Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What UT doesn't need. An essay.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #91
    Originally posted by Sir_Brizz View Post
    Do you guys seriously not play any games that have achievements? You must not play any modern (aka released in the last, I dunno, 8 years) video games, then, since about 99% of games on every platform have them these days.
    Yes we do. How else would we be able to say that achievements are utter ********?


    edit:
    im going to bed now, coming back tomorrow and probably need some time to read through the shitstorm that accumulated until then.
    Last edited by Zoddom; 05-14-2014, 06:25 PM.
    veritas filia temporis

    Comment


      #92
      I'm not going to waste my time watching a 30m video.

      As for not listening to what the players want, again, AGAIN, YOU ARE ONE PERSON. There are many people saying "we want achievements". That is what YOU are ignoring. I mean, look at the poll. "Yes" is beating "No" by a healthy margin.

      So, I don't know what else to say. You don't want achievements but you can't give a good reason why other than "it's BS". That's not good enough. I don't even know what to say. You think I'm NOT a gamer and I DON'T care, JUST BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU? Wow.

      One. More. Time. YOU do not run, nor speak for, the gaming community. It's hard to take your opinion seriously when you can't make a strong argument past "because I said so".

      Comment


        #93
        Originally posted by Keon View Post
        Hats:
        Nope. The game is dependant upon people making and selling market items, and taking away hats or any other form of market is just dumb. We don't need to emphasize it to quite the degree of TF2, but selling skins should be permitted. You say you can just make skins purchasable but not sellable? What does that even mean? Now, making hats a huge feature, nope. But UT99 had skins too, and nobody complained either.
        You do realize that this game will be 100% moddable, therefore hats wont be necessary? Make a skin and share it.

        Comment


          #94
          Originally posted by XanKriegorMkIV View Post
          You do realize that this game will be 100% moddable, therefore hats wont be necessary? Make a skin and share it.
          OMG I LOVE HATS. Shut up and take my money Val...er, Epic!
          Protocol is our alt-fire function.

          Comment


            #95
            Have to disagree on the visuals. Sometimes it was nice to see the power and artistic style behind some of the maps. It is possible to create beautiful and stunning maps with superb layouts that don't hinder game play.

            Not sure why so many are against vehicles as last time I checked, they don't exist in DM, TDM,...etc. They could, but they belong respectfully to game types like ONS. Though if time were a constraint, I would focus on non vehicle game types first, then vehicles.
            Vehicles were the only reason I could ever stand playing UT2k4 or UT3. I think they can make a place here in UT. Vehicles seem promising with a Siege like game type.
            a.k.a Gunner77

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by Wutsittou View Post
              Have to disagree on the visuals. Sometimes it was nice to see the power and artistic style behind some of the maps. It is possible to create beautiful and stunning maps with superb layouts that don't hinder game play.

              Not sure why so many are against vehicles as last time I checked, they don't exist in DM, TDM,...etc. They could, but they belong respectfully to game types like ONS. Though if time were a constraint, I would focus on non vehicle game types first, then vehicles.
              Vehicles were the only reason I could ever stand playing UT2k4 or UT3. I think they can make a place here in UT. Vehicles seem promising with a Siege like game type.
              So long as the game isn't built around them, and so long as I don't have to touch them or even look at them, I couldn't care less about vehicles.

              Comment


                #97
                Originally posted by mastermanaic View Post
                So long as the game isn't built around them, and so long as I don't have to touch them or even look at them, I couldn't care less about vehicles.
                So....you're not a fan of ONS?

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by starman View Post
                  So....you're not a fan of ONS?
                  I'm not a fan of anything post UT99 if you absolutely must know. That doesn't mean I want a rehash of UT99, for your information, if I may preemptively dog that valve of sticky horsecrap.

                  All I care about is Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, Assault, and possibly Domination. That doesn't mean I want to excise the other modes from the game. Just because I don't much care for them doesn't mean they don't have a place.
                  Last edited by mastermanaic; 05-14-2014, 11:51 PM.

                  Comment


                    #99
                    Originally posted by starman View Post
                    I'm not going to waste my time watching a 30m video.
                    Wow. I just dont know what to say anymore. WHO is the one ignoring things?
                    do you also just stop listening in a design meeting when it exceeds 30 min? would explain a lot.

                    Originally posted by starman View Post
                    As for not listening to what the players want, again, AGAIN, YOU ARE ONE PERSON. There are many people saying "we want achievements". That is what YOU are ignoring. I mean, look at the poll. "Yes" is beating "No" by a healthy margin.

                    So, I don't know what else to say. You don't want achievements but you can't give a good reason why other than "it's BS". That's not good enough. I don't even know what to say. You think I'm NOT a gamer and I DON'T care, JUST BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU? Wow.

                    One. More. Time. YOU do not run, nor speak for, the gaming community. It's hard to take your opinion seriously when you can't make a strong argument past "because I said so".
                    wow, are you even serious? how can you say that? I am a player, thus I am part of the community, thus I can state my opinion in a forum that is about including the community in the developement process.

                    You say a "healthy margin" was for achievements. When I look at the polls, it is just 56% which is not a big majority. And you, as a game designer should even think a bit deeper.
                    in the 44% that are against achievements there is a MUCH bigger part of people that will NOT play the game if it is infested with achievements than people in the 56% who wont play the game if it does NOT have achievements, IF ANY.
                    You cannot ignore this.

                    have you ever heard anyone saying "Naaah that game doesn't have achievements, it's ****, I won't play it?". The oppisite however is heard very often.
                    Last edited by Zoddom; 05-15-2014, 04:44 AM.
                    veritas filia temporis

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by van Kuss View Post
                      Yup, I'm more for statistics. The thing is, even in this case they won't reflect anything important. Kill death ratio? Is it important in games like Assault? Flags captured, is that important for the guys more skilled in defensing? Etc. etc.
                      If instead you're talking about stats in a precise environment (let's say in all 1vs1 or DM team) then it'd make more sense, but since the nature of UT they don't work at all, they're just another useless thing to please people.

                      So as I was saying, if there's some sort of competitive play/ranked system or whatever, the stats should work only on that (and would make perfect sense).
                      I fully agree. Stats will make players worry about their K/D and that will keep them from playing the objective e.g. in CTF, look at BF4 everyone is obessing over it thus ruining the actual gameplay.
                      Unreal Tournament - G.O.T.Y. 1999
                      .: 99 Gaming Social Club :.
                      Everyone welcome on IRC Quakenet #99


                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Zoddom View Post
                        1. Introduction

                        2. Analyzing the key strenghts of UT

                        I have thought about why UT was (and still is) such a good game for a long time now.
                        I think it's save to say one for the most important factors that influences someones opinion of a game is its first impression. When I think back to what my first impressions were I have to think of the awesome intro. I have watched it countless times and I still dont skip it most of the times I start the game. But it was not the intro in itself nor the awesome female voice that tells you about the unspeakable violence instrumentalized by Liandri and the NEG. It was the setting and most of all the atmosphere that it put you into. You immediatly had the feeling that you are in a Tournament with brutal competition fighting for honor and glory. This atmosphere was being held up by other game design elements like the maps, their design and lore and that of your competetors. It all just fitted seamlessly. That is were I was disappointed by UT2k3, 2k4 and UT3. They may have tried to fit the "story" a bit better into the Unreal universe or just make it a bit more "epic", but it just made the existence of the Tournament seem secondary.
                        Hello there! Sorry to interrupt the aggressive back-and-forth in this thread. I just found this forum, as a long-time UT fan, and thought that this in particular is something I would like the teams and developers here to be talking about around here. I have very little game-design experience, only attempting map-making in the earlier days of the UEngine. However, I am a somewhat qualified writer and fan of worldbuilding, and at least have enough enthusiasm and imagination for the project that I would like to contribute what I can to discussions.

                        I understand that most people don't expect an Unreal Tournament game to be story-heavy - and that gameplay, fundamentally, comes first.

                        However I think there's a lot to be said about the way you frame and the game frames the fights you are having in this franchise - the "Tournament" being the dressing for the endless 1v1s and TDMs, etc. As a leading online multiplayer FPS, I very much liked the idea that the players, competing for personal glory in Real Life, are actually enacting a Death Match In-Universe. Unreal Tournament 2k3/4 further, to some degree, pushed the setting that was set up in UT99 even further.

                        We had the inclusion of a visible fanbase for the participants of the Tournament (actual arenas in which the competitors stepped through before fighting) and professional wrestling style intros, promos and character arcs that provided the background for, y'know, THE universal bloodsport. You had team management in some cases, an insight into the regular competitors in the sport, their strengths and weaknesses. The AI that you fought had a vested interest in their fight - they were thrown into the Tournament against their will, or they are one of the most bloodthirsty beings in the Universe, or they're a great competitor this year in with a chance of winning. There was politics, too - the sense of a grand conspiracy with the Liandri putting forth a robotic and seemingly undefeatable champion to solidify their place as the main providers, and champions, of the never-ending Tournaments. (They were, I always assumed, a method of population control and management.) The maps, set up as arenas made sense as they were given clever descriptions of their origins, designers, and purposes, to hammer into the player that this is a spectacle, a televised and universally-watched programming sensation, an industry in fact!

                        I'm keen to see more people discuss the presentation of the Tournament, given it was something that felt extremely lacking in Unreal Tournament 3, to the point of being a waste and a shame, in my view. Remember Field LAttice Generators (FLAGs)? How unnecessary the Necris war plot from that game is, when the context of a sporting event, in which any player can potentially lose his life, can provide so much drama in a single player campaign, if the intention is to provide one. Like Battle Royale, or Hunger Games, or the Roman Colosseum, there's plenty of emotion to be garnered from a single player campaign that examines the pressures for fandom and payment and release from the Tournament or the pressure to win and finally beat the Champion Xan - there could be a Rocky-style ascent through the ranks of a millenia-old franchise. And all it is is a way of dressing up some pretty simple AI fights. You can have the player learn the game through this mode. You can have them defend their title in this mode, too. Enact the Tournament in full, in a way it hasn't yet been.

                        Which is not my saying that this should be a key priority of the game developers - as the vision for this and payment models will change rapidly, I know, and priority has to go on making fun first. But at least for this fan, the Tournament itself is such a ripe area for exploration, and it's a concept that's almost interestingly Meta, that separates this multiplayer shooter from many others. To see maps and aesthetics and characters designed around a core idea of the lore as a bloodsport set up for the benefit of very few in the universe - that is what I would like to see again.

                        How do other fans feel about this side of the game?

                        Comment


                          I feel like some players are against ranking/achievements just "because".
                          When you ask them why, their answer is "not needed". No actual reasoning behind it...

                          How does having elements that DO NOT go against gameplay harm people?
                          If you think that in 2014, you can be successful releasing a game straight from 1999, good luck. Do not complain when this game will die after 5 months.
                          Because the problem is whithin some players that want to keep this whole game a complete remake from 15 years ago.
                          Even the worst game of this generation presents achievements, rankings, and in general, a reason for players to come back. Wake up, people.
                          You want to keep this game "super mega old school skillz based yo competitive no bs", and I understand it, but this whole "games of today are trash and present trashy options/features" logic needs to go away.
                          Please, remember that this game isn't supposed to appeal a limited range of players from 1999 or 2004. It is supposed to appeal players from 2014 too.
                          As much as I hate Call Of Duty for its boring gameplay, you have to admit there are several games COD games do the right way. One of them is giving players a reason to come back, gain, earn, and feel satisfied even if they are not the best players in the world.
                          While I do agree on the fact this game has to BE an Unreal Tournament game. "UT" doesn't mean Jurassic Park, or "can't change nothing because otherwise we lose the formula".
                          Do I have to mention all the FPS arena game that had a remake in the last few years, with decent/good products, and died after several months if not weeks?
                          You wanna know why? Simple. Nobody wants to play something that plays, feels, and presents the same options/features of a 1999 game.
                          I loved the old UT, but, for the love of god, be open minded. You can hate today's gaming industry how much you want, but denying that things have changed/progressed since 1999 is not making any sense.
                          You wanna keep the same old school structure? Nice, you want this game to be a new Painkiller, a new Serious Sam, a new Nexuiz. The mentioned games recently came out, keeping the same old old school formula, being almost remakes of old titles, and guess what? They are EMPTY online, and failures.
                          And how can you blame people? I am pretty much an hardcore player. Loved UT 1999, but I AM DYING to see changes in the franchise, because, I am myself tired of seeing the same old game that is too scared to innovate, get modern and try new things. And if I am tired, be sure that casual players are most likely gonna run away once they see the game is the same as the old ones.
                          Seriously. I see so many old school players in these topics bashing new potential features just because "they are not needed". What kind of argument is this?
                          If you think trying something new is not needed why are you even craving a new UT? Go play one of the old games and enjoy that.
                          I am seriously starting to wonder if some people in here want this game to succeed, or they are just trying to give themselves a nice fan service/nostalgic remake.
                          Thank God I have seen developers showing a great mindset in here, but, phew, some people here have missed the last 15 years of gaming/progress.
                          To put it in a simple way: you NEED casual players to check this game out everyday. You NEED everybody to talk about this game.
                          You are not gonna have people suggesting a game to their friends, if said game is missing fundamental features in this era of gaming.

                          P.S.
                          I respect everyone's opinion. That is why I read everyone's post.
                          What I am trying to say is that too many people seem to completely ignore and compare today's releases in the gaming industry.
                          You can hate games of today HOW MUCH you want, but you HAVE to compare what this new game is going offer to their offerings. Period.
                          In no way you can succeed in a market without matching what competition is offering, and/or doing better than you. You can have the best gameplay in history, and you might still have empty servers.
                          UT '99 didn't have the competition a game of today has. Times have changed.
                          Last edited by UnrealBeast; 05-15-2014, 08:58 AM.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by van Kuss View Post
                            Ah we're making a casual game for noobs and retarded people who can't think for themselves. Sorry I thought we were going back to the roots. And only 10 people on this forums should stay if you think people who played this game for 15+ years are not allowed to post and contribute and only designers can
                            I'm going to ignore your posts from now on old man, hoping others would do the same.
                            If you wanna go back to the roots, go play UT'99.
                            Same goes to all the people in this topic that feel it is okay to insult other people, and be closed minded.
                            Nobody cares how long you have been playing.
                            I would have cared if this was 1999. But, unfortunately for you and many other people, it is 2014.

                            Comment


                              If the game did not contain achievements...Well - my own view on their inclusion is that if you can buck the trend, (make cheevo conditions that are actually worth a ****!) you can potentially have a situation where a player's accomplishments in game can be understood - I'm thinking primarily of service commendation medals, or perhaps recognised awards from official tournament success.
                              NO points, or such like, just a way to see how any player's record in the game has been.

                              I do reckon stat recording/log keeping over a player's career would also be something that would add to the game. I suppose that a player being able to track his own playstyle/experience is a useful thing - especially if we consider Esports potential. I also think that a form of overall general game telemetry, if you like, feeding back to Epic may serve future development well.

                              Separate the viewable data into three/six months/all-time increments (this further incentivises players to keep active, whilst not pressuring a player's time commitment unduly. Keeping the "work"/life balance sensible, and people playing more out of enjoyment and aspiration. ) The observer having access to a broad overview of that other player's interaction with the game.
                              Originally posted by UnrealBeast View Post
                              Nobody cares how long you have been playing.
                              Got to agree there. As far as that alone is not enough. If you're able to use your accumulated experience to add reasoned/factual weight to assert the validity of what you're saying - that's great, but for anyone attempting to posit that their view matters most on the sole basis that they're a long-time player, it's simply laughable.
                              Originally posted by Alex1902 View Post
                              Oh god, yes this is so vital. [stats separated into disciplines/gametypes!] DM's Stats rely more on KD, while CTF relies more on Captures/Defenses. It's useless merging them all. It doesn't give info the skills of a player other than "Yeah, well that dude played a lot".
                              Good point, Alex. Stats should be in, providing they serve a purpose.
                              Last edited by Spinarax; 05-15-2014, 10:35 AM.

                              Comment


                                @ Mardarkin:

                                VERY nice post, you really spoke from the bottom of your heart and mine too.

                                @ Unrealbeast:

                                Its not that I am not thinking about stuff. But I get the feeling that most people dont think enough. Such people will just be fine with what you said, and won't think about it any further.
                                Simply stating that a modern game has to look at its modern position, thats easy to say and to believe isnt it?
                                However, you also said modern games have to provide (similar) the good stuff that other games do to compete. But ARE achievements actually a thing that made ANY game good?

                                And to make this clear, when I speak of achievements, I mean achievements as we know them today, not for example things like the awards in BF2 (or even rewards for won tournaments)
                                for these were completely different to what we have in most steam games today for example.

                                And stop just simplyfing what I was saying into terms like "remake" comparable to quake live.
                                What I have in mind could even be a remake. But if it is made WELL it can be a hell of an awesome game just by remaking the old one.
                                Remaking does NOT mean NOT improving. You could improve a ton of things in UT99 and still have the same game - just better.

                                Believe me, I have thought about this very long, and I cannot find that I am close minded. To me its rather the people who think that sticking to the standard formula of selling millions for copies of games, like CoD, BF, CS:GO and other big games did, was the way to go. That is just PURE laziness, nothing else!

                                You CAN build a great game without all this unnecessary **** like those steamachievements. It has been done ALL the time before they were invented.

                                A GOOD GAME DOES NOT GET WORSE IF IT DOESNT HAVE ACHIEVEMENTS.
                                Last edited by Zoddom; 05-15-2014, 12:24 PM.
                                veritas filia temporis

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X