Ut2k4
- Thread starter Mavoric
- 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.
If you dont like it you havent played the demo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gamersresource.uk.tt Gaming Resource for UT etc.!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gamersresource.uk.tt Gaming Resource for UT etc.!!
Mavoric said:
I did play TEH DEMO (or just - DEMO)
.AMayhem said:
Well...
As i've said on other occasions, i didn't fancy UT2003 too much. It was the necessary technical update UT-series needed, but with that, they made, IMHO, one mess of a game.
UT2004 fortunately gets around *some* things, but fact is: UT2004=UT2003+'extras'. I also think that UT2003 was not sufficiantly innovative where it matter the most (maybe): the gameplay. I love the theme of things when done right, but hell... i need something new to play too!
BR is CTF with one flag (not saying it is 'bad'), done in first UT via mutators/gametypes. Double Domination and Invasion are maybe the only *real* innovations presented. With UT2004, they're bringing back AS. Great... or not. I like assault mode. UT2004 AS (by what shown on DEMO), is now horribly consoley and ghey. I would expect some serious tournament non-descript objective game, and they did what? They placed all this kind of HUD hippie-coloured n00b help, saying where to go next, where to shoot, where to f***. I guess we just have so sit around and watch, not PLAY. The in-game tutorial on AS was a good idea though.
Then... there's this thing called Onslaught.
Every single human connected to a computer on this planet than enjoys FPS and tried DEMO likes it. Say: it's great.
I'm not destructively saying ONS is 'bad', but after some play, i get a feeling that "there should be something more to do, more to play". If you see it this way, it's DD (only... more) in a big map, with vehicles. Vehicles BTW, that are undoubtedly a better part for the success of DEMO, ONS, and the future complete UT2004.
But... aren't vehicles "outsiders" of what UT is? I guess people like UT2004, not because of what it really stands, but because of a feature now introduced in the franchise, that one could experience in many 'other' games on the market from quite a while...
I guess i just need something new... something 'else'...
That, or some serious sleep
...You see, this is what goes in the head of someone that intensively played UT over anything else for 3-4 years *nearly every EACH day*.
So, yes. I am talking serious. I'm not saying that i won't get UT2004 (even because my PC is getting old VERY quickly), but i'm not saying either that i will, and SURELY i'm not one of those addicteds (humm, or am i?) that will get it as soon it gets out.
I have some questions as to whether ONS will last. Not sure how different maps will affect the gameplay, but I'll wait and see what the stock maps give and what the Unreal community can provide. I've got an interesting idea for an ONS map, but I'll wait to see how things go...
I'm curious as to what's next from Epic, as there's been hints that the ripper will return in the future, and that the Necris will be in a future game as well.
I'm curious as to what's next from Epic, as there's been hints that the ripper will return in the future, and that the Necris will be in a future game as well.
I sincerely hope that Necris and Ripper references get together in a new SP+MP game coming, even if using current U-Engine...
About ONS, best you can change is number of Power Nodes, their location, and surrounding terrain/blocking architecture. Again, if you just make a TDM or even DM map with an average number of vehicles, most ppl will play it anyway. It's not really about ONS gametype, IMHO, it's the sheer fun of riding a Manta, a Scorpion or a Tank (Goliah?)...
BTW, i'm considering getting that Special DVD version of UT2004. Dunno if or when, or even if i 'can' in fact get it... time will tell...
About ONS, best you can change is number of Power Nodes, their location, and surrounding terrain/blocking architecture. Again, if you just make a TDM or even DM map with an average number of vehicles, most ppl will play it anyway. It's not really about ONS gametype, IMHO, it's the sheer fun of riding a Manta, a Scorpion or a Tank (Goliah?)...
BTW, i'm considering getting that Special DVD version of UT2004. Dunno if or when, or even if i 'can' in fact get it... time will tell...
You see, its almost a UT2004 versus Onslaught. (no matter how weird that may sound)
That's my "main issue" with the thing. It just feels non-UT.
It's good for Epic, though. How many ppl will buy UT2004 to play almost exclusively Onslaught, nearly forgeting the UT2004? (rest)
That's my "main issue" with the thing. It just feels non-UT.
It's good for Epic, though. How many ppl will buy UT2004 to play almost exclusively Onslaught, nearly forgeting the UT2004? (rest)
I think Cope's point is that you were moaning about UT2k4 not being innovative in terms of gameplay, then moaning about vehicles being "outside" of ut (and therefore being an innovation to UT) which is a complete contradiction.
And if you want UT2k4 minus vehicles (which is much MUCH better than UT2k3), then just don't play onslaught or AS. And there will of course be 3rd party assult or onslaught maps released which don't have vehicles in them *cough*
And if you want UT2k4 minus vehicles (which is much MUCH better than UT2k3), then just don't play onslaught or AS. And there will of course be 3rd party assult or onslaught maps released which don't have vehicles in them *cough*
Last edited:
I get very low frame rates with the new Assault and Onslaught. I can't really play either one of those. I doubt I'll buy the game for awhile.
i wasnt at all excited by UT 2003. Its not to bad. The graphics are great.
On the other hand, why do they make gas so flamable.
Back to the right hand, I am very ecxited by UT 2004.
On the other hand, why do they make gas so flamable.
Back to the right hand, I am very ecxited by UT 2004.
lol@nahand
Heh, you can really do awesome **** with ONS maps. In Torlan, I found vehicles are mostly relevant as means of transport, with the possible exception of the Goliath. Sure, they all pack a punch, but I found you can relatively easily kill all vehicles with many different guns. They weren't particularly more threatening than a skilled player with a minigun, for instance.
Also, the turrets' usefulness was highly limited.
With the placement of vehicles and turrets, you can completly alter the gameplay. For instance, you can create a map where there are plenty of turrets with a larger field of vision, and make it more difficult to reach walk around the action to a cap-able node.
Thanks to the connectivity in Torlan, capping the nodes opposite to the Core on the other team's side is relatively easy without a major fight if you are lucky. You can reach it quickly and easily without being seen, and often find it unoccupied. Bingo!
Usually the only large-scale fight occurs at the last node when one team is struggeling against the almost certain defeat. A messy case of "red node destroyed" "blue node destroyed" etc.
With larger distances and less connectivity the mapper can chance the focus of the game and force the players into large-scale battles with Goliaths and turrets, for example. Or make access to both Goliath and AVRIL easier.
A map could be designed as giant race track on pillars where you have to use Mantas to reach the nodes quickly, and risk a lethal drop if you are not careful.
And last not least: I want a flying-only map.
Heh, you can really do awesome **** with ONS maps. In Torlan, I found vehicles are mostly relevant as means of transport, with the possible exception of the Goliath. Sure, they all pack a punch, but I found you can relatively easily kill all vehicles with many different guns. They weren't particularly more threatening than a skilled player with a minigun, for instance.
Also, the turrets' usefulness was highly limited.
With the placement of vehicles and turrets, you can completly alter the gameplay. For instance, you can create a map where there are plenty of turrets with a larger field of vision, and make it more difficult to reach walk around the action to a cap-able node.
Thanks to the connectivity in Torlan, capping the nodes opposite to the Core on the other team's side is relatively easy without a major fight if you are lucky. You can reach it quickly and easily without being seen, and often find it unoccupied. Bingo!
Usually the only large-scale fight occurs at the last node when one team is struggeling against the almost certain defeat. A messy case of "red node destroyed" "blue node destroyed" etc.
With larger distances and less connectivity the mapper can chance the focus of the game and force the players into large-scale battles with Goliaths and turrets, for example. Or make access to both Goliath and AVRIL easier.
A map could be designed as giant race track on pillars where you have to use Mantas to reach the nodes quickly, and risk a lethal drop if you are not careful.
And last not least: I want a flying-only map.