UTComp features in 2k7

[UnrealGrrl]

the prob is not utcomp, it was a good idea and its a good mutator. the problem is with players thinking that if one model is skinnier than another that it gives an unfair advantage. no it doesnt, you have the choice to use that model too. saying all players should be gorge is the most ridiculous thing ever, if you want to be stealthier, play matrix, if you dont care, play whatever model you want, everyone has a choice, and the game is meant to look AND play good.

this of course does NOT apply to competitive only and ladder situations where the playing field should be "level" the problem is saying that the game out of the box should automatically fit with competitive ladder rules. as long as the tools are part of the game to force models and as long as the models are more visible this time around, it shouldnt be a problem... but thats prob wishful thinking since whining seems more popular than playing these days.

as far as the thought of utcomp actually being in ut2007, well from what weve heard so far the models are plenty visible. if hitsounds were implemented in a better way thatd be ok with me, and as long as warmup is OFF by default, who cares? player stats? sure why not, more is always better...

ps. i dont mind playing on utcomp servers and 1/2 the time i do, i turn off bright skins and whatever else im not used to, and i tolerate the useless warmup time in pub games... ppl should really play more and whine less, theres some good servers and players enjoying themselves out there.

 

[Raffi_B]

The fact that people are blaming UTComp for UT2004's demise is just absolutely hilarious.

Let's do some actual research, shall we? That way we can have a thread that isn't just biased opinions.

Here are the facts:

Over the past several months (about 12 or so) I have been recording the online numbers for UT2004 from both the gamespy stats page and Csports.net stats page. One year ago, there were an average of 4000 players at any given time playing, and 5000 servers. Now, there are an average of 7000 players and 3000 servers. Yeah, UT2004 is dying alright. This exact same thing happened with UT1. When it came out everyone thought it sucked then after a few years it grew on everyone and ended up being awesome.

The competitive community uses UTComp, and that's not going to change any time soon. If you think getting rid of the competitive community is a good idea, well then you are going to be playing along side maybe 10 other people. This game has a very large ratio of competitive players to casual players. To be frank, it truly doesn't matter if brizz or edhe "refuse to play online" because of UTComp. GGL, TWL, ESWC, and WCG, along with many other competitions, use UTComp. You don't stand a chance at convincing all of those corporations and players otherwise.

UTComp is designed to eliminate variables. These variables include people who use Matrix because they hate being seen and/or shot at, not knowing if your minigun/flak primary/link secondary is actually hitting your opponent, being on the opposite side of the country as your opponent, and many others. Using Matrix on a dark map is pretty much like permament invisibility with brighskins off. Using Tamika on Compressed or Idoma is the same way. Why should one person have an unfair advantage?

Set up a 8-player stock TDM server. Nobody will join. Add UTComp. People will join.

I hope in UT2007 Epic at least includes server-side options for Brighskins and hitsounds both of which can be disabled/altered client-side. If the game is more playable competitively out of the box, the game will be picked up more quickly by CPL and other competitions. If you want to tell me that being picked up by a major gaming competition means nothing, you would be making a large fool of yourself. It not only attracts new players to the game, but it motivates existing players to play more in the hopes that they would one day be able to compete.

The problem with many players in this community is that they are afraid to try new things. They stick with gametypes they are familiar with and leave it at that. That is one of the reasons that I'm starting to dislike TAM. The mod itself is fine, but I see it more of an "on-the-side" gametype than a complete one. I was expecting ONS and AS players and the like to take up TAM then use that as a segway to get into TDM and CTF and other gametypes that require more raw frag skill, but this didn't occur. Not to say TAM is killing the community, but many TDM, ONS, AS, CTF, etc. teams are just playing TAM full-time now.

Please at least think before posting useless bias without any factual backing.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Over the past several months (about 12 or so) I have been recording the online numbers for UT2004 from both the gamespy stats page and Csports.net stats page. One year ago, there were an average of 4000 players at any given time playing, and 5000 servers. Now, there are an average of 7000 players and 3000 servers. Yeah, UT2004 is dying alright. This exact same thing happened with UT1. When it came out everyone thought it sucked then after a few years it grew on everyone and ended up being awesome.

How is that factual? All it proves is that there are more people playing Onslaught yet again. Look at the per gametype statistics and you will find that they are more than just a little lower than they were even 6 months ago. When 2k4 came out, there were several thousand people playing CTF (3000 iirc). At the time of this writing, even according to GameSpy stats there is only roughly 1000. It was the same last night during the entire evening. What this tells me is that Onslaught is the inly gametype that actively fluxuates in player numbers. Other than DM, every other gametype has systematically gone down in player numbers over the past 6 months, and the only thing I can attribute that to (because it's the only thing that has really changed over that time) is how many servers are using UTcomp + newnet in CTF. I guess we'll get to see even more over the next few months. Of course not everyone leaves because of UTcomp (and I do believe that UTcomp is normally only a FACTOR to them leaving), but realistically, what have you noticed has changed about the game in that time? Even 2k3 didn't experience anything like this.

The competitive community uses UTComp, and that's not going to change any time soon. If you think getting rid of the competitive community is a good idea, well then you are going to be playing along side maybe 10 other people. This game has a very large ratio of competitive players to casual players. To be frank, it truly doesn't matter if brizz or edhe "refuse to play online" because of UTComp. GGL, TWL, ESWC, and WCG, along with many other competitions, use UTComp. You don't stand a chance at convincing all of those corporations and players otherwise.

I was never asking that the competetive commuity stop using it. I was saying that the only way to run a server is with UTcomp installed on it, and for alot of people ASIDE FROM EDHE AND MYSELF that is NOT a good thing. UTcomp is not the same game as UT2004 out of the box is, there is little use in denying that. I haven't seen more than a handful or so of new players start UT2004 (other than ONS/VCTF) over the last six months that still play it today. In my opinion, that is the fault of UTcomp, and your online experience being completely different than offline (or even, the experienc in ONS being amost exactly the opposite of CTF). It's hard to deny that that could possibly and plausibly be true.

UTComp is designed to eliminate variables. These variables include people who use Matrix because they hate being seen and/or shot at, not knowing if your minigun/flak primary/link secondary is actually hitting your opponent, being on the opposite side of the country as your opponent, and many others. Using Matrix on a dark map is pretty much like permament invisibility with brighskins off. Using Tamika on Compressed or Idoma is the same way. Why should one person have an unfair advantage?

You use this argument every time a UTcomp discussion comes up while completely ignoring that some variable is what makes strategizing in a game enjoyable. Other have used the analogy before, UTcomp's purpose is to simplify the game to the equivalent of "clicking on the 'Start' button". It's not that far from the truth.

Set up a 8-player stock TDM server. Nobody will join. Add UTComp. People will join.

That would be true if every UTcomp server online at the moment was beig played on, but they ae not. UTcomp doesn't get your server played on, instead people playing on your server at all hours of the day will.

There are alot of other factors, too. Packet loss, centralized ping (yes, even WITH newnet enabled), and overall network connection are some main ones. Obviously people are going to play more on a gigabit connection than a megabit connection.

Aside from that, if you don't have a server with an installed playerbase, don't count on anyone playing on it for more than a couple hours a day.

I hope in UT2007 Epic at least includes server-side options for Brighskins and hitsounds both of which can be disabled/altered client-side.

I hope that they don't. At least, not the method by which UTcomp has chosen to do so. I wouldn't mind seeing Epic's style of brightskins as a server-side only option (no glowsticks). As far as hitsounds go, I've never had that much trouble hearing the stock hit sounds, as you have apparently. If you have to have hitsounds so that you know you hit someone from 1000uus away, more power to you. I think that WASN'T included for balance, personally.

If the game is more playable competitively out of the box, the game will be picked up more quickly by CPL and other competitions. If you want to tell me that being picked up by a major gaming competition means nothing, you would be making a large fool of yourself. It not only attracts new players to the game, but it motivates existing players to play more in the hopes that they would one day be able to compete.

They tried that with the "Pro Edition" of UT2003. It didn't seem to help their situation anymore than not having that edition did.

I was expecting ONS and AS players and the like to take up TAM then use that as a segway to get into TDM and CTF and other gametypes that require more raw frag skill, but this didn't occur. Not to say TAM is killing the community, but many TDM, ONS, AS, CTF, etc. teams are just playing TAM full-time now.

If we're removing variables... What does TAM really do than create a next to no variable TDM experience? Why wouldn't those players switch over?

 

[Discord]

Set up a 8-player stock TDM server. Nobody will join. Add UTComp. People will join.

Well, the deal with that is that typically casual pub- type players prefer a larger server while competitive folks want a smaller one. And that's the way it breaks down, at least in the US... playercount >= 14, it's a non- UTComp pub. Playercount <= 12, it's a UTComp competitive pub.

An alternate exercise would be to set up a 24- player CTF server with UTComp. Nobody will join that one except maybe people who don't know what UTComp is. Take UTComp off and you'll probably get some takers.

Or, of course, you could try an ONS server.


Re: numbers. I'm not so sure about that average of 7,000 players online. I've hand- counted the serverbrowser myself on several occasions as a spotcheck, and I can tell you that GameSpy stats for UT04 are bunk.

I also have never believed that business about major tournaments drawing more players. They might draw competitive players on a certain level... but CPL's choice of Painkiller has clearly not done squat for that game. And if it has, it certainly hasn't done as much good as Painkiller actually being a good, fun- to- play online shooter with a sizeable marketing budget would have done.

Now, as to UT04 having a higher composition of competitive players a year in... well, that's probably true. UT04 is certainly not the flavor of the month anymore, and by now the ratio of competitors and diehard casuals to curious newbies is probably a good deal higher.

I was expecting ONS and AS players and the like to take up TAM then use that as a segway to get into TDM and CTF and other gametypes that require more raw frag skill, but this didn't occur. Not to say TAM is killing the community, but many TDM, ONS, AS, CTF, etc. teams are just playing TAM full-time now.

I think you shouldn't give up on that right away... it takes time. I've seen individual players go from ONS to VCTF to TDM; but not everybody changes gears so quickly. A lot of people from the ONS crowd haven't been playing UT for 5 years or more like you and I have, and it does take some time for casual players to be able to hop gametypes comfortably. Let the TAM guys go another 6 months and then migrate to UT07 before you declare that one a failure...

 

[Raffi_B]

How is that factual? All it proves is that there are more people playing Onslaught yet again. Look at the per gametype statistics and you will find that they are more than just a little lower than they were even 6 months ago. When 2k4 came out, there were several thousand people playing CTF (3000 iirc). At the time of this writing, even according to GameSpy stats there is only roughly 1000. It was the same last night during the entire evening. What this tells me is that Onslaught is the inly gametype that actively fluxuates in player numbers. Other than DM, every other gametype has systematically gone down in player numbers over the past 6 months, and the only thing I can attribute that to (because it's the only thing that has really changed over that time) is how many servers are using UTcomp + newnet in CTF. I guess we'll get to see even more over the next few months. Of course not everyone leaves because of UTcomp (and I do believe that UTcomp is normally only a FACTOR to them leaving), but realistically, what have you noticed has changed about the game in that time? Even 2k3 didn't experience anything like this.

Actually, a lot of the slack has been picked up by CTF, DM, and TDM. AS and ONS mostly stayed the same.

I was never asking that the competetive commuity stop using it. I was saying that the only way to run a server is with UTcomp installed on it, and for alot of people ASIDE FROM EDHE AND MYSELF that is NOT a good thing. UTcomp is not the same game as UT2004 out of the box is, there is little use in denying that. I haven't seen more than a handful or so of new players start UT2004 (other than ONS/VCTF) over the last six months that still play it today. In my opinion, that is the fault of UTcomp, and your online experience being completely different than offline (or even, the experienc in ONS being amost exactly the opposite of CTF). It's hard to deny that that could possibly and plausibly be true.

Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there.

You use this argument every time a UTcomp discussion comes up while completely ignoring that some variable is what makes strategizing in a game enjoyable. Other have used the analogy before, UTcomp's purpose is to simplify the game to the equivalent of "clicking on the 'Start' button". It's not that far from the truth.

Alright, I guess I'm going to go form my own non-UTComp TDM team. The team's "strategy" will be to all use the matrix model and to only pick relatively dark maps. That way we can bypass the fact that our frag skills might suck.

That would be true if every UTcomp server online at the moment was beig played on, but they ae not. UTcomp doesn't get your server played on, instead people playing on your server at all hours of the day will.

There are alot of other factors, too. Packet loss, centralized ping (yes, even WITH newnet enabled), and overall network connection are some main ones. Obviously people are going to play more on a gigabit connection than a megabit connection.

Aside from that, if you don't have a server with an installed playerbase, don't count on anyone playing on it for more than a couple hours a day.

A UTComp server has a much higher chance of being populated than a non-UTComp server because of the fact that many more players enjoy playing with UTComp enabled than disabled. That's all I meant by that.

I hope that they don't. At least, not the method by which UTcomp has chosen to do so. I wouldn't mind seeing Epic's style of brightskins as a server-side only option (no glowsticks). As far as hitsounds go, I've never had that much trouble hearing the stock hit sounds, as you have apparently. If you have to have hitsounds so that you know you hit someone from 1000uus away, more power to you. I think that WASN'T included for balance, personally.

What stock hitsounds? Run a test for me. Load up the game, and go play an instant action match with a bot. Shoot the minigun at him. Try and count how many times you're hitting him. Doesn't work, does it?

They tried that with the "Pro Edition" of UT2003. It didn't seem to help their situation anymore than not having that edition did.

Wait a second, what Pro Edition? The one that Mark Rein alluded to vaguely in an interview that was never actually released? That pro edition? Yes, I guess it's perfectly OK to make assumptions on software that was never released or played.

If we're removing variables... What does TAM really do than create a next to no variable TDM experience? Why wouldn't those players switch over?

In terms of the things that UTComp corrects, TAM and TDM have the same variables. TAM doesn't really eliminate any "variables" per say, it only elminates certain aspects of the game (weapon/pickup control, timing, etc.) If you're going to compare the skill of seeing a dark skin in a corner to powerup timing, you're comparing apples to oranges. They are two different things. One can be mastered and used as strategy. The other involves turning your monitor gamma up... yeah, real skill there.

Let me put it this way... one time when we were playing TAM at FragBU I had used the invis combo and you said that was lame. Now, please explain to us how identifying a hard-to-see person can vary from a person using the invis combo and a person using a dark skin hiding in a corner. The two are pretty much identical, yet to you one is lame and the other is a skill that must me mastered.

 

[Nosnos]

You use this argument every time a UTcomp discussion comes up while completely ignoring that some variable is what makes strategizing in a game enjoyable. Other have used the analogy before, UTcomp's purpose is to simplify the game to the equivalent of "clicking on the 'Start' button". It's not that far from the truth.

That is just it... I can only really speak for myself but I do belive that many UTComp lovers dont think that picking a dark skin or standing in shadows should have any role in UT. And sure UTComp makes the spotting of an opponent easier which in turn makes it possible to hit an opponent further off. But at the same time it makes it that much harder to play sneaky and to avoid being hit from far away. It is just as possible to play sneaky and strategic on a UTComp server, you just have to do something more interesting than stand in a dark corner with the LG, something that actually tricks your opponents...

 

[1337]

That's the real reason for UTcomp, isn't it ?
It's got nothing to do with the lack of hit-feedback or the dark skins.

// ---
And as for UTcomp itself ... that is a bad mutator by default, because it does several things that have no real reason for being put into a single mutator.
Mutators should be small & beautiful, not large partial convertions.

All of those features are default in a single mutator, because there was a desire for all of those features by a centralized group of players. Those features are put in there to be used, and if admins or players really didn't like the features they have the ability to disable them. Turning newnet client-side isn't enough, because it effects gameplay, but that is the reason why there is vote feature in utcomp allowing the players to vote off newnet serverside.

In fact ... I wonder why they didn't make it a total conversion ?
Or where they afraid no one could be forced to use it (TC's are invisible, mutators can be shoved down your throat after joining the server)

So far Utcomp seems to do :
- skins & hitsounds for the blind and deaf
- extra statistics
- warm-up round
- alternate weapon-balance
- coloured text
- 'enhanced' net-code

I can see UT2k7 adapting warm-up rounds (pretty useful for pre-match, but nothing a decent admin can manage) and statistics (always fun to look at once in a while).

No, it's so there are less unfair advantages and there are also added features that some players might fancy to play with for various reasons requiring an intuitiveness and understanding beyond your limited conscience. It has nothing to do with players not wanting to practice. Unless by practice you mean have to **** around with your .ini just to play competitively; what a joke you are. UT99 competitive scene was all about .ini settings and all of that bull****, players really shouldn't be forced to fool with.

If I'm not mistaken, all of the gameplay-effecting settings in UTComp admins are able to disable serverside, and features that aren't gameplay affecting and gameplay affecting can be disabled or configured clientside.

UTComp brightskins makes up for team color map advantages and ****ty skins, plus all of the .ini settings available that would give someone an unfair advantage over another.

The real 'need' for this mutator comes from the fact that all the lesser clans/players want to be able to pull the same stunts as the top-tier, but they don't want to spend time to practice ...

I loled at that one. Everything you have posted so far has been pro dumbing down the game so their is less skill involved.

Top tier people play on LAN. They don't allow players to use lamer .ini settings on LAN, for a good reason too. They can only change their mouse sens and weapon binds. Brightskins allows players to play on the same level, without it mattering what model they use. It doesn't make it easier for a lesser skilled opponent to play with a higher skilled opponent, it just makes for less bs and unfair advantages in competitive play.

I don't see how you correlate .ini settings, team color advantage, server advantage to skill or requiring practice.

If admins didn't want newnet they could disable it serverside, and if the players didn't want it they could vote it off.

You whiners aren't an important part of the public server community if you don't do anything but whine. How about instead of whining, go finance and populate a good server without utcomp.

UTComp servers are a blessing for competitive players and players that just want to have fun and be able to vote in server settings and enjoy the included gametypes utcomp has to offer, and I don't care how many of you unreasoning whiners don't like it.

If you would like to promote non-demo pub play without utcomp, then you should find ways to do so. Being a part of a clan or a centralized community really encourages players to play multiplayer more often. Perhaps you can setup a ladder without UTC and promote clan competition without UTC?

UTComp was made by people that were more than whiners. They saw a need for change and they took action. You people are just whining. If you really don't like utcomp, but have a strong desire to play multiplayer, why don't you setup promote and mantain a server w/o a utcomp. It's that simple. If your playerbase is so large and deserving of being catered to, you should serve yourselves instead of flapping your hands at the real playerbase thinking they must abide to your every desire. Get a freaking clue.

It should be the server admins decision whether brightskins are used, and what kind (I don't think glowsticks are appropriate).

It already is.

 

[JaFO]

...
Alright, I guess I'm going to go form my own non-UTComp TDM team. The team's "strategy" will be to all use the matrix model and to only pick relatively dark maps. That way we can bypass the fact that our frag skills might suck.
...

until you meet a team that has practiced playing against those 'invisible' skins or one that just has better tactics.
I'd say that the only reason I couldn't hit 'Matrix' in a "dark" map is not because I don't see the model, but because I'm not as fast at aiming as I am at acquiring my target. Heck ... add in a little map-knowledge (favourite hiding spots), good soundcard and human nature and you don't even need to *see* players.

...
What stock hitsounds? Run a test for me. Load up the game, and go play an instant action match with a bot. Shoot the minigun at him. Try and count how many times you're hitting him. Doesn't work, does it?

while you're counting your shots I'm just waiting for the target to drop. Even if I only hear 1 out of 10 shots I just know I'm doing some damage.

...If you're going to compare the skill of seeing a dark skin in a corner to powerup timing, you're comparing apples to oranges. They are two different things. One can be mastered and used as strategy. The other involves turning your monitor gamma up... yeah, real skill there.

bright gamma isn't going to help if you haven't learned to recognise players by movement and contours (sp?).

... Now, please explain to us how identifying a hard-to-see person can vary from a person using the invis combo and a person using a dark skin hiding in a corner. The two are pretty much identical, yet to you one is lame and the other is a skill that must me mastered.

hmm ... both are a skill to be mastered. But then again I've never claimed either was lame

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Actually, a lot of the slack has been picked up by CTF, DM, and TDM. AS and ONS mostly stayed the same.

Not according to the numbers. CTF has under 1,000 player, around 950 and lower all the time. That's alot lower than it was 6 months ago. If any slack was picked up, it was by TAM/DM/ONS, not CTF.

Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there.

No, it doesn't. But can you ame, with any certainty, even 12 players that have started playing UT2004 (other than ONS/AS/VCTF/DM) in the last 6 months and have not gone inactive?

Alright, I guess I'm going to go form my own non-UTComp TDM team. The team's "strategy" will be to all use the matrix model and to only pick relatively dark maps. That way we can bypass the fact that our frag skills might suck.

I already admmitted that a solution like Ecpi's style Brightskins was acceptable. I don't agree with the use of adjustable glowskins. I guess for the competetive community a better solution than standard team skins is needed (I never had a problem with visiblity, but then I've always thought acuity was it's own skill). The point is, you don't need neon green, pink, gold, and "non-colored" as options for skins.

A UTComp server has a much higher chance of being populated than a non-UTComp server because of the fact that many more players enjoy playing with UTComp enabled than disabled. That's all I meant by that.

I disagfree that it's UTcomp that's causing that. You can try and set one up, but in today's UT2004 people play on the same servers more often than not and you'd be lucky to get a player base. REally, there is no way to prove if that statement is true or not.

What stock hitsounds? Run a test for me. Load up the game, and go play an instant action match with a bot. Shoot the minigun at him. Try and count how many times you're hitting him. Doesn't work, does it?

It does work. I KNOW I'm hitting him. I'm the type of person that doesn't think you should know exactly how much health someone has based on the number of "plinks" you hear. The Epic hitsounds are balanced more for that method of thinking than for knowing, point for point, how much health someone has.

Wait a second, what Pro Edition? The one that Mark Rein alluded to vaguely in an interview that was never actually released? That pro edition? Yes, I guess it's perfectly OK to make assumptions on software that was never released or played.

It was released, the CPL required them to use it. It was even in one of the UT2003 patches and could be turned on by editing the INI.

In terms of the things that UTComp corrects, TAM and TDM have the same variables. TAM doesn't really eliminate any "variables" per say, it only elminates certain aspects of the game (weapon/pickup control, timing, etc.) If you're going to compare the skill of seeing a dark skin in a corner to powerup timing, you're comparing apples to oranges. They are two different things. One can be mastered and used as strategy. The other involves turning your monitor gamma up... yeah, real skill there.

You are always talking about removing as many variables as possible, which is supposed to somehow eliminate the need of any skill but raw fragging. In terms of TDM, weapon/pickup control and timing is a SKILL that is VARIABLE, and according to the "remove variable" mindset, ought to be removed to make the ame as fair as possible.

Let me put it this way... one time when we were playing TAM at FragBU I had used the invis combo and you said that was lame.

I said it was lame for YOU to use it. As a person who is always lamenting the use of "lameness" in the game, then suddenly once the option is available to you, you are more than happy to exploit it's existence. I guess that's more than just lame. Regardless, even many purists will tell you that adrenaline, as implemented in 2kX, is pretty lame altogether.

Now, please explain to us how identifying a hard-to-see person can vary from a person using the invis combo and a person using a dark skin hiding in a corner. The two are pretty much identical, yet to you one is lame and the other is a skill that must me mastered.

Er, that's opposite ends of the spectrum. The so-called invisible skins are not actually invisible. Essentially, the comparison you are making here is not far off from comparing a ghost to a person wearing camoflauge.

 

[Plumb_Drumb]

you quote whores

 

[Raffi_B]

The thing with the minigun is that the opponent won't "react" to every shot, so while you do know you're hitting him because of the occasional grunts and such, you don't know how much you're hitting him.

I never said the game should be down to only raw fragging. I said that the lack of brighskins, for example, are just an added uncertainty and not an actual skill that had to be mastered. Timing and control take skill and strategy to execute correctly whereas turning up your monitor's gamma does not.

And BTW, your exact words were "invis is lame". In principle, you stated that having hard-to-see skins adds a strategic element to the game and is a skill that had to be mastered etc. Now it kind of diminishes the strength of your argument when you are for one form of hard-to-see skins and against another. Are you saying that if I were to use a brighter skin like Gorge on a dark map it would be alright but if I were to use a darker skin like Matrix it would not be alright?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

The thing with the minigun is that the opponent won't "react" to every shot, so while you do know you're hitting him because of the occasional grunts and such, you don't know how much you're hitting him.

I don't need hit for hit feedback. In fact, I think that it's relatively unfair with a weapon like the minigun that ought to be used as a last resort anyway. It's spread is not conducive to knowing when and where each bullet hits while firing. I could understand if it was harder to tell with the Ltg for example, but I think it's easy to tell with most weapons.

I never said the game should be down to only raw fragging. I said that the lack of brighskins, for example, are just an added uncertainty and not an actual skill that had to be mastered. Timing and control take skill and strategy to execute correctly whereas turning up your monitor's gamma does not.

You have used that as an argument in the past. I've already said that I find Epic style brightskins acceptable. I do not find glowstick style skins acceptable. How do you continue to use the gamma argument? Every skin of a certain color should be equally visible, I agree. But how is this different than any other sport? In football, it's obviously going to be harder to see someone running in a white jersey during a snowstorm than someone in a black jersey, right? The only thing that changes is the environment. As a player of that game you have to adapt to it, you can't make the ref put navy blue jerseys on the team wearing white just because they are more difficult to track.

And BTW, your exact words were "invis is lame". In principle, you stated that having hard-to-see skins adds a strategic element to the game and is a skill that had to be mastered etc. Now it kind of diminishes the strength of your argument when you are for one form of hard-to-see skins and against another. Are you saying that if I were to use a brighter skin like Gorge on a dark map it would be alright but if I were to use a darker skin like Matrix it would not be alright?

So you are saying that an invis player is only a "hard to see" skin? So, a whole team of Matrix and a whole team of invis players are equally as difficult to play against?

Even Matrix in the darkest level is easier to see than an invisible player. My whole argument is that the skins should be easy to see, but shouldn't be glowstick easy. I have said it a million times before, I don't know why Epic, after making the 2k3 brightskins patch, decided not to use those same style of skins in 2k4. IMO it was an oversight on their part to do that. Glowstick skins is OVERCORRECTING for a problem that wasn't EXTREMELY bad in the first place.

 

[1337]

Problem: There aren't any populated servers without utcomp, and some players don't like utc.

Solution: Finance, promote, and mantain a server without utcomp, or get a group of players with similar tastes to populate a server that currently doesn't have UTC.



It's that simple really.

Trying to push your opinion of utcomp down other people's throats on a forum isn't going to solve anything. Especially if they have interests that are unlike your own. If your type of players really cared about competitive play and an even playing field, but didn't like utcomp's added features, why didn't you make your own mutator?

Why didn't you people make a mut that disables or automatically enables all .ini settings that may give a player a visibility advantage over another? Or make a mut that makes the opposite team dm skin only, so there isn't a teamcolor map advantage? Or why didn't you people make the regular ingame hitsounds more consistent and less randomly communicating hits to the player? Why didn't you people make a mut that disables matrix? Why didn't you people make a mut that lessens the gamma settings effect on player visibility so players can't burn out their retina for a little extra player visibility advantage? Ofcourse, these issues may seem silly to you. But your insensitivity to the needs of the competitive(not necessarily skilled or pro but wannabepro, atleast) playerbase is what is causing you your grief. Maybe if the competitive playerbase weren't the ones that financed good servers and were the heart of the online ut2k4 multiplayer community, things would be different. But your group of whining lazy and inactive player's lack of dedication to multiplayer, is why there isn't any vanilla servers out there, you simply don't play enough or admin public servers.

AEnubis is the only poster I know of that has taken the matter in his own hands, by admining a TAM server. He also is one of the only posters against utc that I know doesn't exploit darker skins to their advantage. He uses the bright yellow robot skin. If more of you were like AE, there would be more servers without utc.

If your playerbase is so large and deserving of being catered to, you should serve yourselves instead of flapping your hands at the active playerbase thinking they must abide to your every desire.

 

[dc]

I can see where a lot of you are coming from about disliking UTComp, but some of the statements in this thread are just horrendous. UTComp was really never intended for pub use. From the beginning it was meant to be use for competitive and tournament play.

Like I've said in the past, 2k7 should have a promode and a pubmode.

Promode which fixes all the stuff that competitive players don't want to play with, and pubmode which is just stock, no brightskins, no bs, for pub players.

 

[Midnight]

wow there are a lot of ppl here who don't like utcomp.

seems that a lot of you don't like utcomp because you feel it makes it easier for better players to shoot you. let me tell you something, they would shoot you anyway with or without it. however, the game is not enjoyable for a lot of players when they have to strain their eyes to see people. some people here have said they like to strategize in the game and not just aim and shoot. well unless you are playing a team game with a team and using strategy as a team there is really no strategy to this game.

also, I will tell you that to play at a top level it requires that the brain process what it sees on the screen and translate that instantly into reactions in the hands. the hard to see default models, while still visible somewhat, are not the best way to allow the brain to track player movement. it is easier for the brain to track players if they are more visible. this is why many players want bright skins because it makes the game more enjoyable to play because they can play it better and it isn't annoying trying to follow some nearly invisible player on the screen. if you don't agree, just for a minute imagine if the default skins were the invisible adrenaline booster skin. those are visible, barely. when an invisible guy is dodging around it is hard for the brain to track him, and annoying and frustrating for the guy trying to shoot him. the default skins are the same way, only to a lesser degree. then you have brightskins which allow for the brain to track movement even better.

this game is not about hiding yourself in a dark corner. there are many other games out there like that, this is not one of them. you shouldn't need to feel like you need an advantage of being hard to see in order to play this game. why can't you simply play with brightskins and recognize that everyone is on an even playing field. other players don't have any advantage that you yourself don't have. this game is about aim and movement skills. you should be visible to the other players at all times, and whoever has the superior aim and movement will be the winner. If you rely on the matrix skin in this game to do any good, you are a sad sad excuse for a gamer.

in closing I will just say that I play on utcomp servers primarily cause I hate the default hard to see models, but I do play on those default servers sometimes too, and I have no problem aiming at people most of the time (although sometimes I do, and my "aim" is not as good as it could be due to the brain things discussed above), even if it is less enjoyable of a game when I have to strain to see them and can't tell if i'm hitting them or not. yes I like to know if that flak that looked dead on was actually recorded by the server as a hit or not. I should not have to guess if lag messed up my shot and made it not register or not.

 

[-AEnubis-]

skill ( P ) Pronunciation Key (skl)
n.
Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience. See Synonyms at ability.

1. An art, trade, or technique, particularly one requiring use of the hands or body.
2. A developed talent or ability: writing skills.

Visual acuity gets better with practice, and hence is factually a skill.

Maybe your non-comp team should all force gorge, and not worry about model selection? Since they feel the need to pick a hard to see skin to compete, they've already sacrificed personal taste, as to "what they want to look like." Why not insure they can see their opponents as well as possible?

Well, maybe we could just eliminate hitsounds all together, and just put enemy hit points above their head for you. Wouldn't that better eliminate that variable?

The comparison with or without is equal across the board. Most people I play against, lose about 10% or more hit-scan accuracy to lacking bskins, just as I do. I die a little less, and I hit a little less. Anything that effects a weapon that consistantly is effecting weapon balance. Anything that effects Epics weapon balance bothers me.

If anything would justify these features, it would be the variable that is "system specs." So you can imagine my sceptecism when captain "jesus rig" comes in here and defends it.

 

[Plumb_Drumb]

i don't like UTcomp for one reason:

Newnet.
It's the single reason I won't play on UTcomp servers, and yes, they all have it enabled now it seems.

Too bad that one thing has destroyed the mod for me.
I got used to the hitsounds; I got used to the skins; I got used to 50 minutes of pointless warmup; I don't even look at my stats... but newnet makes the game suck.

If it's not meant for pubs, then it should stay the **** off, cause that's where I play.

 

[dc]

If it's not meant for pubs, then it should stay the **** off, cause that's where I play.

Well the mutator can't excatly control what server it's on. It's up to the admin.

 

[Persefone]

If the top is to high, no problem, we pull down the mountain and we are in the top.

UTComp players use some difficult to see in some environment skins like an excuse for their true objective; to mutate UT in a point and click game. They don´t want to fix a problem, they want a radar because they want to know where are the rest of the players without doubt, and that doubt is a must in a professional combat sport.

And they are the competitive.

UTComp players want to know if they hit and how much damage they do, but that uncertainty is a must in a professional combat sport.

And they are the elite.

UTComp players want a gameplay has nothing to do with Unreal series.

And they are the true comunity.

 

[dc]

Please don't comment on what competitive players want when you're not one yourself, and really don't know much about the competitive community. You're just making yourself look dumb.