Have brain, will travel. Job offers via PM please
]SideWinder[ said:
Selerox on the other hand, as like much of the other members of this forum, are nearly tossed in to a fit of rage at the idea that the new UT is going to be called UT2007. Why is this? Because it has a horrible reminder of the 200X games before it. The 200X games were like acid to the face of there beloved UT99. I could care less, but selerox and others like him are repulsed by the idea.
I play UT2004 every single day of the week. Ditto UT2003. I also played UT since the original demo. So am I some fanatic of the original UT? Not really. I loved the original UT, but it's time had passed, so I adapted and moved on. However, I think the fact that fact that the new UT is including some of the gameplay elements from the original UT, as well as tweaked UT200X is a good thing overall.
The reason I don't like the idea of the name UT2007 for the new game isn't because it reminds
me of the UT200X serires, but because it reminds the non-UT players of it. For all it's positives (and it has many of them), the UT200x games had a few fairly major flaws that put off a lot of possible players (UT2003 more than UT2004 admittedly). UT2003 really wasn't a great game in terms of features and playability (by that meaning reliability and bugs), it was also way ahead of the tech curve. It was a big disapointment to many inside and outside the UT community, and it's overall public image took a beating.
Epic state they want a fresh start with the new UT, where they can erase the mistakes that Epic have openly admitted they made on UT200X. They also admitted that the sports style thing really didn't go down well with anyone. Why not wipe the slate clean and head for a seperate naming system, as most people expected -and a significant number wanted- by which I mean UT2/3/4 (depending on your definitions on wether you count UT2003 or the UT200X series at all, some people don't). The fact that they chose the UT2007 name, ties the negative public image to the game that it inherited from UT2003. It's not exactly indictative of starting over is it? A return to simple numbered sequels would give a far better idea of the age of the series as well. UT2007 gives no idea of how long the series has been around, and so doesn't make it sound as "established" as maybe it should. A name such as UT4 makes the game appear (rightly) to be a long-standing series with a reputation. UT2007 simply doesn't, especially as many new players
may not know about the UT series, and so simply won't know how long the game's been around. A game name that gives the impression of being an "insitiution" gives a far better image than a relativly "faceless" dated game.
It's one of the reaons the xbox360 got it's name. It would have been a straight fight between PS3 and Xbox2, but Microsoft marketing believed that the added "gravitas" for want of a batter word, of the PlayStation's longer series could impact negativly on sales. Subconciously, people see a 3rd generation console being better than a 2nd gen one (3>2). So Microsoft went the route of naming the new xbox the xbox360, thus including the "3" part to match the PS3, and in effect sidestepping the PS3's appeal of being the most established console series.
That is smart marketing. Epic/Midway haven't grapsed the concept. Let's hope the future publicity budget for the next UT is bigger (and better used) than the one for UT200X.
Damn, I'm in the wrong career here...