Extremely disappointed with the regressive weapon design in the Alpha release of UT4

[absinxe]

Hello,

Let me say that I hate to be the troll who makes an uninformed post like this, but I hope that this post among many others like it will help influence the developers to change their mind.
I played the Alpha Release of UT4 for a few hours and what immediately struck me was that the weapons were intentionally designed to function like the weapons in Unreal Tournament 1.

I think this is a bad idea, because, having played UT since the first release, I believe the weapons and gameplay mechanics have been exponentially improving in every sequel game release.
I think that the game is doomed to losing interest to the fans of the entire series as well as Epic altogether, by trying to appeal to the minority of the purists who only enjoy the original UT gameplay and resent UT2004 and UT3.

For those of you who think that regression is the way to go, please go and play Unreal Tournament 3 again, and witness how much of a masterpiece it was to competitive gaming.
Even to this day, UT3 blows out of water any other multiplayer experience from any first person game because of the magnificent, diverse, and balanced array of weapons that each offer a completely different spectrum of combat, not just more of the same point and shoot mechanics.

There were a few things that weren't perfect in UT3. For example, I enjoy how, using the Shock Rifle in the new UT, it is a lot easier to combine the secondary with primary fire with an XBOX/PS3 controller.
In UT3, you practically have to stand still to shoot down the projectile if not using a keyboard and mouse, at least to the point of making it as effective as other weapons.
Another thing I was disappointed with in UT3 was a lack of first person view in vehicles that existed in UT2004.

Anyways, cue the troll comments, but please add me to the list of people who want more from this game, not less.
Thank you,
-D

[_Lynx]

Welcome to the forums! However, I'm afraid you did make an uninformed post. There are no attempts to appeal to a certain group and if you'd check some of the last builds you'd notice that:

- Impact hammer secondary is a new mechanic which is something in between UT2004 and original UT impact hammer secondary
- Rocket launcher alt-fire, rocket salvo, behaves completely different from any UT before that.
- There is a new weapon, called Bio-launcher, which is currently just a different take on Bio Rifle but will keep changing.
- Mechanics of both Link Gun fire modes were modified, primary fire overheats to avoid excessive spamming, secondary fire mode has a pull functionality. Both changes are new to UT franchise.

The rest of weapons - Translocator, Enforcer, Shock Rifle, Sniper Rifle, Flak Cannon, Redeemer kept their mechanics intact, as they did in UT3 compared to original UT. I strongly suggest you to play more of the game, check out weapon tutorials, and to try out different fire modes of changed weapons.

[Flikswich]

Pretty sure you're gonna get some trolling if you say ut3 was a competitive masterpiece then praise ut4's shock for being better on controllers.

Everything you said was subjective and there are no reasons behind what you're saying. As far as I'm concerned ut3 was way closer to being designed to emulate ut1's weapons than ut4 is.

[Cunni]

Pretty sure you're gonna get some trolling if you say ut3 was a competitive masterpiece then praise ut4's shock for being better on controllers

+1. Giving a feedback on gameplay while referring to controller makes lose all credibility to any post on this forum. :/

[Andriushka]

I agree with many of the first post. Dont like simplify which bring console, but seems that only consoles create a market (allow to be gamedevelopment powerful) and the good thing is that using the minimum buttons the game include maximum efficiency in gameplay and make a general view more solid.

It is all obvious but current weapons look like modmakers work and it is not surprising, becouse make new weapons for UT4 is a very difficult thing not just for beginners but for developers also. For example when I first saw the current sniper rifle (textured) I thought it was random box model for testing. After a while I looked closer and realized that it is a specially made as SR. I was surprised when someone from community wrote this is the final model. Also with flak, take something from UT99 is not good by default. Lead modeller from Epic improved Flak weapon but it still the same in general. It is easy to understand now, but not before, when the fans wont make new UT. UT game general conception requires increase weapons design and concept in new game. Without it there is no much sense. Also with locations look now it is the almost same as SR.

I already wrote somewhere I want in this game/gamedevelopment, UT4 as UT3+ and UT99 gameworld elements, 25-30 peoples in Epic games official + current community as a big helper + new UT4 game oriented much more like online game but still have UT gameplay look in general + of course new consoles UT release + one button launcher HUD without mutators and mods from official side. As I undertand mutators and mods was not work properly/used even when UT3 was released, but now even more so. Developers do not pay attention to mods/mutators, since this is not a part of online game (with leveling or something similar). But mods/mutators good for prototyping something but who will prototyping something knowing that this will not exist in game by default knowing that nobody will play in it. And of cource official developers can not support something that does not fit into the game concept and gameworld. Some old UT community dont like UT3 community becouse they want "very much" and do nothing. But why they must do something if they want UT3+ game, but know the good result is almost impossible from the internet modmaking side and their mods will not used nowhere. I do not understand why this gamedevelopment in its current form should be continued in the new year.

Another thing I was disappointed with in UT3 was a lack of first person view in vehicles that existed in UT2004

It was absolutely right in UT3. Vehicle is a player mod and first person view availability with third person view is wrong. There may be a choice between only first person or third person view at starting of vehicle gameplay development. Third person view is much better in every way in UT gameplay. Just becouse this give pleayer looking around bonus and shows vehicle body as part of game graphics and changes the look of the game in battle. And without bonuses nobody wll use this view, just show its presence and make additional button for it is wrong element in game. Today as I undertand developers do not add elements in game that no one will use and this is right for MP games but not absolutely right for single player game.

[StormyFacade]

I'm sorry, but honetly as far as weapons go, UT3 was good in some ways, but awful in others.
Examples of just crappy weapon design (IMO):
- The Stinger Minigun's Secondary being a projectile rather than hitscan.
- Impact Hammer's Secondary. Yeah, it removes powerups from people and that's pretty cool, but if you're not aiming to control locations of powerups, then your opponent getting it instead is what it should always be: A punishment for not keeping level control in your hands. Other than for anti-powerup uses, it's fairly useless, more so than UT99's Impact Hammer's secondary.
- Enforcer Secondary. I'd rather it have a faster attack rate that's more inaccurate, than a sorta-accurate 3-round shot.
- Bio Rifle projectiles being heavier than they used to be. Yeah, it instantly-kills most enemies without maxed armor, but that's the point. It's kinda **** otherwise.
- That "weapon" that deployed slow fields, in maps that you kinda never get to actually use in a useful, tactical fashion in the base maps.
- Vehicle Mines. 'Nuff Said. Apparently someone thought the AVRIL wasn't good enough. That person had no idea what they were talking about.

Examples of good weapon design:
- Pretty much everything else.

UT3 was not a great game though competitively, otherwise, it would have remained alive after the month of release. UT2004 and even UT99 remains semi-conscious to this day. UT3's multiplayer is Catatonic at best.
What with Warfare's mere existence, the completely abhorrent AI in the campaign, the fact the campaign ends on a note where it'd be a deathmatch that'd actually challenge you far more than any 1v1 really ever could (imo), don't get me started on maps that require specific mutators to get out of certain areas, that's just plain stupid. Didn't ship with Invasion, arguably the absolute best gamemode since Assault, then Monster Hunt when that came out.
OH also? It's still basically not happened, a GOOD UT2004RPG equivalent that is just as flexible, just as moddable, and not a total nightmare to both install and get to work with other mutators. Really, that could have also shipped with the game, or come in one of the official content packs.
You know, THE best mutator in UT history. You know, aside from "Redeemer Arena" which DID come with the game, which was completely hilarious and amazing.

Also first-person view in vehicles was 100% in UT2004 without any custom content downloaded. Was kinda crappy that it wasn't in UT3, since some vehicles are kinda hard to use, like the Dark Walker when you're piloting it in a tunnel. Granted, there was a zoom option, but it just wasn't the same. The Goliath's second seat in 3rd-person is also just so dumb since the shots don't REALLY line up with the reticle, last I remember (which is probly not even remotely well).

[nubizZz]

I don't feel the current weapons are at all similar to their UT counter parts. Where as I appreciate that hit scans have been reduced in efficacy in line with changing environmental variables that make them easier, and I do think it's time to abandon the mechanic, I don't think they are extremely problematic at the moment (only slightly). They were in UT, so that's different. Projectiles, though capable of producing "more frags" like in UT, do so in a very different fashion. UT projectiles did more damage at large, but were more challenging to do damage with. The current weapons are quite the opposite, with reductions in damage, but increases in efficacy (mostly speed).

Increased weapon efficacy is rendering the dodge functionally obsolete. Less and less of the current weapons can be dodged in a reactive fashion, and combined with minimum radius damage, and enlarged projectiles, doing so for the ones that are slow enough, has become more of a chore in limiting ones options to hold position at the cost of a little health.