The new gametype "Conquest" sounds to me like some sort of RTS from first person perspective 
... or whatever
... or whateverFirst Details on Next-Gen UT
- Thread starter RaptoR
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
sounds sexy as hell...LordHypnos said:Looks like another EPIC failure in the making
if you think its "another" failure, you obviously dont like some other epic game(s), and perhaps you jsut dont liek the games they make... taht doesnt make they failures... now Tribes: Vengeance is a failure... a lot fo people play(ed) and love all the Epic games.
LordHypnos said:Looks like another EPIC failure in the making
Lol, I think your post qualifies more as a failure than ANY of EPIC's games ever did.
T
Tournament0
Guest
hal said:
I think they are trying to reduce the file size of the game.
The new Conquest game type looks interesting.
# "conquest will take advantage of the UE3 engines ability to seamlessly stream maps by putting you in a battlefield the size of several maps stitched together"
# "players will battle on one of two teams, each sides terriroty will look physically different, as you take a territory it will convert to the otherteams structures and physical surroundings"
Jebus H. I forsee a *very* small number of community maps being made for that. Would take an entire frickin mod team.
# "players will battle on one of two teams, each sides terriroty will look physically different, as you take a territory it will convert to the otherteams structures and physical surroundings"
Jebus H. I forsee a *very* small number of community maps being made for that. Would take an entire frickin mod team.
T
Tournament0
Guest
Angel_Mapper said:# "conquest will take advantage of the UE3 engines ability to seamlessly stream maps by putting you in a battlefield the size of several maps stitched together"
# "players will battle on one of two teams, each sides terriroty will look physically different, as you take a territory it will convert to the otherteams structures and physical surroundings"
Jebus H. I forsee a *very* small number of community maps being made for that. Would take an entire frickin mod team.
Lets hope that Epic will make more maps for Conquest, so we don't have to.
If someone does make a Conquest map, it'll be good.
Sounds good to me, but then, I like Onslaught, along with DM and CTF.
I can see some issues / fun with 2 teams / 8 factions agreeing a time to 'pause' a game.
I can see some issues / fun with 2 teams / 8 factions agreeing a time to 'pause' a game.
UT1 (UT99), UT2 (UT2004). UT2003 doesn't count. Because it was a beta.
Lots of good points, the lobby/stats/clan system sounds like a very good feature. UT has always lacked a "matchup" system, this could be it. The slimming down of the surplus gametypes is a massive plus.
As for Conquest, er... yeah. Sounds great, but then so did ONS, and even Epic has stated that gametype had some big gameplay flaws. If it works it could be a great addition to the series. If it doesn't (which looking at the complexity of the gametype is possibility) then it's going to be anothre DOM/BR. For those that wonder why I bashed ONS, everyone expected it to be a massive competitive gametype. It's not even as big as CTF right now, and CTF has been pretty shaky from the start of UT2003.
One thing Epic absolutly have to do is spend equal time on the maps for all the gametypes. Many people justifyably criticised Epic for spending too much time on ONS at the expense of all the other gametypes in UT2004. That can't happen in UT3 or it'll be a disaster.
As for the name, I hope Epic has the good judgment to dump the yearly naming thing. Everyone hated it from day one. I also hope they don't use some kind of idiotic alt name thing like "UT: Evolution" etc. They sould dumb. Stick with Unreal Tournment 3.
Lots of good points, the lobby/stats/clan system sounds like a very good feature. UT has always lacked a "matchup" system, this could be it. The slimming down of the surplus gametypes is a massive plus.
As for Conquest, er... yeah. Sounds great, but then so did ONS, and even Epic has stated that gametype had some big gameplay flaws. If it works it could be a great addition to the series. If it doesn't (which looking at the complexity of the gametype is possibility) then it's going to be anothre DOM/BR. For those that wonder why I bashed ONS, everyone expected it to be a massive competitive gametype. It's not even as big as CTF right now, and CTF has been pretty shaky from the start of UT2003.
One thing Epic absolutly have to do is spend equal time on the maps for all the gametypes. Many people justifyably criticised Epic for spending too much time on ONS at the expense of all the other gametypes in UT2004. That can't happen in UT3 or it'll be a disaster.
As for the name, I hope Epic has the good judgment to dump the yearly naming thing. Everyone hated it from day one. I also hope they don't use some kind of idiotic alt name thing like "UT: Evolution" etc. They sould dumb. Stick with Unreal Tournment 3.
sounds good, if they are starting to ditch things, e.g. the names, gametypes etc, lets hope that they will ditch the double dodge, or nerf it. The movement is what needs to be perfect, if there already starting to make maps, surley the movement is near enough finished?
the clan matchup thing does sound good, even though i dont think i will ever play a game competitivly again like how i played UT, but then again, all of the match setup features etc in UT2004 sounded good, and they ditched that.
Conquest sounds...... diffirent, which is a good thing, not too sure about the massive maps though, sounds like some sort of age of empires game
edit: oh, and also, lets hope they ditch vCTF as well, pointless putting that crap in there
the clan matchup thing does sound good, even though i dont think i will ever play a game competitivly again like how i played UT, but then again, all of the match setup features etc in UT2004 sounded good, and they ditched that.
Conquest sounds...... diffirent, which is a good thing, not too sure about the massive maps though, sounds like some sort of age of empires game
edit: oh, and also, lets hope they ditch vCTF as well, pointless putting that crap in there
Last edited:
RaptoR said:
Hopefully they'll ditch the "yearly naming convention". Quite frankly, I've never liked it and I never will
It's also cause of this people started using the horrendous ut99 name
UT2007... ffs :-/ imagine that.
I hope they really do improve the AI on the same scale as the graphics. IMHO that should be the focus of any game given that graphics are more than adequate.
Conquest sounds like an extension of Onslaught. Definitely interesting, altough I think this means servers should have bots by default as there's no way in hell that any next-gen mp-game is going to get the players and servers required to run this type of game at its optimum setting.
Reducing the number of core-gametypes does not make one iota of a difference as the MP-scene already does have a million choices in games. Then again most choices available are simply DM or CTF with 'alternate' weapons, so if Epic really wanted to 'be different' it'd kill them and leave ONS & Conquest as the 'new' core-gametypes.
/me still suspects an april-fools joke though ... or if that doesn't happen then there's a new DukeNukem:Whenever-project
Conquest sounds like an extension of Onslaught. Definitely interesting, altough I think this means servers should have bots by default as there's no way in hell that any next-gen mp-game is going to get the players and servers required to run this type of game at its optimum setting.
Reducing the number of core-gametypes does not make one iota of a difference as the MP-scene already does have a million choices in games. Then again most choices available are simply DM or CTF with 'alternate' weapons, so if Epic really wanted to 'be different' it'd kill them and leave ONS & Conquest as the 'new' core-gametypes.
/me still suspects an april-fools joke though ... or if that doesn't happen then there's a new DukeNukem:Whenever-project
This is sweet news, gonna take a while before its released though i am affraid.
I would like ddom to be left in, i think its fun. Personally i am not interested in the conquest mode, its good they keep innovating though.
I am a DM/TDM player, hope they wont put all the effort in conquest and make some good (not only eye-candy) dm maps aswell.
Dieing to see the screens btw.
I would like ddom to be left in, i think its fun. Personally i am not interested in the conquest mode, its good they keep innovating though.
I am a DM/TDM player, hope they wont put all the effort in conquest and make some good (not only eye-candy) dm maps aswell.
Dieing to see the screens btw.
Last edited: