Official UT3 complaint thread

[fuegerstef]

...Warfare (its ONS, but with hoverboards, an "Orb" that will instantly capture a node, and sometimes you can do stuff like blow up a barricade.. so ONS really).

A few things need to be added:

Warfare is ONS with:

-totally different gameplay
-totally different vehicle-handling
-totally different infantry/vehicle balance

to summarize:
It is totally different, but shares a few similiarities (like the names for nodes, cores and vehicles)

WHY ARE YOU COMPLAINING WHEN YOU HAVEN'T EVEN BOUGHT THE GAME?!!!!!

BECAUSE HE WANTS IT FIXED, SO THAT HE CAN BUY IT. AND HE VOICES WHAT HE WANTS TO HAVE FIXED.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

How can you know what you want fixed in a game without even playing it?

 

[fuegerstef]

How can you know what you want fixed in a game without even playing it?

We are talking about this person:

My biggest complaint is the lack of features and options in the UI. No custom xhairs, modifiable bots, weaponthrow, no saved settings, no saved active mutators lists, ext.........

All that can be "read" on this forum or from the demo. I cut the quote, in this post he even said that he liked the gameplay.

 

[Grobut]

A few things need to be added:

Warfare is ONS with:

-totally different gameplay
-totally different vehicle-handling
-totally different infantry/vehicle balance

to summarize:
It is totally different, but shares a few similiarities (like the names for nodes, cores and vehicles)

Its not that different, the gameplay is very similar, only people can get to objectives faster on foot because of the Hoverboard, and defenders have to keep an extra eye out for people carrying the Orb, apart from that though, i dont see any big differences, it is pretty much ONS.

There are a couple of maps where they have spiced it up a bit more though, like the one with the Tank pad, but thouse are very few and far between, most of them are very much like the ONS maps of old (just smaller for the most part).

Honestly, if you have played ONS, you can pick up Warfare and know exactly what to do within a few minutes, the differences are not so big that there is any serious learning curve to speak of (apart from the obvious one of having to learn the layout of the maps).


But we can agree that the vehicals behave differently, they steer in a rather awkward way now, atleast for me, the steering seems like it was intended for the analogue stick on a joypad and is not all that keyboard freindly.
But again, thease new Necris vehicals, its nothing that you wont learn within a few games, its not that big a difference.

They are all minor tweaks to ONS in my eyes, and i really dont see Warfare as anything more than ONS with some more bells and whistles attached.

 

[fuegerstef]

Honestly, if you have played ONS, you can pick up Warfare and know exactly what to do within a few minutes, the differences are not so big that there is any serious learning curve to speak of (apart from the obvious one of having to learn the layout of the maps).

Well, I played ONS for 4 years (I think the first demo of UT2004 came out around Feb 18th) with the top players in EU. And I picked WAR up very fast (played with those who moved). The resulting gameplay from the changes is IMHO totally different.

 

[Grobut]

Well, I played ONS for 4 years (I think the first demo of UT2004 came out around Feb 18th) with the top players in EU. And I picked WAR up very fast (played with those who moved). The resulting gameplay from the changes is IMHO totally different.

They are different, there's no denying that, but "totally different" is a streach i feel, at its very core, the gametype is still ONS, the feel has changed a bit due to tweaks, and new elements that have been added to the ONS core, but that core still shines though to such a degree that any ONS player can pick it up and play, with a minor learning curve pertaining to the new additions.

It is a matter of how you classify it though, from my perspective, i do not feel this is a big change for the simple reason that there is little learning curve involved, but if you look at it from a purely gamplay perspective, then yes, there are definately different tactics involved now, so that is a bigger change.

In the end, we both have a point really, so there's not much reason to argue

 

[haslo]

UT3 Warfare is pretty much the same as BF2142 Titan Mode as well. In both games/modes, people are playing a guy with a gun in first person and have stuff to blow up

 

[Mr. Scary]

I probably should have elaborated a bit on me not buying UT3. At some point, yeah I'll be getting the game. But after my experiences with the following titles:

Quake 4
BF2
BF2142

I've decided to wait out on a game when it's released.

Much like an o/s, I refuse to buy a game the day it comes out. Too many titles are "release now/patch later" and I'm so sick of that "consumer acceptable mentality." I love the UT series. What impressed me about the demo was it felt damn close to UT99.

At some point I'll get the game. Hell if Kalvin976 has it and plays it, the game can't be all that bad. Which is why I was somewhat asking for seasoned veterans to chime in because most of them I've gamed with in UT and they know what I'm looking for vs. some of the new crowd ...and that's not a dig against anyone who's relatively new to Beyond Unreal. I'm glad to see new forum activity from people around here.

So it's all cool. At some point I'm gonna pick it up and smoke everyone's butt in some pick up games and ya'll can hate me then.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Decide how much you like the demo. If you like it, then it's a good investment.

 

[Taleweaver]

Epic reads your feedback unless you act like an asshat.

No they don't...or maybe I should say it more sarcastically:
[sarcasm]They might read your feedback, but will never consider anything from it, no matter how vital, valid and feasible your suggestions might be.[/sarcasm]

Back in the demo days, Epic tauted they were going to listen to the community. The community disliked the User Interface. The community offered suggestions. MANY suggestions. Heck, they were more unanimously against the Interface than they were against VCTF&CTF being one gametype or the name UT2007.

And Epic had a sticky thread exactly for that. My reply was on the 18th page. Unlike the majority of the posts, it wasn't something like "redo UWindows!" or "I don't like it".
I realised there wouldn't be enough time & manpower to redo everything so I didn't ask for it. I realised a lot of options were left out, but I knew that would be a heckuvalot of coding too. My suggestions were simple ones, meant to reduce the complexity of the interface. In addition to reasoning about the why I wanted these changes I provided screenshots to illustrate exactly how to things could have been better.
And I wasn't speaking just in my name, then. I had checked on Titan's to gather information, and literally no one could say it weren't changes for the best.

Then the final game came...NOTHING was changed. Even worse: there wasn't even an official word as to why not. I had spent multiple hours on that post because I don't give half-assed feedback. I didn't want a thank you note or credits or something...just the knowledge that Epic would do whatever they could do to give everyone a best first impression of the game.
There wasn't even a word about it. No "we're glad for all the feedback, even though we weren't able to use it all". No "we weren't able to fully implement your desires." or anything else. Just the same lousy interface we were disliking to begin with.

Epic reads our feedback? Am I the only one to see that as bad news? We all know that Epic's forums has so many posts it's VERY easy to miss a couple. If they really read it - like Wartourist says they do - then it means they purposely ignore feedback. That's far worse than not reading it.

 

[Lethargy]

No they don't...or maybe I should say it more sarcastically:
[sarcasm]They might read your feedback, but will never consider anything from it, no matter how vital, valid and feasible your suggestions might be.[/sarcasm]

Back in the demo days, Epic tauted they were going to listen to the community. The community disliked the User Interface. The community offered suggestions. MANY suggestions. Heck, they were more unanimously against the Interface than they were against VCTF&CTF being one gametype or the name UT2007.

And Epic had a sticky thread exactly for that. My reply was on the 18th page. Unlike the majority of the posts, it wasn't something like "redo UWindows!" or "I don't like it".
I realised there wouldn't be enough time & manpower to redo everything so I didn't ask for it. I realised a lot of options were left out, but I knew that would be a heckuvalot of coding too. My suggestions were simple ones, meant to reduce the complexity of the interface. In addition to reasoning about the why I wanted these changes I provided screenshots to illustrate exactly how to things could have been better.
And I wasn't speaking just in my name, then. I had checked on Titan's to gather information, and literally no one could say it weren't changes for the best.

Then the final game came...NOTHING was changed. Even worse: there wasn't even an official word as to why not. I had spent multiple hours on that post because I don't give half-assed feedback. I didn't want a thank you note or credits or something...just the knowledge that Epic would do whatever they could do to give everyone a best first impression of the game.
There wasn't even a word about it. No "we're glad for all the feedback, even though we weren't able to use it all". No "we weren't able to fully implement your desires." or anything else. Just the same lousy interface we were disliking to begin with.

Epic reads our feedback? Am I the only one to see that as bad news? We all know that Epic's forums has so many posts it's VERY easy to miss a couple. If they really read it - like Wartourist says they do - then it means they purposely ignore feedback. That's far worse than not reading it.

+100

 

[Sir_Brizz]

No they don't...or maybe I should say it more sarcastically:
[sarcasm]They might read your feedback, but will never consider anything from it, no matter how vital, valid and feasible your suggestions might be.[/sarcasm]

So you didn't read any of the patch changelogs?

Back in the demo days, Epic tauted they were going to listen to the community. The community disliked the User Interface. The community offered suggestions. MANY suggestions. Heck, they were more unanimously against the Interface than they were against VCTF&CTF being one gametype or the name UT2007.

I disagree. Plus, hey did listen, if you read the patch changelogs.

Then the final game came...NOTHING was changed. Even worse: there wasn't even an official word as to why not. I had spent multiple hours on that post because I don't give half-assed feedback. I didn't want a thank you note or credits or something...just the knowledge that Epic would do whatever they could do to give everyone a best first impression of the game.
There wasn't even a word about it. No "we're glad for all the feedback, even though we weren't able to use it all". No "we weren't able to fully implement your desires." or anything else. Just the same lousy interface we were disliking to begin with.

Nothing you suggested? Because things did change. Just not everything.

Epic reads our feedback? Am I the only one to see that as bad news? We all know that Epic's forums has so many posts it's VERY easy to miss a couple. If they really read it - like Wartourist says they do - then it means they purposely ignore feedback. That's far worse than not reading it.

Read the patch changelogs and then tell me they are not listening to feedback. If you think all of those things they have been fixing (and particularly the order in which they have been fixing them) were on their issue lists since before the demo came out, well.... I have no idea what to say in that case.

 

[Wail of Suicide]

You must be kidding yourself if you think Epic doesn't listen to the feedback. As Brizz says, look at the changelogs.

I know I personally wrote up about 3 pages of feedback (by hand, and I have small print) and who knows how many posts. Funny thing is, after playing the game a lot I felt like a majority of my criticisms and complaints weren't really that valid. Some still are, and it's definitely different from ONS (mostly improved, in my opinion), but more than half were just things I hadn't adjusted to.

Ex. the UT3 Goliath shell's splash radius compared to that of UT2004's Goliath shell. There was lots of criticism here, and yet if anything the Goliath seems more powerful than it used to be -- Possibly because I can't jump around so much and because the maps are smaller, but, yeah. I don't think I'd want to advocate for more splash on that thing at this point.

 

[Buffy]

I dont have any complaint for map model vehicle or online game

but
in off line game (Instant Action)
still many things missing UT2004 have
main thing I complaint about is
after instal Patch 2 still no "SPECTATE" Option in instant action !
and Bots config option !(no voice no Icons)
anythings change yet
why not to add such small option for UT3 ??
is this hard to do for Epic ?
for me this option is really convenience & fun

 

[Coffin_Dancer]

huh?

spectate mode works fine for me now, i just have trouble
swirching from one player's view to another's - unless that's what you're referring to?

CD

 

[Buffy]

I know my English bad

huh?

spectate mode works fine for me now, i just have trouble
swirching from one player's view to another's - unless that's what you're referring to?

CD

but you dont read my comment well
I said
"SPECTATE" Option in instant action !

 

[Trynant]

I'd be (half) playing the game a lot more for spectate in Instant Action

but you dont read my comment well
I said
"SPECTATE" Option in instant action !

+1

Putting a bunch of bots in a map and watching them kill each other was one of my favorite pass times in the previous Unreal games, not having this feature in UT3 is severely disappointing. Especially in the first UT when you could put 100+ bots into one map and watch the carnage ensue

EDIT: And also having the game remember which Instant Action mode I chose last (a la UT and 2k4) would rock oh so very much. Same with server browser remembering which gametype I chose to play.

 

[Grobut]

Its not just spectating, its anything to do with instant action really, its just been cut to the very bone option wise.

 

[siriusmindfrag]

Link Gun Trajectory (visual glitch?) primary fire Appears to be coming from the head of the BOTSplayer vs. the tip of the gun.

*not sure if this is just on my machine or if it has been mentioned before*
running on chocolate-not sure if this is the "bug list".

 

[Anuban]

Its not just spectating, its anything to do with instant action really, its just been cut to the very bone option wise.

While this is true it is also true that it is very very easy to set up "spectating" in UT3 for Instant Action. Many of you here know me and you know I don't play online and I used Spectator mode for testing tons of ONS and VCTF maps back in UT2K4. So yeah I was bothered at first as well and then someone told me about the "viewbot" command and bam it was all so clear. I just set up a the F6 key to use as my spectate bot/switch to a different bot key and I was all set.

So just into your Input.ini file and add that line and then when the game starts just press F6 and you will be in spectate mode and then further pressing F6 will switch to the next bot. You can feign death to prevent from being killed but it doesn't matter ... all that happens when your character gets killed is the camera shifts a bit and you just shift it back with your mouse and keep on spectating. It is such a good workaround that I think Epic feels that issue is really not as important as fixing other parts of the game. I have to say on this one I am 100% agreement. This method may not be perfect but it is really good and definitely gets the job done.