Solutions to worries about UT2k7 performance / wep. balance and movement

[legacy-Eclipse]

Ah now i understand. Good idea.

Frogger, there are other places they could advertise it, like www.unrealtournament.com and the news section of UT2004 in-game

[Frogger]

Originally posted by Eclipse
Frogger, there are other places they could advertise it, like www.unrealtournament.com and the news section of UT2004 in-game

yeah..i check those oft updated pages everyday..:bulb: :bulb: :bulb:

[legacy-Eclipse]

Originally posted by Frogger
yeah..i check those oft updated pages everyday..:bulb: :bulb: :bulb:

Yup.... we don't. We check these forums. But the newbie's dont check these forums but DO check the news section in-game.

[legacy--_Faction_-1979]

This is not a insult or a flame placebo, but this just wouldn't work. I've read suggestions of yours in the past and some i've agreed with and some I haven't. In this case I simply disagree.

I will be happy with whatever epic decides is good personally. I know there will be a couple of things that maybe I won't like as much as previous games, but the way I get around that is to just stop comparing new games to the previous ones and enjoy the actual game I'm playing. Just be satisfied with what they give us, on the whole epic haven't put a foot wrong with unreal tournament so far.

Keep the ideas coming though, no one can be spot on all the time. At the very least you introduce topics that are new to the forum and I respect that.



Could I ask a question of someone relating to this subject though?
How long from epic releasing the demo to releasing the full game is there? How possible would it be for epic to make meaningful changes between the demo and the full game? Does anyone think that something along that idea would help? Or maybe some variation on this theme?

[placebo]

Oh god, don't fondle me!

Well, I thought it was the best way... OF FACILITATING COMMUNITY TESTING. I don't inherently believe that using the community as a beta tester is a good idea, in fact, I several times posted pleas to epic to not listen to the community. But I'm just saying that if Epic does so choose to accept the advice from the community every Friday or whatever, I think that my method would probably be the best.

[legacy-AgentZero]

IF Epic decides to do this then they must also show 1 new map to suit with the new movement. You just can't have 2k4 maps with 2k7 movement cuz it won't feel right. Everyone would be like "wtf? Im feeling handicapped with 2k7 movement, gimme 2k4 movement now otherwise **** ut2k7 with this ghey movement i aint buying it."...(for example when people would want to get up the ramps in rankin with 2k7 movement or in Roughinery when they want to dodge-jump from the 4 health vials above the lift to the 50a...).

As for the tech demo, it's been discussed many times and even in interviews, so basically you know that a 6800 can run it and by the time ut2k7 comes out if you get a good enough computer by then it will work for sure. But then again, you got nothing to lose if they release the tech demos (assuming they're finalized ofcourse, otherwise NO) to AnandTech and such, so I say go for it. And not everyone knows about the system specs I guess.

And I really can't imagine Epic actually doing such things like you mentioned, they're not THAT involved with the community (I wish they were), atleast not with ut2k4 (hopefully that will change for ut2k7).

And using the community as a beta tester is a good idea IMO, cuz that's what they're catering for. If Epic were to not listen to the community like you said, then they wouldn't be trying to bring back the ut99 feel with up-close-and-personal movement (everyone saying "UT99>*" is mostly what got them to make an up-close-and-personal movement system, I think).

[Logy]

Originally posted by placebo
That way, Epic can get the feedback they need, without having the risk and logistical complexity of a beta, as well as the ability to accept changes without spoiling the awesomeness of UT2k7 before it's released. A feedback form would be established with a simple list of checkbox feedback ("In which of the following areas was this week better/worse than last week?"

This would be bad. A hodge-podge of gamers with no qualifications other than an internet connection filling in multiple choice questionaires is no way to design a good game.

Not to mention that sometimes people will dislike something right off the bat (because it's different than they are used to), when the change might in fact be better for the game overall. Case in point:

When UT2003 was first released, this forum was swamped with people complaining that the Rocket Launcher was grossly overpowered, and the LG was useless. Turns out, they just didn't know how to deal with either, because they hadn't played the game long enough to figure it out. If they had been given the chance to vote before the game was released, in the final product the RL would have fired nerf rockets, and the LG would have been a fully automatic nuclear death ray.

For the "will it run" crowd, they could release any of their nonplayable tech demos for all of the Anandtech sort of sites to eat up, as well as partially answering the questions of the people in the market for upgrades. Guides would be posted, graphics cards would be put to the test, and people could have a better idea of what to start saving money for.

Any of the tech demos would satisfy this; perhaps the city flyby one would be the best, or some other kind of camera zoom-through that covers long draw distances, layered shaders, and intense physics for each of the main cruxes of the game. A clear disclaimer at the start regarding "this is not fully optimized for x, x, or x" might precede it.

Whatya think?

Frankly, sod the "will it run" crowd. If they had any brains, they'd save their money (and their breath) and wait for the full game to come out so that they could see real-world benchmarks based on the equipment available at the time, rather than buying the most expensive getup six months before the game is released, then whining "BUT ANANDTECH SAID THE FLY BY RAN AT 50000 FPS ON MY HARDWARES WHY DON'T THE FULL GAME RUN SO GOOD OMG EPIC PLZ FIX!!!!"

[legacy-AgentZero]

Originally posted by Logy
[B]This would be bad. A hodge-podge of gamers with no qualifications other than an internet connection filling in multiple choice questionaires is no way to design a good game.

Not to mention that sometimes people will dislike something right off the bat (because it's different than they are used to), when the change might in fact be better for the game overall. Case in point:

When UT2003 was first released, this forum was swamped with people complaining that the Rocket Launcher was grossly overpowered, and the LG was useless. Turns out, they just didn't know how to deal with either, because they hadn't played the game long enough to figure it out. If they had been given the chance to vote before the game was released, in the final product the RL would have fired nerf rockets, and the LG would have been a fully automatic nuclear death ray.

Hmm, you got a point there, but I guess it will be Epic that has to filter out the good stuff from the bad stuff.

Good stuff: "Bring back the UT99 feel"

Bad stuff: "OMGWTFEPIC THIS GAME IS SOOO NOT RELAISTIC LIEK WTF WHO CAN DOUBLE JUMP IN REAL LIEF, NO1, LIEK HOW GHEY IS DAT , THIS GAME IS NUTHING LIKE CS ITS SO FAKE, OMGWTF EPICPLZFIX REMOVE DODGE JUMP".

[The_Deacon]

A mutator to accomplish this is all well and good, except that the UT2007 movement and weapons are designed for UT2007. We can hardly judge things properly if we're not even playing the correct game.

For example, mutating the movement to be more grounded would just result in every map taking a comparative age to move around. That's not going to get the right feedback.

Epic aren't idiots. They'll get things pretty well balanced, and a demo will sort out the balance even better ASSUMING EPIC LEAVE A SENSIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME BETWEEN DEMO AND FULL GAME

[Da Spadger]

Originally posted by The_Deacon
Epic aren't idiots. They'll get things pretty well balanced, and a demo will sort out the balance even better ASSUMING EPIC LEAVE A SENSIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME BETWEEN DEMO AND FULL GAME

Two weeks! That'll be perfect! :up: