UT2004's devastated community and UT2007's future

[Discord]

You claim I exaggerate the effect bots (and perhaps demo players) have on the amount of UT2004 player numbers, but as I have pointed out countless times before, I have in the past actually counted players by hand and my numbers come close to matching www.csports.net numbers. Also consider the fact that ONS often has tons more bots online than actual players. So you might have 4 players and 12 bots. Now if there are 1000 ONS servers that would yield 4000 + 12000 bots - LOL! Which would mean Gamespy would show 16,000 players for ONS when there are actually only 4000 players

That much is true. I've done the handcount myself a couple of times and always came out close to CSports... and that's with filters off.

And, at the time of writing CSports stats shows 1264 UT2004 players while Gamespy shows 6616. There are differences on almost all other games as well, but in most cases GameSpy actually shows fewer players than CSports, and in no other case is it a 5:1 ratio in either direction.

You cannot blame tactical military shooters for Unreal franchise's decline.

Not solely, no. But I think it would be a mistake not to recognize that the futuristic shooter is way out of vogue right now. Doom3 anyone? Of course, it doesn't help that Doom3 is poop.

Neither did it help that UT2003 wasn't much to write home about.

All the sequels were either cheesy or just a ripoff of... games like Battlefield 1942...

A well done sci-fi game has not been made recently to compete with the polish of some of these military shooters. I'm willing to bet Enemy Territory: Quake Wars or some upcoming sci-fi game will prove you wrong.

All indications thus far seem to demonstrate that ET:Quake Wars (made by those guys from Wolfenstein: ET... a, yep you guessed it, WW2 tactical shooter) is going to be BF2 with bAdAzZ sPaCeDuDeS... whoa, man!

Just further evidence, really, that the old- school DM- based raygun shooters (read: iD and Epic) are totally played out... and after more than a decade, that's just the way the cookie crumbles.


So it's hard times for UT. Big schmeal. What exactly is Naliking's point anyway, besides to stick out his tongue? Threadstarter's perspective I can understand... I don't really agree with it, since I found CS:Source's massive population to be more of a nuissance than anything, but I understand it. At any rate, and as stated, counting bots is wrong, mmmmkay?

Meantime, Epic will need/ want to keep making new versions of their engine, which means more UT games on the way, at least for now, and for as long as it's profitable. Maybe one of these days it'll hit the bigtime again. Maybe not. As long as I can get a game, I still don't much care.

 

[BITE_ME]

raveno. Just go buy Counter Strike. It has the most players....well thats what Game Spy says. Then go to their forums after playing a couple of games. Then post about the cheaters with their hacks.

 

[hal]

I don't think you can combine the UT2004/UT2003 community with the UT99 community to claim the Unreal Community as a whole manages to make the top 10. Other games are holding their own as separate entities from their predecessors. Clearly the UT99 community is a different beast which rejects most things that have do with what many claim are flawed sequels .

Why on earth not? Unreal/UT and their sequels are all a part of the same series. Many of the players own/play/have played all of them. The only other community to which I made that comparison was Quake - as it is the most similar in gameplay to Unreal/UT. Add up all of their online numbers and tell me if I'm wrong.

You cannot blame tactical military shooters for Unreal franchise's decline. UT2003 is what almost killed the franchise within a blink of an eye. UT2003 was one of the most if not most downloaded demo in game history at that time and within 2 months the Unreal franchise came crashing down. A well done sci-fi game has not been made recently to compete with the polish of some of these military shooters. I'm willing to bet Enemy Territory: Quake Wars or some upcoming sci-fi game will prove you wrong.

Quake Wars is a different beast, regardless of how well it does. It's nothing like the gameplay that the rest of the Quake series offers, let alone the Unreal series. It's the old-school-action-fps to which I am refering.

Bots were not counted in the original UT2003 demo. Use some logic man. You don't even have to have been a server admin to figure this out. Why would Epic need to start counting bots when UT99 was a success and had tons of players. They even stated that they thought that UT2003 would do HUGE numbers online. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for them to start counting bots as early as the UT2003 demo. They thought UT2003 would be ****ing HUGE. They thought it would be the Counter-Strike Killer. They had no clue

Now imagine the shock when player numbers for the demo and retail version of UT2003 tanked and people started fleeing from the game as if they were doused with gasoline and set on fire.

Even if you believe they enabled bots before the patch, they would have done it in response to people's reaction to the demo, and if we make an even bigger leap, one could argue perhaps they were planning this deception from the reaction people had to the UT2003 leaked BETA.

All of that is wild speculation. Conspiracy theory at best.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Bots were not counted in the original UT2003 demo. Use some logic man. You don't even have to have been a server admin to figure this out. Why would Epic need to start counting bots when UT99 was a success and had tons of players. They even stated that they thought that UT2003 would do HUGE numbers online. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for them to start counting bots as early as the UT2003 demo. They thought UT2003 would be ****ing HUGE. They thought it would be the Counter-Strike Killer. They had no clue

You truly prove you are an idiot. UT2003 always counted bots. It doesn't take a garbage man to tell you that.

The rest of you post was worthlessly full of "conspiracy theory" and about ZERO facts, like evrything else you post. I don't know anyone that thought UT2003 would beat CS. But thanks for the idea

 

[naliking]

Not solely, no. But I think it would be a mistake not to recognize that the futuristic shooter is way out of vogue right now. Doom3 anyone? Of course, it doesn't help that Doom3 is poop.

I can agree with that. And Doom 3 was definitely messed up. However any game done right and marketed right and done by a recognized developer should attract players. Sci-Fi can appeal to the world war 2 crowd if done right. There are probably a lot of world war 2 games that are not popular online at all because they were not done properly.

All indications thus far seem to demonstrate that ET:Quake Wars (made by those guys from Wolfenstein: ET... a, yep you guessed it, WW2 tactical shooter) is going to be BF2 with bAdAzZ sPaCeDuDeS... whoa, man!

True, but it is still a science fiction based game. In fact it really does seem like a BF2 clone in terms of appearance but it does look interesting.

What exactly is Naliking's point anyway, besides to stick out his tongue?

Not really . You don't see me starting multiple threads about UT2003-4's demise. Usually the only time I comment on it is when some fanboy uses Gamespy stats to trash other games or decides to use them to proclaim how great UT2004 is based on player numbers or claims UT2004 to be the superior game.

 

[naliking]

You truly prove you are an idiot. UT2003 always counted bots. It doesn't take a garbage man to tell you that.

The rest of you post was worthlessly full of "conspiracy theory" and about ZERO facts, like evrything else you post. I don't know anyone that thought UT2003 would beat CS. But thanks for the idea

You crack me up. Find the original UT2003 demo and prove that it sent bots as players to Gamespy's stats. Remember, what is displayed in the server browser is not necessarily what is sent out with regard to queries that request the data. Then find a theory as to why several UT2003 server admins started complaining about it when they perceived that bots were suddenly being counted in queries.

Either way, there can only be one conclusion as to why Epic would start counting bots in UT2003 when they did not count bots in UT99. I know logic is not your strong point as you have demonstrated countless times before, but even a buffoon as yourself must clearly see that their intent was to deceive the public as to how many people were playing the game because they feared UT2003 was going to bomb and bomb hard . That's not a conspiracy theory that is common sense.

 

[hal]

Since you brought up logic, might I remind you that because you cannot think of another reason that it is so... does not make it so.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Yep. Common sense is to read what other people whine about and then form your opinion around it. WTG naliking. There is any one of a thousand reasons bots were reported (and yes, what shows up in the server browser is EXACTLY what Gamespy sees. It is ALL READ DIRECTLY FROM THE MASTER SERVER. Gamespy can't get any information about UT servers that is NOT located in the Master Server file, which resides on Epic's server).

 

[MuLuNGuS]

hmm..

forget about stats, go...play teh game and have fun.


u dont buy a CD from band that was purchased from many ppls before.

sure, a online game is nothing without online players, but there are still enough out there....and i think that will be the case in the future too.

 

[Taleweaver]

forget about stats, go...play teh game and have fun.


u dont buy a CD from band that was purchased from many ppls before.

I completely agree with the first part, but for some reason, I get the idea that lots of ppl indeed buy something because lots of other ones do it, regardless of the quality/use of the said object.

One detail about the numbers of online players has always made me wonder: why is it important? Barely anyone plays BR; in fact, in the server browser, you can always count the amount of populated servers on one hand. Yet still, I can find a decent BR game with real humans 9 out of 10 times (AND with good ping). Why do the pubs need to be populated with many thousands of players at the same time? Last time I checked, I wasn't able to join more than one server at the same time...

 

[naliking]

Since you brought up logic, might I remind you that because you cannot think of another reason that it is so... does not make it so.

I can't argue with that, but my assumption is the most plausible scenario if you believe people behave according to reason. It is unlikely Epic's president came into the office one day and said. "Hey guys I think we need to start counting bots as players just for the hell of it and if anybody asks why we are doing this, just delete their posts".

If they enabled bots counting as players by mistake, they would have addressed the issue and removed it and would have answered questions about it. If it was a mistake they were definitely aware of it long before UT2004 came out, which means once again, that bot counting as players was left in their for nefarious purposes.

So the most plausible scenario is the one which contains the willful intent to deceive as to how many people actually play the game.

 

[naliking]

Yep. Common sense is to read what other people whine about and then form your opinion around it. WTG naliking. There is any one of a thousand reasons bots were reported (and yes, what shows up in the server browser is EXACTLY what Gamespy sees. It is ALL READ DIRECTLY FROM THE MASTER SERVER. Gamespy can't get any information about UT servers that is NOT located in the Master Server file, which resides on Epic's server).

Player data is most likely generated from the game itself and naturally that data would propogate to the Master Server. If UT2004 generates false information, Gamespy will receive that information and so will any other tool that queries individual servers directly. Gamespy KNOWS that the data is falsefied as they have posted at the atari forums when people accused them of posting incorrect stats, and that was a long time ago. Csports went ahead and tried to stop games using bots to create false numbers and Gamespy chose not to for obvious reasons . Now you have a situation where games that have an excessive amount of bots compared to real players, and counts those bots as players will display a grossly inaccurate count on stats sites that don't filter them.

That's when you end up with a case like UT2004 where Gamespy reports 8000 players when in fact there are only really a thousand human players playing the game

 

[LooseCannon]

WARNING: sweeping generalisation:

Most people are stupid. Forming their own opinions is too hard. They follow the popular masses. They buy the No.1 pop music CD, because it's No.1.

The retail marketeers know this and use it over and over. The thread starter is an example. When something drops from No.1, most people think it's no longer as good.

If one wishes to form one's own opinions, maintain ones own values and enjoy what one trully enjoys oneself, then decide if you like the people in the smaller UTx.. community or the masses in the 'popular' games.

OMG! There are over 100,000 people playing Counter Strike at this moment. That's a lot of idiots, based on my initial, sweeping generalisaion.

I know that everybody is somebodies idiot (haxed quote - idiot for wierdo - author unknown to me), but I like to idiots around the UTx.. community.

WARNING: my opinions, agreeing with other posters above:

1. There are too many mods verses hours in the day. After 6mths online, I'm still learning the basic game types and they're plenty fun for me.

2. Onslaught does indeed provide a place for newer players to get involved and help the team.

 

[Wowbagger]

Since Sci-Fi shooters arent the most popular genre Epic needs to make UT2007 shine and shine brightly.
It wont be enough with pretty gfx anymore.
When reading the interviews with Epic it sounds like they know this and build the game accordingly.
Then again we heard all this before UT2003 came out and to some extent UT2004.

UT2007 needs to be solid in every aspect to be REALLY successful.

Lets face it we gamers are many more now (not just a few nerds) and were spoiled with all the good MP games coming out.
We (sadly) dont want to do the work anymore, it all has to be served by the Devs.
Its not 1999, when the community helped making the game with all sorts of mods etc, and if the Devs doesnt realise that theyll fail.
Its sad but true.

Ive said this before, in UT they invented but also borrowed, stole alot of good stuff from other games and made a solid game that crushed the competition.
They need to do that again (especially with QW ET comming out)

 

[Wowbagger]

WARNING: sweeping generalisation:

Most people are stupid. Forming their own opinions is too hard. They follow the popular masses. They buy the No.1 pop music CD, because it's No.1.

The retail marketeers know this and use it over and over. The thread starter is an example. When something drops from No.1, most people think it's no longer as good.

If one wishes to form one's own opinions, maintain ones own values and enjoy what one trully enjoys oneself, then decide if you like the people in the smaller UTx.. community or the masses in the 'popular' games.

OMG! There are over 100,000 people playing Counter Strike at this moment. That's a lot of idiots, based on my initial, sweeping generalisaion.

I know that everybody is somebodies idiot (haxed quote - idiot for wierdo - author unknown to me), but I like to idiots around the UTx.. community.

WARNING: my opinions, agreeing with other posters above:

1. There are too many mods verses hours in the day. After 6mths online, I'm still learning the basic game types and they're plenty fun for me.

2. Onslaught does indeed provide a place for newer players to get involved and help the team.

True, its wrong to declare a game dead just because its not top 5 but when its impossible to find a good (no 150 speed low grav or maps made seemingly by 6 year olds or 24/7 Faceclassic ) server its just no fun anymore.

Sure one could isolate oneself in the competetive community playing clans but truth is that community is getting very thin too.

I bought HL2 and have played some CS:S and altho its not my prefered gametyp it was VERY refreshing to select servers by what map i wanted to play on a FULL server, instead of like in UT2004, joining one of the few populated, closest to a default setting/retail map, server running.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Player data is most likely generated from the game itself and naturally that data would propogate to the Master Server. If UT2004 generates false information, Gamespy will receive that information and so will any other tool that queries individual servers directly.

They don't query servers. That's what the Master Server list is for That's why if the Master Sever is down, Gamespy stops working.

Gamespy KNOWS that the data is falsefied as they have posted at the atari forums when people accused them of posting incorrect stats, and that was a long time ago. Csports went ahead and tried to stop games using bots to create false numbers and Gamespy chose not to for obvious reasons . Now you have a situation where games that have an excessive amount of bots compared to real players, and counts those bots as players will display a grossly inaccurate count on stats sites that don't filter them.

I absolutely don't, as well as don't know anybody, that ever trusts or has trusted CSports numbers. Go ahead if you like, but even by hand counting they are quite a ways off. What you aren't gettiong here is that there isn't an "elite" group of people that go around to every empty server in the server list and join them just to make the bots show up. It is completely implausible that there are 7000 bots and 1000 players. It is almost statistically impossible.

That's when you end up with a case like UT2004 where Gamespy reports 8000 players when in fact there are only really a thousand human players playing the game

See above. Statistically improbably, and more likely impossible.

Oh but you read it on TEH INTARNETS! IT MUST BE TURE!!!!!!!!!!! Go back to INA where your "opinion" came from.

 

[klasnic]

Perhaps it's just that the bot AI is so good they appear human

 

[naliking]

They don't query servers. That's what the Master Server list is for That's why if the Master Sever is down, Gamespy stops working

My understanding is that you connect to the Master Server list to get a list of servers. Once you have those server IPs, you can make your query directly to those servers to get the data that you want. This means if you only want to monitor a select group of servers and you know their IP, you don't have to go through the Master Server in order to create a statistic summary regarding number of players and whatever other data the game gives out.

I absolutely don't, as well as don't know anybody, that ever trusts or has trusted CSports numbers. Go ahead if you like, but even by hand counting they are quite a ways off. What you aren't gettiong here is that there isn't an "elite" group of people that go around to every empty server in the server list and join them just to make the bots show up. It is completely implausible that there are 7000 bots and 1000 players. It is almost statistically impossible

Discord a UT2004 admirer has already backed up my claim that hand counting UT2004 players more often than not matches up with www.csports.net data. The difference between me an you is that I along with friends have very often counted UT2004 players by hand. Wait t'il 2AM USA time and then count the players yourself. I already demonstrated to you that it is easily plausible for UT2004 to have 7000 bots and only 1000 players

Oh but you read it on TEH INTARNETS! IT MUST BE TURE!!!!!!!!!!! Go back to INA where your "opinion" came from.

Actually my opinion comes from real world observation and actual participation in validating the data myself. Your opinion and remarks are just the typical knee jerk reaction of the typical fanboy.

Perhaps Epic is working on creating a bunch of dummy fictional servers for UT2007 which nobody can connect to in order to play, and those servers will always appear to be full. However they will be full of A.I bots with PINGS, pretending to be real players and those servers will then broadcast false data in order to inflate UT2007's player count. Then no filter will be able to detect a bot from a human player .

 

[Taleweaver]

I can't argue with that, but my assumption is the most plausible scenario if you believe people behave according to reason. It is unlikely Epic's president came into the office one day and said. "Hey guys I think we need to start counting bots as players just for the hell of it and if anybody asks why we are doing this, just delete their posts".

I agree that made-up theory isn't likely, but how about this one (also fictional):

Epic's president came into the office one day and said. "Hey guys, I just wanted to play a little 1 on 1 with some guy on the internet, so I queried the master list and selected a server that had only 1 (human) player in it. As soon as I joined such a server, I realised this wasn't going to be a 1 on 1 match: there were 10 bots around, which weren't clearly shown when I joined. Why don't we change the player numbers of the servers so it include bots to the player total, so people who see the server on the master list can form an idea of how crowded the server is?" The other Epic employees thought about this, took into account that you can still see whether a server has human players in it by checking the playernames (bots aren't listed here), and decided the chief had a good point.
What they forgot was that Gamespy, a third party company and thus not invited to this meeting, used the very same player numbers to calculate the total amount of active players. As a result, the "number of players" suddenly boosted seriously on gamespy. Unfortunately, the anti-community part of UT (the guys/girls that bought the game just to complain about it) picked up this flaw before Gamespy did, and immediately drew the conclusion it HAD to have some marketing purpose. Threads with complaints started raining down and buried every chance Epic had to say that the feature was to show people in advance whether they were going to enter a normal fight or a spamfest.

How's that for a plausible scenario? I know I've been in that situation; in UT99, it's not that easy to know in advance how many players are ON the server (bots and humans combined). You have to check the number, check the server settings for bots and then make the calculation. Easy, but not very intuitive or fast.

 

[Steyr]

I'd also blame Epic for strangling the UT200x series at birth by making a game that quite frankly wasn't UT.

That was digital extremes. DE made the sucka** UT2003 and then Epic, seeing the horror, tried their best to fix it so it didn't ruin the Unreal Tournament name. Needless to say, Epic is doing this next one themselves.

Repeat after me: Epic is teh roxxor. Digital Extremes is teh suk.