Absolutely. From what I can see now, you have to make particles through the GUI ... Which is a lot more cumbersome than anything in UE2. And more problematically, you can't seem to make emitters directly through code anymore (at least, not that I've seen). A lot of the work of creating emitters was a lot more straightforward to do just by tweaking number values than to have all the overhead involved in running the editor.
Hints about UT3 Expansion?
- Thread starter Dark Pulse
- 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.
Absolutely. From what I can see now, you have to make particles through the GUI ... Which is a lot more cumbersome than anything in UE2. And more problematically, you can't seem to make emitters directly through code anymore (at least, not that I've seen). A lot of the work of creating emitters was a lot more straightforward to do just by tweaking number values than to have all the overhead involved in running the editor.
Yeah perhaps that is the case but I found the new particle editor to be leagues better then anything we had previously, not having access through code is problematic and I have experienced problems not being able to hook into kismet either. You cant deny the UE3 particle system is faster though, it really doesnt suffer like either of the previous systems did.
This isnt the old UE we are talking about its UE3 -> UE3.5! Those older ones didnt have cooking, kismet and all this other map embedded mumbo jumbo we have now. But hey maybe Im the only one considering things like this for an engine update using a branch off the base UE, I wouldnt assume things are the same especially since UE3 is more different to UE2 then UE2 was to UE1. As an example, we couldnt open UE2 maps in UE3 or UE1 maps in UE2 and its mostly because of the actors not because of the bsp.
Honestly we gotta stop with the assumptions that there will be a new branch for UT3 expansion off of UE3.5. When you look at the feature set for GoW2 engine it makes you wonder what of those are actually useful in a UT scenario. Then ontop of that how much would an engine update break of the existing game, just whacking it all ontop like they did with UT2004 was messy as hell so you had people using bits in their levels from 2002 and some people using more optimized bits from 2003-2004.
It wont instantly give better FPS, infact Id assume some of the features will make the FPS worse for people who cant run UT3 so well. Keeping in mind there should be options to turn that off.
I still hold that if you were to put UT2004 into UE3 (the one UT3 is using and an exact copy of UT2004 running on the new systems) the FPS will be better then UT2004 on UE2.5
This isnt the old UE we are talking about its UE3 -> UE3.5! Those older ones didnt have cooking, kismet and all this other map embedded mumbo jumbo we have now. But hey maybe Im the only one considering things like this for an engine update using a branch off the base UE, I wouldnt assume things are the same especially since UE3 is more different to UE2 then UE2 was to UE1. As an example, we couldnt open UE2 maps in UE3 or UE1 maps in UE2 and its mostly because of the actors not because of the bsp.
Honestly we gotta stop with the assumptions that there will be a new branch for UT3 expansion off of UE3.5. When you look at the feature set for GoW2 engine it makes you wonder what of those are actually useful in a UT scenario. Then ontop of that how much would an engine update break of the existing game, just whacking it all ontop like they did with UT2004 was messy as hell so you had people using bits in their levels from 2002 and some people using more optimized bits from 2003-2004.
It wont instantly give better FPS, infact Id assume some of the features will make the FPS worse for people who cant run UT3 so well. Keeping in mind there should be options to turn that off.
I still hold that if you were to put UT2004 into UE3 (the one UT3 is using and an exact copy of UT2004 running on the new systems) the FPS will be better then UT2004 on UE2.5
If anything is going to happen with engine updates I would assume epic would push the UT3 engine version forward as much as they can without breaking anything, then backport any of the features they need from UE3.5 in there. Its either that or the base engine version for UT3 staying the same and features completely being backported to the UT3 engine build branch.
My point is this takes away time from actually fixing up UT3's gameplay because every time you backport or forwardport something you are taking development time away. Epic could roll through engine updates which fix problems with the engine and leave it at that adding none of the features which would require more work to bring the old maps, game code etc up to scratch.
Thats the way I see it anyways, Id much rather have the game fixed then more engine features to play with as a modder. Thats about all I wanted to say!
Gah but there wasnt as many engine branches as there are now, UE2.5 was based on the PC UE2! UC2 being UE2.x which is, I'll assume UE2 on xbox updated!
Edit: If its going to take them awhile they might as well clean slate it and make UT4 on UE3.5 tbh!
My point is this takes away time from actually fixing up UT3's gameplay because every time you backport or forwardport something you are taking development time away. Epic could roll through engine updates which fix problems with the engine and leave it at that adding none of the features which would require more work to bring the old maps, game code etc up to scratch.
Thats the way I see it anyways, Id much rather have the game fixed then more engine features to play with as a modder. Thats about all I wanted to say!
Gah but there wasnt as many engine branches as there are now, UE2.5 was based on the PC UE2! UC2 being UE2.x which is, I'll assume UE2 on xbox updated!
Edit: If its going to take them awhile they might as well clean slate it and make UT4 on UE3.5 tbh!
Last edited:
UBerserker, UC2 was UE2.X.
MonsOlympus, I guess that to fix the game they need to update the engine. You can't change the sticky-ragdoll bug without changing the engine, but that will be perfectly backwards compatible as ragdolls are clientside.
And yes, that's what I mean, they might make UT4 out of this. I would be happy because I don't even have UT3 full, lol.
MonsOlympus, I guess that to fix the game they need to update the engine. You can't change the sticky-ragdoll bug without changing the engine, but that will be perfectly backwards compatible as ragdolls are clientside.
And yes, that's what I mean, they might make UT4 out of this. I would be happy because I don't even have UT3 full, lol.
Ummz ragdolls arnt clientside in UT3 sorry, how else do you think you can knock someone off a hoverboard or pin em to the wall with them seeing the almost exact same thing? Also, thats not really a big thing sure it might be a tad annoying but for the most part its purely visual and doesnt effect gameplay. Something thats purely visual and can be fixed without breakin compatibility, the fact theres no standing still and turn anims. Theres a pretty big list of gameplay problems though, some are map specific some are general.
Basically what Im saying is this is an expansion not UT2003->UT2004 or UT4 at this point so sticking with what they got is best bet. There are acouple of problems with the engine but not so many it'll take the work of getting UT3 up to the full UE3.5 (with possible DX10 support say). I would agree with an engine update if it was a new game, being an expansion I think the game should take preference, its not like they need a title to showcase UE3.5 since they already got GoW2.
I certainly dont want a half/half update like UT2004, what a mess that **** was, better to dump whats broken and move on entirely
Basically what Im saying is this is an expansion not UT2003->UT2004 or UT4 at this point so sticking with what they got is best bet. There are acouple of problems with the engine but not so many it'll take the work of getting UT3 up to the full UE3.5 (with possible DX10 support say). I would agree with an engine update if it was a new game, being an expansion I think the game should take preference, its not like they need a title to showcase UE3.5 since they already got GoW2.
I certainly dont want a half/half update like UT2004, what a mess that **** was, better to dump whats broken and move on entirely
Last edited:
Of course ragdolls are at least simulated, but they're not entirely server-controlled. That makes it easier.
If you want to keep to the word, "expansion" would most likely be something like RTNP was to U1. A new CD which makes your game to a new one. That's possible, but I don't know if it is a very good idea... Either way it doesn't say "bonus pack" so it won't be free DLC.
If you want to keep to the word, "expansion" would most likely be something like RTNP was to U1. A new CD which makes your game to a new one. That's possible, but I don't know if it is a very good idea... Either way it doesn't say "bonus pack" so it won't be free DLC.
I dont even know what your point is tbh, youre on about something Im just not getting it. I think we can agree it wont be free DLC, that doesnt mean it wont be pay DLC on console though especially since disk swapping will be an issue.
I just dont want a repeat of UT2003->UT2004, you might think its the best thing since sliced bread but I would much prefer UT4 with an official tool for converting maps over. Thats about all I can say on the topic!
I just dont want a repeat of UT2003->UT2004, you might think its the best thing since sliced bread but I would much prefer UT4 with an official tool for converting maps over. Thats about all I can say on the topic!
What are the chances of them making a PC ONLY UT this time? such as UT4? Otherwize I don't see how this "whatever it is" will be recieved any better than UT3 was.
Indeed, it should be PC only. All UTs were PC only. And all UCs were console only. Why did they change that? "Profit"? They should look at the Server Browser... Maintaining a game for multiple platforms isn't an easy thing to do. And very disappointing... for both sides AFAIK.
Drop Gamespy, Improve Netcode, Add announcer voices (making a female announcer the default announcer and the ONLY announcer was stupid), redo UI/GUI, add new gametypes, remove dorky looking creatures on the startup splash screen of UT3, no more inflated space shoes with leather belts, add a spectator tab, built in IRC chat client. Do what you did for UT2004 basically. Only problem is that this UT is for those lesser consoles, and those lesser consoles ruin the quality and potential of the PC version of UT3, because that's what Epic tends to do for now.
Last edited:
Drop Gamespy - no way, GameSpy provided master servers for all of the Unreal series games to date. If they completely dropped it, they would basically drop UT2004, UT2003, UT99, U1... But making it less relying on that would be a good choice - leave only the MS of GameSpy.
Improve Netcode - 100% agreed, all I see on the demo in the Ping tab is 9999.
Add announcer voices - maybe, but I don't think it's a primary concern.
redo UI/GUI - 100% agreed again, that blood theme and FPS drain in the menu is awful.
remove dorky looking creatures on the startup splash screen of UT3 - Not a primary concern again.
no more inflated space shoes with leather belts - I can't say I liked holographic shields too much. Though they could make it the Unreal II style - different armour costumes that you can charge by killing enemies or taking pickups...
add a spectator tab - agreed again.
built in IRC chat client - yeap, they had it from UT99 as well, why didn't they add it here?
And you forgot some other main points:
Make the installer more friendly - that is, make sure people CAN install the game without the need of using workarounds.
Optimise the performance - make it give you more FPS (if possible), and add not some kind of a simple scroller to adjust the quality, but make it as selectable as in UT2004 - 10 tabs with full settings and descriptions.
Reduce load time - it takes me like 5 minutes to actually load the game, WTF?! UT2004 starts in a few seconds!
And now I don't play UT3 mainly for performance issues. And if I decrease everything to the minimum, it looks a lot worse than UT2004. So I do get why many people don't play it. Quote from Reaper's knowledge:
Improve Netcode - 100% agreed, all I see on the demo in the Ping tab is 9999.
Add announcer voices - maybe, but I don't think it's a primary concern.
redo UI/GUI - 100% agreed again, that blood theme and FPS drain in the menu is awful.
remove dorky looking creatures on the startup splash screen of UT3 - Not a primary concern again.
no more inflated space shoes with leather belts - I can't say I liked holographic shields too much. Though they could make it the Unreal II style - different armour costumes that you can charge by killing enemies or taking pickups...
add a spectator tab - agreed again.
built in IRC chat client - yeap, they had it from UT99 as well, why didn't they add it here?
And you forgot some other main points:
Make the installer more friendly - that is, make sure people CAN install the game without the need of using workarounds.
Optimise the performance - make it give you more FPS (if possible), and add not some kind of a simple scroller to adjust the quality, but make it as selectable as in UT2004 - 10 tabs with full settings and descriptions.
Reduce load time - it takes me like 5 minutes to actually load the game, WTF?! UT2004 starts in a few seconds!
And now I don't play UT3 mainly for performance issues. And if I decrease everything to the minimum, it looks a lot worse than UT2004. So I do get why many people don't play it. Quote from Reaper's knowledge:
Last edited:
UT2kx and UT1 game servers really report to GameSpy, but they report to Epic master-server too. And the games use only Epic MS.
How come? When the GameSpy server went down, it was a real panic at OldUnreal. The server browser showed nothing at all.
I think people want the list to be populated, no matter what it takes. And if GameSpy works, why choose anything else? That would mean that people would have to put extra effort in making it work - and those who don't know how would be out of the play...
