? When I said 'improved' I actually meant...improved (omg! the simplicity).


Good point, and well taken care off. Or didn't you know many game magazines deliver CD's with patches?

UT99: The bots have always pressed the switch. I was killed by a bot on that map in the pressure chamber the first day the game was out.

UT2004: What improvments. Be specific.

Red Alert 2: Not really bots now is it.

I didn't claim that console games have been patched for 17 years. :bulb:

 

[Taleweaver]

UT99: The bots have always pressed the switch. I was killed by a bot on that map in the pressure chamber the first day the game was out.

UT2004: What improvments. Be specific.

Red Alert 2: Not really bots now is it.

I didn't claim that console games have been patched for 17 years. :bulb:

Jeez, dude. Forget I ever mentioned it. You have your point of view, I have a different one. This isn't a discussion for the patch+bonus pack in one anymore, but a discussion to keep the discussion going. Sorry, but this is pointless hair-splitting (my prev post as well, I admit that), and it's not going anywhere.

No hard feeling, mate

 

[Mr.Magnetichead]

[W H I T E C R O S S]

 

[Kriegs-Maschine]

Seriously, down with bonus packs. I'm not saying down with free new content though. I'm just saying there is a better way of delivering it. How? Take a look at good ol' Counter-Strike. New maps and stuff are released through patches, that all players HAVE to downloaded. This means that all servers WILL have that content, and all players to. If you do not think this method is a good one then you are just being a straight up CS basher.

Bonus packs are a thing of the past and only prove to be an annoyance imho. I hated having to look for servers that were running ECE because alot had a bad habit of not putting it in their title. After ECE was released I didn't want to play on servers that didn't have it, but since it wasn't a mandatory update, alot of servers (at the time, I don't know how it is recently) didn't bother installing.

So rather than waiting until they have 200mb of new stuff, why not slowly feed us new content (a map or two here, a model or two there) over time? This ensures everyone has the same content and can play on any server not running custom content.

What about people with 56k? What about them!? 56kers don't play CS then? CS has WAAAAAAAY more players than any of the older UTs did, and it seems to manage just fine pushing maps through in patches rather than bonus packs.

Note: I am not saying UT should have a STEAM-like service. I am just saying new content should be pushed in PATCHES and not in seperate bonus packs that people don't have to download.

I 100% agree with you on all the line. There is so many awesome custom maps/skin but if 5% of the servers get it, its totaly useless. If there is a auto-download thing like in Steam/CS, everyone will have it, see ur skin, and we will have a lot new maps to play in all server, rather than the same 3-4 ****in map that we play all the time and gets boring very quickly, and those maps would be official which also mean played in Leagues like TWL,IGL...