1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

What We Want!!

Discussion in 'Unreal Tournament 3' started by Mabz, Mar 31, 2005.

?

How many walljumps allowed at a go?

  1. 1

    13 vote(s)
    48.1%
  2. 2

    5 vote(s)
    18.5%
  3. 3

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. unlimited

    9 vote(s)
    33.3%
  1. Mabz

    Mabz New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    0
    What we want from the new UT codename Envy is NOT ONLY to re-live the experience from the original Unreal Tournament provide, and it did provide in its vastness, but we want the new experiences. Remember the spinchilling experience when all you can hear is a dim sound of an oncoming missile that keeps on getting louder and louder but still remains unsuspicious. Then at the last millisecond you see this huge redeemer missile in your face and your fate is sealed at that instant. Fair and fine, Epic tried to incoporate that into UT2004 by making bots more 'trigger happy' with the redeemer but let's face it, UNREAL TOURNAMENT is a legend and it is JUST UNREAL TOURNAMENT, UNREAL TOURNAMENT Codename ENVY must make a legend of its own...

    Now listen here Epic Megagames, we've waited 2 series (UT2003 UT2004) for you guys to get this right but now listen to what we want. Before we get any further, UT2003 and UT2004 both rocked... now let's continue.

    The feeling of being in a virtual battle zone is ultimately matched by the way your moments around an arena and the way objects relate to you. Let us begin by your moments by taking an example of a game. One of Theif 3: Deadly Shadows' key to success was to really place players to actually feel like they are stealth theifs. This is because a player could actually move the mouse and see his own arms legs but not head ofcourse, and this makes perfect sense. Imagine Unreal in the same environment:

    1. You can actually see your arms extending to the gun you are holding and your fingers holding the trigger.
    2. Movements to the side would be accompained by the exact movements of a personal strafing to the side. That is camera movement is toggled up and down, and one should see shoulder movement too. Turning ofcourse, would require the whole body to turn and the feet to possesse the same lifting animation as a human being.
    3. WE WANT TO HAVE THE SCREEN ROTATE WHEN WE DO A WALL JUMP OR SUMMERSAULT!!! Like the Unreal Tournament Matrix Mutator that shoes you a revolution at least. But from you Epic, we want except character movements to be portrayed with except monitor movements!!
    4. A stand still position would have a slight inhale/exhale movement. You see, in all past UT series, the gun alone moved. We need the whole 'map' to move as if when we inhale our head moves slightly upwards, followed by an exhale, slightly downwards. Try it.
    5. Inhale and exhale sounds please!!!

    Notice that Unreal Tournament has a hand extended when you select the minigun... the reason why Epic could not do that in UT2003 is because many players have different skins. Moreover, graphics and memory were probably a problem too due to high detailed graphics for the gun shown in first person as opposed to the low detailed gun when viewing it lying on the ground. But we've overcome that Epic!! We are able to show astonishing graphics like the ones being portrayed in UT codename Envy.

    So, let us see our bodies and dodge like the way your character dodges and give us the true feel of being in a deathmatch. Dammit, let us shoot our feet if we have to.

    Now we go on to the game play. I begin by asking this question:

    1. What prevents a person from walljumping many times? I suspect it's the code of only 2 jumps (doublejump) and 1 walljump being allowed by in all honesty, I feel that a person should walljump infinately times.
    It combines cool manuvering tactics which helps you to shake off your adversaries.
    2. Make the redeemer more robust. Fair and fine, the redeemer should be volatile but your primary weapen shouldn't end its reign of destruction just with one shot. It's disheartning to see your warhead dissapper with one shoot after you broke limb and heart to obtain it. Plus, it would be cool to see it go through a fierce battlefield and end all disputes by annihilating anything that moves.
    3. Everything must be destructable. Take a hint from Red Faction. Coding must be so good that should it mean the tower in ONS-Torlan falling down then let it be after a lot of hits and actually pieces of the buildings being chipped off. Now that's what I call a battlefield.
    4. More manuevers, like rolling from side to side, knocking a person with your gun etc.
    5. When somebody achieves a high award like a Monster Kill, they want to be noticed. Why not open a small window on the top left corner of every player's window (in network games) and show the player who achieved the high award be seen doing an atomatic taunt animation.

    Finally, I conclude, in vehicle based worlds, please make a hugh aircraft that can man road vehicles like the manta, scorpion and allow a designated player to deliver them to players whenever the vehicles get destroyed either by dropping it down or spawning it to them. Unreal will always Rock!
     
  2. BadAss84

    BadAss84 BadAss[zero]

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sorry, i didn't realise you alone spoke for the entire unreal community.

    Let me bow down before you, because you are obviously capable of reading everyone else's minds.

    Btw, your idea's suck, badly.
     
  3. Go&nd

    Go&nd Meow

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mabz, your ideas are naive.

    And your attempt to sound like you're addressing the developers directly while speaking for the whole community is just annoying. :hmm:
     
  4. SanitysEdge

    SanitysEdge Aspiring Astrophysicist

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    Killing.
    Not running away.
    Not jumping around.
    Killing.

    ^Its a beautiful poem, no?
     
  5. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Wandering spirit

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    2,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    "We" do not like the way you are talking as though you're representing anyone, Mabz ;)

    Let's see...About your more natural approach of movement/standing still: I'd vote "absolutely not" on this one. Maybe all of you get a deep thrill out of the fact of a moving, bobbing, breathing screen, but I like my aim as accurate as possible. Besides: I already hear myself breathing and see the screen different if I move my head in real life. Why emulate it? ;)

    As for the gameplay (same numbers as yours, Mabz):
    1. I don't care (about the only time you can do it more than once is in low gravity). I seriously doubt Epic will do it, though. The next UT is going to be "less bouncy"
    2. I'll make another offer: remove the redeemer alltogether (at least from every gametype except onslaught). Sorry, but the redeemer is unfair enough as it is (yes, even with the 'one shot kills it')
    3. I can already see where this is going: ppl flying straight to the enemy base and shoot a ditch all around the entrance, so the wheeled vehicles can't get out anymore :rolleyes: On the same issue: more destroyed ground->more particles in the map->more stuff that has to be calculated->more strain on your CPU.
    4. Once again: the next UT is going to be "less bouncy" You better bring a good bunch of votes to make Epic change their minds on that one, because I often heard that UT2004 has too much maneuvres as it is
    5. Players are already notified. Nice idea, though ;)
     
  6. gosia

    gosia Registered Idiot

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Id like to see 64 player games- I think that I read that the new game type "Conquest" Is suposed to have maps 4x the size of a ons map. If thats true. thats gonna leave a hell of alot of killing space.

    It would be nice to see them make their own ctf4 or other search more than 2 team games. More people would probably play it if it were official.

    I remember the clan system from Tribes 2 was quite good. It would be nice to see somthing similare to that.

    I wish they would bring back the HUD from UT99... It wasn't important.. It was just kind of cool to see where you got hit!

    It would be fun to see unique abilities or weapons from the differant races. That would add a bit more flavor to the game
     
  7. SanitysEdge

    SanitysEdge Aspiring Astrophysicist

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    Conqest maps are 3-4x bigger than onslaught maps, I certianly hope that 64 players isnt the maximum with so much space. about 96 or a little less sounds good.
     
  8. iron12

    iron12 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Taleweaver - redeemer is unfair enough as it is

    You can use it to you know. :D
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2005
  9. gosia

    gosia Registered Idiot

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, I just fear how that might effect ping. Then again. BF1942 isnt that bad ping wise. So, if it dosnt lag... more people = more fun!
     
  10. AMmayhem

    AMmayhem Mayhem is everywhere

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    I love it! :tup:
     
  11. b0rnAga1n

    b0rnAga1n New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    about seeing hands and fingers on triggers and stuff. do you realize how many character skins there are? it would be hella gay if everyone who wants to make their own skin have to modify gun models as well. having character specific gun models would do nothing other than be a pain.
     
  12. SanitysEdge

    SanitysEdge Aspiring Astrophysicist

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    0
    It wouldnt be that hard, modlers would just have to make a high poly model of an arm, texture it, then position it so it looks like its holding the gun.
     
  13. nick89

    nick89 Mr High Ping

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most of those ideas i would have to disagree on.
    With anouverability i would like to be able to do everything you currently can, minus dodge-jumps.
     
  14. Dark Pulse

    Dark Pulse Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about None? They're trying to keep the Hip-Hop down.
     
  15. T2A`

    T2A` I'm dead.

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    8,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Moving the 1st-person view around when you somersault isn't fair because not all models do it. I didn't read the rest because it's a dumb poll.
     
  16. m&ms

    m&ms Melts in your mouth, not in your hand.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK all your ideas suck, but this one in particular.
    There was a gametype in 2k3 called bloodpit that combined shield gunning, quad jump, and infinite dodges. The objective was basically to knock your opponents into the pit using the shield gun while not falling off yourself. The concept was good and the gametype fun, but the infinite walldoges ruined it. All someone had to do was get at the correct angle against the wall and they can walldodge infinitely as high as they want to go. Against an opponent who was good at this, it was impossible to prevent them from stalling the game infinitely.
     
  17. gosia

    gosia Registered Idiot

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    eh? this sounds actually pretty cool! :)
     
  18. Mr.Magnetichead

    Mr.Magnetichead Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't want to see people jumping around like jetpacked pansies.

    I want BLOOD! I want WAR! I want my enemies faces in the MUD.

    I want to hit you with a BIG stick.

    I want the game HEAVY, ARMOURED and ARMED TO THE TEETH MOTHER ****ER!
     
  19. B

    B Bee

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    8,973
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who are you, and how the **** do you know what I want?

    :con:

    No, 2003 sucked ass.

    1. What's the use, besides stressing the vidcard?
    2. No, keep the cam steady.
    3. No we don't, if we want that we install a mutator.
    4. You shouldn't be standing still, so no use.
    5. No again, no use at all.

    Yeh we've so overcome that, if you are one of the lucky bastards to allready have a 64bit SLI machine you might get 30 fps!!!! And after adding all that crazy **** you want you get a whopping 10fps! Yeh, we've so overcome it :rolleyes:

    1. Again, mutators could add this. Not needed as default.
    2. Like Tale said, remove the damn deemer. And all other ****ed up superweapons.
    3. What, are you playing on a NASA mainframe? There are no pc's capable of rendering this while maintaining a playable fps.
    4. no use in a fast paced shooter as UT.
    5. You allready get a message when someone is on a spree.

    Finally, I conclude, your idea's suck and you shouldn't be speaking for all of us.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2005
  20. gosia

    gosia Registered Idiot

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, I think hes figured out this by now.... geese you guys are mean :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2005

Share This Page