Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ONS = Warfare ?? Please explain EPIC.

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

    #91
    Originally posted by Xyx
    Apparently, they need more of a clue than that. Something like "What you are doing now is entirely pointless. Stop doing it and go shoot people!".

    Still interesting what moves them, though. Have you asked them why they seemingly ignore the text? Perhaps a better understanding of the underlying problem would help.
    All I could do is ask them through the text-chat. But then they seem to not read that too, even when I tell them again at the end of the match.

    Comment


      #92
      Originally posted by Moloko
      what they should do though (if they haven't already) is get some more people who play at a much higher skill level to playtest, for some more feedback not just (can't shoot down a raptor) Mark Rein, because no offense to him but that comment is crazy noobish.
      Yes, they do need a good play tester, but you'll find the one in that video (and who playtests the most) is Jeff Morris, AKA Wartourist.

      Comment


        #93
        Originally Posted by Xyx
        Originally Posted by fuegerstef
        I invite you to join one of our demoservers where at least once an hour people seem to not to be able to read the huge yellow letters "You cannot damage a locked node."
        Apparently, they need more of a clue than that. Something like "What you are doing now is entirely pointless. Stop doing it and go shoot people!".

        Still interesting what moves them, though. Have you asked them why they seemingly ignore the text? Perhaps a better understanding of the underlying problem would help.
        Well ONS is alittle different than games like bf where you can capture any point, if I remember rightly. I even attack unlinked nodes on occasion when an enemy takes down a node behind the one Im attacking. Really though I find it make the gametype a bit too linear, although that does depend on the node setup now that I have been enligtend, it does also help to keep the action in certain areas so you dont get people all over the joint or rushing the power cores etc.

        Id like to see some nodes which dont have to be linked to, to destroy but you still need to link to them to capture. Something kinda like z steel soldiers or warhammer dawn of war, I guess its almost the same as bf or similar to ONS. Its just with clear lines to everything its easier to know where your objectives are and certain parts of the maps get used alot more.

        This could be where the side objectives come in. One thing I have never under stood with any fps gametype like this is you always spawn at the point the enemy is trying to capture, just makes for spawn kills, ofcoarse theres limited protection. Perhaps the side objectives start up vehicles factorys or open new spawn areas so that you can gain an upper hand especially if your team isnt doing so well. It gives you a better oppertunity to mount a counter offensive, ofcoarse nodes can give you this as well but like I said its a clear line from A to B where with the side objectives I think they'll be alittle more blurred. This should also help newer players to play as they can do these objective similarly to other games then work there way up to being good at offensive manovers on nodes.

        Really though Im just guessing because Warfare is very up in the air, this could be bad news for ONS players because they could be loosing their gametype of choice in return for something new. On the other hand it could be Warfare is more ONS like and the people who wanted something new are lost. If Warfare is anything like what we've been hearing over the times both player sets should be happy. Although Id be sad if ONS went I would be more than happy with something new that was better, I like ONS but really there are plenty of other gametypes which got cut this time around. If this move is to make one better gametype then great but if we recieve an updated ONS Im sorry to say but I'll be dissapointed.

        Comment


          #94
          Originally posted by Hedge-o-Matic
          I'm not so much "alarmed" as I am sort of confused. I remember reading Epic's first take on Warfare, with deformable terrain, and the map altering in real time as the teams pressed the battlelines forward and achieved objectives. Then this effect was canned, in favor of a series of linked maps, held together with streaming loading.

          Now, Warfare and Onslaught are combined.

          Now, I do enough creative work to understand that the vision can drift. But, given the severe drifting of the Warfare paradigm, why have they tethered Onslaught to it? Onslaught was a solid gametype, with a solid following. To me, they may be tossing the baby out with the bathwater on this one.

          Now, this isn't just a reactionary, reflexive fear-of-change thing, but a concern rooted in experience. Take Domination, from UT99. A simple concept with hardcore fans, that, with some very minor tweaks, could have stayed unchanged in 2k3. Instead, Epic changes fundamental characteristics, altering the game to the degree that the Domination fans abandon it, and nobody replaces them. They fixed a gametype that wasn't broken to begin with. Imperfect? Maybe, but hey, I don't get 100% oxygen exchange but I'm not lining up to replace my lungs with experimental versions, if you get my drift.

          I just hope that Epic considers all that Onslaught does right currently, and is very cautious with their changes. Warfare is all over the map, conceptually, and now it's trying to use Onslaught as an anchor, to slow the drift. I just hope this doesn't morph Onslaught into somthing it isn't, all to save a concept that doesn't appear all that solid to begin with.

          On the other hand, if all goes well, this could be very good news, bringing together the Assault, Onslaught, and possibly vctf people into one gametype. Obviously, a mod team will begin porting over "Classic Onslaught" starting from the day the demo is released, but if Warfare is a better experiment than Double Domination turned out to be, we may not miss the original Onslaught very much.

          I have my fingers crossed, and hope Epic can learn from their mistakes as well as I think they can.
          Why would you be confused, this is standard practice for Epic napkin ideas, incoherent design phases and making stuff up as they go along trying to fill up the gaps...

          Its nice to see Epic havent learned anything from ut2k3/Unreal2/ut2k4/ECE

          Comment


            #95
            Originally posted by Bishop Gantry
            Why would you be confused, this is standard practice for Epic napkin ideas, incoherent design phases and making stuff up as they go along trying to fill up the gaps...

            Its nice to see Epic havent learned anything from ut2k3/Unreal2/ut2k4/ECE
            What do you want? Designers that don't tell you anything until the game is finished or designers that discuss unfinished ideas/concepts with the community and change them if necessary?

            I'll go for the second type. So don't punish them when game concepts change.
            They could give us an update on the ONS/Warfare situation though.

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by VoodooPriest
              What do you want? Designers that don't tell you anything until the game is finished or designers that discuss unfinished ideas/concepts with the community and change them if necessary?

              I'll go for the second type. So don't punish them when game concepts change.
              They could give us an update on the ONS/Warfare situation though.
              For a discussing to take place it must actually happen first...

              In my opinion the main problem with Epic is their last minute on the spot drastic game concept changes so why the hell should I support it, the other main problem being the inconsistency and breaking their own known fluff material and almost obsessive nature of trying to reinvent the wheel when its already there...

              When you have the wheel you dont try and reinvent it, you dont try and change it all you have to do is improve it...

              Comment


                #97
                No point in ****, epic haven’t even shown their card and into they do I'm going to play the waiting game. Those guys working on the game are players too, so I'm sure there get it right...

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by fuegerstef
                  Scroll down, till you find "Kompaniet quits Onslaught"
                  And I know that there had been better Clans than FAT before (you forgot mi5, although B1tchkilla playes for them from time to time now). FAT were originally an NFS-Underground clan that was formed for fun. Some of them got UT2k4 over 1 year after relase.
                  Hehehe, well I was just joking about the FAT part, its amazing to see how they improved I guess. I remember when they first appeared on the ladder (I thought their name was funny :P).

                  And off course mi5 p00ned the ladder, but if I remember correctly they only started doing so after most top clans left (I could be wrong tho).

                  Anyway, Im getting way off-topic here.

                  As for the way how ONS gets bored, the choke point issue was just an example. Although maps without that proble are way more fun, I still thing it wouldnt be good enought to keep players interested for a period longer than 2 years. There just comes a point where battles over certain nodes get boring. Just take a look at dawn, its hardly played because (especially in the beginning) matches took ages! I even remember my first match against warhead (fear) we played dawn and ended up in overtime where the cores drained to 1-0 (yes one core had 1 points left). It was fun at the time but got bored soon. Now matches like that feel frustrating.

                  Im just looking for some challenge to get back peopls interest in ons, and I hope silly things like orbs in warfare can do that.

                  Btw, I enjoyed reading the kompaniet article. Those guys sure knew what they were talking about at the time.

                  Comment


                    #99
                    Originally posted by MrScruffy
                    i still find it amazing that newbs need this explaining.
                    Hey, me too, but apparently this is a real problem on some servers.

                    Originally posted by MrScruffy
                    it's mentioned in the video you get with the game aswell explaining onslaught.
                    Yeah, and do you think people making these mistakes could find that, buried as it is in some obscure corner of the menu?

                    Originally posted by fuegerstef
                    All I could do is ask them through the text-chat. But then they seem to not read that too
                    Have you tried MOTD? That's kinda hard to NOT read.

                    Originally posted by MonsOlympus
                    ONS is alittle different than games like bf where you can capture any point
                    I might make a mutator for that sometime...

                    With far stronger cores, of course. And maybe go into overtime with cores draining right from the start.

                    Originally posted by MonsOlympus
                    Id like to see some nodes which dont have to be linked to, to destroy but you still need to link to them to capture.
                    Recipe for deadlock. Nodes are already destroyed far easier than they are reclaimed. Those nodes would be dead 95% of the time. It's not like they're small or moving targets. Unless they were in some sort of bunker, but that's a mapping thing.

                    Originally posted by MonsOlympus
                    One thing I have never under stood with any fps gametype like this is you always spawn at the point the enemy is trying to capture, just makes for spawn kills
                    In most games, you have equal weapons and more health when you respawn. In ONS, you even lose your spawn protection for visiting a locker. That makes spawnkilling easy more than anything.

                    Originally posted by Bishop Gantry
                    Why would you be confused, this is standard practice for Epic napkin ideas, incoherent design phases and making stuff up as they go along trying to fill up the gaps...
                    And telling the community all about it.

                    Originally posted by Bishop Gantry
                    Its nice to see Epic havent learned anything from ut2k3/Unreal2/ut2k4/ECE
                    Yeah, I at least expected them to get the link setups right for the ECE ONS maps. But noooo, all three fux0red.

                    Originally posted by VoodooPriest
                    What do you want? Designers that don't tell you anything until the game is finished or designers that discuss unfinished ideas/concepts with the community and change them if necessary?
                    Har. There's a difference between discussion (two-way communciation) and misinformation (the one-way communciation we're seeing here - at least, until Epic acknowledges any suggestion made here).

                    Originally posted by p2xelgen
                    Those guys working on the game are players too, so I'm sure there get it right...
                    Sure, that's why UT2004 still suffers from several flaws that were pointed out in UT2003, eh?

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by fuegerstef
                      IIRC Kompaniet left for different reasons than you stated
                      Yeh, Kompaniet didn't take getting pwned very well

                      Neither did Kaizen

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Gearbox
                        Yeh, Kompaniet didn't take getting pwned very well

                        Neither did Kaizen
                        kompaniet never did much in the first place if my memory serves. kaizen on the other hand lasted a while till they finally ended up merging with x6. they had a decent ONS roster. though my favorite line comes from a match against them "LOL. VEHICLES" right after i crushed one of them with my raptor lol

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by SweetTooth
                          kompaniet never did much in the first place if my memory serves.
                          Well they did quite well imo.

                          I was among the first to enter the clanbase onslaught demo ladder (with my clan tD) and remember first meeting Kompaniet there. They were in a league of their own, they really mastered the game really fast and p00ned. We were #3 on the ladder at the time and did quite well, they were the first to beat us! Afaik they left the ladder around the summer wich is about 6 months after the game's release. And in the time they were active they practicly pwned everyone. Sadly the demo ladder was erased so u cant see their results there, but u can still see their results on the 6on6 ladder, they are the #1 clan in the hibernating list.

                          Comment


                            I wonder if they'll make us wait for the demo, or will they release more information as aspects of the gametype become "set?"

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X