Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unreal Tournament 2004; the objectives, the remaining reasons

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

    Unreal Tournament 2004; the objectives, the remaining reasons

    When Epic Games released the Unreal Tournament 2004 demonstration version last month, one could not help but ponder the sonic boom that shook left field Internet users. When Assault did get post ex-facto submission, the remaining cause is why; Why were there rehashes of the same old philosophy? These ages, the consumer expects a counter for the game designer's several points of construction.

    With the original Unreal Tournament, we had the shape formed which heavily impacted the entire community as a whole, and the livers of the programmers went to work immediately. This undenying support of the consumer added for four additional extra packages, each with environments with their own breath. With this breath, the tree of the gaming industry quickly coughed out the carbon dioxide of greed, which led us to believe that Epic Games was truly one of the few who had this philosophy. We had most gratitude for it.

    With Unreal Tournament 2003, the idea there was to create a door, per se, with the keyhole firmly locked for previews to take care of. To receive the key, one had to pass the test of time and anticipation. Id est, not many advantages were held to this continuity of past games, but the entire anticipation theory was finalized by Unreal Tournament 2003. When the demonstration version was unveiled, it took the gaming industry tree by a storm. The carbon dioxide of previous optional expansions for the original Unreal Tournament game was quickly let back in by numerous complaints. In a perfect world, Newton once experimented with the toy concept of balance vs. anticipated balance; an element heavily overlooked by today's society as well as the casual gaming industry. When balance shares the light, when could we have a chance to strike at it? Why would we? Which field of energy would it be located in? When game designers harness energy from these fields, they don't leave out the consumer perception; they merely use the stepping stools of marketing. This is something to be thankful for.

    Unreal Tournament 2004's demonstration version, however, defies this analogy as well as philosophy. In a perfect world, energy fields of game design could as well be handed to us in cardboard boxes; but sadly, it isn't so. With Newton's proposed law, could a simple gaming industry product defy it that much? How in the world could citizens of the entire planet; or solar system, for that matter, live in a society where imperialism strikes us as a definite balance between energy for entertainment purposes and energy for non-individual industry purposes? With the "Onslaught" mode, we have a clear example of how achievements from all-around industries such as mechanical engineering, car engineering, and hovercraft engineering get used for entertainment purposes, and we just have to ask ourselves, "now what?" The previous games in the Unreal Tournament series had little to no references to vehicular engineering. What happened? Is society really this low?

    Please share your opinions.

    #2
    huh? Sorry, I'm from this planet called "Earth".. me no speak Zumbuculouse

    Comment


      #3
      Wow.

      You sure seem to know what your talking about. Just wish I did.

      Comment


        #4
        WTF DID YOU JUST SAY:weird:

        Get of the drugs son its not good for ya

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by FILIP_KICEV
          WTF DID YOU JUST SAY:weird:
          thank god... i thought i had gone crazy

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Unreal Tournament 2004; the objectives, the remaining reasons

            Originally posted by Ausmok IV
            ... meaningless post taking the pi ss...
            Ever considered a career in marketing?

            Comment


              #7
              It seems they don't manufacture "New Members" as they did some years ago anymore.

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Unreal Tournament 2004; the objectives, the remaining reasons

                You need to explain your metaphors better. I believe your pontification was overintellectualism of simple ideas, of which you haven't adequately explained.

                Why do you say Assault is a post ex-facto submission, and what specifically is your problem with that? And before you go there, it's actually "Ex post facto."

                What philosophy specifically was rehashed? Is it good or bad by your reckoning?

                What specific points of game construction are you talking about that consumers expect? And do you think Epic exceeded or fell short of those expectations?

                What specific shape formed which heavily impacted the entire community as a whole in UT? You're use of breath to describe Epic/DE's effort with the bonus packs, and a claim of a resulting blacklash by other game developers in charging for their updates, is hollow. Game developers have always charged for updates - there was no change in that regardless of Epic and DE's effort with the 4 bonus packs.

                Then the rest of your metaphors take a downturn in clarity and your message gets lost in your diatribe.

                Don't take this personally, I see it all the time on some debate forums I frequent, though not to this level. I just think if you want a serious discussion here you'd be willing to contribute seriously to it.

                Maybe you can supply your own answers to the questions above and have a straightforward discussion with us on this issue.

                Comment


                  #9
                  ^^^^ wot he sed :up:


                  i got half way through and went back to the start, becus i was determind i was gonna read this and understand it rather than just slag it off. I dont beleive in critisicing what u dont understand.

                  However, iv read it 3 times and i still dont quite catch on to exactly ur point is.... apart from vehicles just seem to have appeared without any prior reference to vehicles in the past 2 unreal tournament titles....

                  possible version for those of us who do not have english literature of philisophy degree's?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    um
                    I think your trying to say you liked ut but 2k3 turned out to be a nvidia driven letdown and you dont like the 2k4 vehicles?
                    or the key was carbon dioxide in cardboard boxes
                    please dumb down your post a bit so we can understand
                    Be like "FFS EPICS I HATE TEH VEHICLES!!!!!1"
                    or UT>2K*
                    :haha:

                    Comment


                      #11

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Unreal Tournament 2004; the objectives, the remaining reasons

                        Originally posted by Ausmok IV
                        Please share your opinions.
                        A lot of nice words and metaphors. Sounds really smart or something. :bulb::up:
                        Originally posted by yoghurt
                        Ever considered a career in marketing?
                        :haha:

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Ineffability, said Ephraim Marx, is the ineluctablility of the consequences of procedures. Little did he know how well his words would apply to Unreal Tournament 2004. The conjunction of automation and passivity; of the human and the merely anime, create discordances and tremulusness in even the most insensitive and impressionable of players. Of what value is Onslaught, when mechanization has already given the lie to the essential postulate, that there can be intelligence, artificial or not, in the mere destruction of Power Cores, which immediately, like the players, may respond in an endless minuet of absurd mock violence. Surely the buyers of Unreal had a right to expect the evolution would ultimately bring forth a higher form of life; instead, it is the forms of death that have proliferated, with all its sad echoes of the very corruption most of us yearn to escape from. Alas! Mr. Bleszinski has led us astray; it is impossible to know whether this was unintentional or the product of a mean and perverse sense of humor. We may be forgiven for asking whether this had to happen, and for expressing our natural repugnance.

                          Qu'il faut peu de chose pour vous perdre, as de Maupassant shrewdly observed, only a century before. We have no record of the response of his friend Ephraim, cousin of Karl.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Clever! :up:

                            Comment


                              #15


                              Human reason is by nature architectonic.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X