First Details on Next-Gen UT

[placebo]

errrr what?

I didn't mean that to sound so gruff. Really. I just think that vCTF is very very fun and more reliant on solid skill and strategy, and the reason many people think of it as "crap" is simply because there only a few really polished maps for it, and Epic hasn't chosen to fully support it as a gametype. Many other fun games have vehicles in their CTF, and it would be a shame if Epic killed support for it.

However, I've realized that Epic could (and should!) take the following route:

Make normal CTF have vehicle support, and thus have some maps have vehicles and some not, just as logically as weapon pickups and anything else! There would be no need for a seperation of CTF and vCTF, and would allow for maps to be balanced with vehicles depending on their size etc.

Again, I apologize for being so brash.

 

[L0cky]

Tse, I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I just draw different conclusions.

and keep in mind, these were the top choices 5 years ago.. and havent MAINTAINED the fan base

If you mean maintained as in keeping the same amount of players now as when they were at their peak, I think that's a no brainer. Games lose popularity for reasons beyond the gameplay; graphics and immersion being the most obvious. Overall though, I think they maintained their player base pretty well (bearing in mind far less people were online before broadband).

My point is, if you were to compare the popularity of UT/Q3/Tribes (which all were pretty much strong at the start and then peaked about 2 years after they were released) to UT2004, UT2004's popularity dropped off fairly quickly by comparison. It might pick up again (as happened with Q3), being realistic I wouldn't place any bets on it.

UT had a few quirks, where over time players learned how to make use of them and I contend that these gave it it's longevity. With UT2004, Epic made a proactive decision to exert stringent control over what players can and can't do (there are some threads @ forums.utassault.net with willhaven talking about 2k4 assault if you want some pretty clear examples). There's little chance of players finding anything new after a few months of play (despite what hal said ;p), and I blame this for the diminishing popularity, rather than people becoming bored of this kind of FPS.

Btw, I don't think ut2004 is a dead game (far from it), I'm just being relative to other games.

Success from Epic's point of view is based on the amount of copies they get out the door (which is mostly at the start where longevity doesn't matter). Many people bought UT2004 based on their experience of UT (many skipped UT2003, that's a different discussion). I just wonder how many people would be interested in another UT based on their experience of UT2004?

Games in a series must have longevity.

+ what Brizz said

 

[W0RF]

I think dilution is a factor too. Back in the day, you had Quake, Doom and UT (to speak generally. One might also consider Duke Nukem).

Today you have Quake, Doom, UT, Half-Life, CS, XMP, BF-everything, CoD, Rainbow 6, Splinter Cell, Tribes, Planetside, AA, BiA, Deus Ex, Farcry, Ghost Recon, the Bond shooters, MoH, NOLF, Painkiller, Elite Force, Republic Commando, TacOps, Timesplitters, and on and on. And that's just shooters off the top of my head; I'm sure there are still people out there playing Marathon or Descent.

 

[RegularX]

I think dilution is a factor too. Back in the day, you had Quake, Doom and UT (to speak generally. One might also consider Duke Nukem).

I would agree. Quake didn't even have much competition at all until Unreal Tournament and Quake III went more or less head to head, and only then did we start to see some real divergence in design. And BF1942 isn't really that similar to Counter-Strike, which isn't really that similar ET ... these games don't become popular because they followed one formula or another ... if anything they became popular by not following a formula.

 

[Bazzi]

Seems I have to upgrade my PC sometimes in the future afterall

Even if it's like 2006 when it ships...

 

[RegularX]

Hey wait:

# Features eight teams, each with unique armor.
# "players will battle on one of two teams

Which is it? is Conquest an 8-team game or a 2-team game? Did the first one mean to say "classes" ?

 

[Bang Yr Head]

Strangely, add classes to the players and it's rather creepily similar to XMP

sounds good to me (I loved XMP)

main thing im concerned about is quality maps. I hope they do not port over any existing maps and just do all new maps from scratch. maybe leave room for 2 or 3 remakes (Face, Rankin, Torlan) but thats it.

otherwise I like the sound of where this game is going, it should be pretty sweet. Conquest sounds like it can potentially be really good, if they dont **** it up...

 

[Nosnos]

I just hope they will recruit a mapper like Soma (Goose, Achilles, Waisten & Fractionary) to do all the DM maps, that would help UT200X to get the best DM-maps ever created

 

[Bang Yr Head]

I just hope they will recruit a mapper like Soma (Goose, Achilles, Waisten & Fractionary) to do all the DM maps, that would help UT200X to get the best DM-maps ever created

quoted for the absolute truth. Soma is an amazing mapper. Achilles is one of most beautiful maps i'v ever seen, not only that but it plays amazing.

 

[TseTse]

UT had a few quirks, where over time players learned how to make use of them and I contend that these gave it it's longevity. With UT2004, Epic made a proactive decision to exert stringent control over what players can and can't do (there are some threads @ forums.utassault.net with willhaven talking about 2k4 assault if you want some pretty clear examples). There's little chance of players finding anything new after a few months of play (despite what hal said ;p), and I blame this for the diminishing popularity, rather than people becoming bored of this kind of FPS.

i understand your point but i think you are talking nuances and not stepping back to look at the big picture.

the entire GENRE of old school gameplay is basically dead... not going anywhere even with this type of dynamic you are talking about.

there's no evidence that any nuances, tweaks and improvements within this larger framework will change the situation.

within the wide realm of ut/quake/tribes... the only thing that has garnered significant interest since 2001 is onslaught... which completely broke from the ctf/dm sport concept... breaking considerably from the old school gameplay.

i dont think what you are talking about has determined longevity of any online game. i think it's a great factor worth noting, but there are plenty of other factors... including the fact that there are social infrastructures that also refuse to adapt/change.

in a sense, the sequels to the old school games have the same challenge as asking seniors in high school to switch schools. you can tell them a million things about the new school (and the school might be better by all counts), but the odds are they wont go...

while i believe there are many factors actually going against big online old-school sequels, i think they pale in comparison to the fundamental reality that mainstream gaming is BORED with old-school gameplay.

a battlefield sequel will do better than a quake, tribes or ut sequel... online... no matter how well you tweak the nuances of the gameplay.

(and yes, that's a prediction regarding quake4)

 

[Sir_Brizz]

while i believe there are many factors actually going against big online old-school sequels, i think they pale in comparison to the fundamental reality that mainstream gaming is BORED with old-school gameplay.

a battlefield sequel will do better than a quake, tribes or ut sequel... online... no matter how well you tweak the nuances of the gameplay.

(and yes, that's a prediction regarding quake4)

The reason why is because the INDUSTRY is demanding it right now. Do you think that a sci-fi game would not garner more popularity if there weren't 50 "realism" games right next to it on the shelf? Considering that Sci-fi is SERIOUSLY outnumbered by crappy remakes of realism game means that rrealism games are going to be more successful no matter what. Even Halo isn't very risque with it's post-modern realistic weapons in a sci-fi environment. *DING* *DING* *DING* *DING* *DING*! That's what is selling right now, so let's copy it off and blame it on the industry. F taking risks. Money, Money, Money! WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

It's ironic that the Video Game industry was built on risk taking, and now there are only a fvery few companies left that are ABLE to take risks thanks to the greedy publishers that make them work (HELLO EA!).

 

[TossMonkey]

I want scans NOW!

 

[Selerox]

Soma > All

I just hope they will recruit a mapper like Soma (Goose, Achilles, Waisten & Fractionary) to do all the DM maps, that would help UT200X to get the best DM-maps ever created

Oh **** yes! :tup:

 

[klasnic]

Polys aren't limited by the engine. If you want specs, go to the official site http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html/technology/ue30.shtml


Now, where's the scans fs?

Thanks, L0cky reading up on it now

 

[L0cky]

Tse: I think it's the game, you think it's the genre, no worries; we'll have to agree to disagree.

I agree the 'realistic' FPS is booming though; what's surprising is that everyone moans and groans when 'yet another' tactical shooter comes along... then they play it anyway


I hope they bring Hourences back aswell as get Soma on board for DM!

Now.. where are these god damned pictures?!

 

[TseTse]

The reason why is because the INDUSTRY is demanding it right now. Do you think that a sci-fi game would not garner more popularity if there weren't 50 "realism" games right next to it on the shelf? Considering that Sci-fi is SERIOUSLY outnumbered by crappy remakes of realism game means that rrealism games are going to be more successful no matter what. Even Halo isn't very risque with it's post-modern realistic weapons in a sci-fi environment. *DING* *DING* *DING* *DING* *DING*! That's what is selling right now, so let's copy it off and blame it on the industry. F taking risks. Money, Money, Money! WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

It's ironic that the Video Game industry was built on risk taking, and now there are only a fvery few companies left that are ABLE to take risks thanks to the greedy publishers that make them work (HELLO EA!).

i think you are misreading the situation and the market. you are lookin at the supply-side without lookin frankly at the demand side facts.

id like to point out that the industry prefers BRANDS over innovation... (in 2002, of the top 200 console games only 13 were original title/brands and of those only 4 were profitable)

imo, epic needed to stop behaving like the industry (ut2k3) and to try something new, refreshing and which resonates with gamers (onslaught). looking BACKWARDS to old school gameplay isnt refreshing or gonna work out...

there's no evidence to suggest old school gameplay can make any real comback. there's a lot of evidence to suggest it cannot and hasnt (when tried).

again, we can wait and see what happens with quake4 in the meantime...

i believe i can predict precisely what will happen.

 

[TseTse]

Tse: I think it's the game, you think it's the genre, no worries; we'll have to agree to disagree.

I agree the 'realistic' FPS is booming though; what's surprising is that everyone moans and groans when 'yet another' tactical shooter comes along... then they play it anyway !

see, i dont think the issue is "realism," at least not outside basic physics.

a battlefield 3000 game with crazy alien stuff would do well, imo, if it remained realistic in physics.

we definately disagree if you think tweaks or variations within quake, ut or tribes will suddenly make any of them very popular (unless they break from old school gameplay and gametypes).

 

[L0cky]

we definately disagree if you think tweaks or variations within quake, ut or tribes will suddenly make any of them very popular (unless they break from old school gameplay and gametypes).

Nope, they won't make them popular at all... UT2004 was very popluar on it's own merits. Remember, I'm talking about longevity; UT2004 sold very well indeed. There was just nothing to keep people after so long, and I believe that will have a knock on affect to subsequent UT games.

This was actually my original point

 

[Selerox]

Round-based way, a good way to destroy what UT is.

imo, epic needed to stop behaving like the industry (ut2k3) and to try something new, refreshing and which resonates with gamers (onslaught). looking BACKWARDS to old school gameplay isnt refreshing or gonna work out...

Which leaves us with what? Round-based gameplay? I don't want round-based gameplay. Every other game out there does round-based gameplay. It's boring, and it's been done before. It's one of the numerous reasons why I found ONS so poisonously boring.

Trying something new is fine, but don't follow the crowd. Industry dynamics doesn't mean a damn to me. I play UT because it's not like the rest, it chooses fast gameplay over the slow, boring, round-based dross we've seen an any number of games recently.

Apologies if I've missed your point along the line. It's late, and you've typed a lot of stuff, most of which I'm not inclined to read right now. This is my point of view towards any form of round-based crap that Epic might have the lapse of reason to thrust upon us.

 

[TseTse]

i dont think it is counter strike vs innovation.

no, i think there's plenty of directions to go (and i think there's already a lot of neat stuff being played).

however, i think to the degree that ALL the elements of old-school gameplay and gametypes are placed together you get a flop.

i still think that some of the elements can be used in ways that resonate with gamers (not sure about the peter pan physics tho).

this new Conquest gametype, imo, sounds awesome. personally, i just hope they dont sorta hold too tightly to the old weapons... and the old style of frag-oriented gameplay.

Nope, they won't make them popular at all... UT2004 was very popluar on it's own merits. Remember, I'm talking about longevity; UT2004 sold very well indeed. There was just nothing to keep people after so long, and I believe that will have a knock on affect to subsequent UT games.

This was actually my original point

i love/d UT2k4 but im not gonna exagerate its popularity online. folks who know me know i did a lot of constant analysis of the stats online and i would say it did ok for a while...

all cuz of ONS.

but if you remove bots and ONS... you can see what im saying about old school ctf/dm gameplay. it's dead.

like i said, of the 400,000 aliases seen playing ut/quake/tribes ctf in the past month... 300,000 were playing a game from 2001 or earlier.

the #s are shrinking. the fanbase is shrinking.

to me, it's like expecting people to go back to playing Pitfall. they might just for the romantic memory of it... then they move on.