Vehicle armor should ricochet bullets and...

[ne_skaju]

Light armor shoul be vulnerable to bullets but absorb some damage.
Heavy armor should be unvulnerable for bullets (though could be damaged by Impact hammer), but these vehicles should have bad FOV, so infantry can attack them from rear or flanks.

[RogueLeader]

UT is not about realism, but about beeing fun. If you want realism go and play realistic tactic shooters, that is not UT. If you are skilled enough to blow up a tank with an enforcer you should have the possibility to do so and that is why UNREAL Tournament alway was such fun. When Epic thinks something is fun they implement it into the game no matter how unrealistic and I think that's quite a good way of making games beeing big fun.

[_Lynx]

+1 to what RogueLeader just said. Forget realism - It's Unreal after all. Think balance. You want vehicles that are vulnerable to some handheld weapons? Forget about Link Gun healing then, and vehicles should have less health.

[MonsOlympus]

If you are skilled enough to blow up a tank with an enforcer you should have the possibility to do so and that is why UNREAL Tournament alway was such fun.

I think this is the concern, not so much making UT more realistic but more skillful. There is reasoning behind the thinking so its not a totally unrealistic gameplay idea. What it does do is makes it harder for infantry vs vehicles which could cause some balance problem as the infantry should be unrealistically strong vs vehicles (like in tribes or warhammer 40k). It does add depth to the infantry vs vehicles side of gameplay and in my eyes thats a good thing, the link did well in 2k4 but there still was something missing. The avril IMO just wasnt effective enough as a general anti vehicle weapon considering the amount of damage a vehicle can do when used well.

When Epic thinks something is fun they implement it into the game no matter how unrealistic and I think that's quite a good way of making games beeing big fun.

I agree, the main goal should be fun! Adding depth to a game though doesnt instantly turn it into a tactical shooter, theres alot of finer points which makes that specific sub genre and first person isnt always a requirement. Would you call vampire: bloodlines or dues ex tac shooters? Those come alot closer to that then 2k4 could with this feature implemented.

I want to see the longevity of 2k7, this is why I kinda agree with any idea that will require alot of learning and participation on the part of the player. This way people will go omg I found such and such out a year after they have been playing the game. Thats something I noticed while comparing 2k4 to UT99 is that the core gameplay wasnt changed much at all, the weapons and basic movements all work the same way. There was a few things added here and there to create some extra depth but with the amount of people who have played through the older games (especially now with the anthology re-release). Since vehicles are so new it makes sense to add the depth between vehicles and infantry, since the infantry has been explored alot now and the vehicles are only on the second round.

[Pendrokar]

If you can't kill the guy with an assault rifle while you are in a tank, there is something wrong with you.

Forgot to mention killing a tank with an assault rifle is easy if your on a high hill at which the Cannon turret cannot fire (well minigun can).

[2th]

Will the dragons still be able to hurt vehicles?

lol.... comdey gold man. comdey gold!!!

[eduardvictor]

My opinion is that vehicles shouldn't be totally destroyed by bullets and lasers..

Just rendered totally useless, like:

Engine failure,
Gradual speed loss,
Weapon malfunctions and disablement...
Like a broken down car...

Only superweapons, turrets,rockets and other vehicles should totally wreck a vehicle in UT 2007...

[>>Gunslinger<<]

My opinion is that vehicles shouldn't be totally destroyed by bullets and lasers..

I disagree. I think the balance right now is pretty good, encourgaing use of both vehicles and foot work, esp when vehicles are not available.

Just rendered totally useless, like:

Engine failure,
Gradual speed loss,
Weapon malfunctions and disablement...
Like a broken down car...

I hear they are actually doing this to some degree.

Only superweapons, turrets,rockets and other vehicles should totaly wreck a vehicle in UT 2007...

I disagree. What happens when you are at a node (or even the core) without rox? Do you just lay down and die? I don't think that will be much fun. Plus, it IS possible to take down a tank on foot with a machine gun (assault rifle) irl, just much, much harder. Just like UT.

[Phopojijo]

Remember, realism doesn't make much difference to Unreal... just what's fun.

Frankly I'd prefer to see a resurrection (albeit not for more than one game... there is value to the phrase "Ad Nauseum") of Halo 1's vehicle system, in spite of Bungie themselves avoiding it. Shoot a vehicle? Passengers take a percent of damage. Shoot a passenger? He takes damage. Vehicle never dies.

Why? Reward. You secure a vehicle, you're rewarded with the vehicle and with the enemy's loss of the vehicle (as well as some frag points). You're rewarded for your successful risk management. Also, punishment -- the driver should have been more cautious and thereby got part of his team killed... punishment? His team loses his vehicle.

In a sense all game design comes down to is properly managing risks, punishments and rewards on a game-rules scale. The next tier is level design which does similar risk/punishment/reward management just on a map scale. The final tier is just making it flow properly and match the gameplay-atmosphere of the game itself. After that -- its just aesthetics and environment-atmosphere. Not to downplay the tedium and implementation of this statement, but for the most part, where items are laid out will affect gameplay more than the color palette used. Albeit, both are equally important...

Note how realism doesn't actually come up during this list? Just because you have the power to make things realistic, doesn't mean you should. Sure -- most games do realism really well, that's their thing. Some games, however, have their own things. Realism can be amazingly fun... non-realism can also be amazingly fun. Embrace variety.

Look at Final Fantasy... it doesn't always need to make sense.

[Mardok]

Remember, realism doesn't make much difference to Unreal... just what's fun.

Frankly I'd prefer to see a resurrection (albeit not for more than one game... there is value to the phrase "Ad Nauseum") of Halo 1's vehicle system, in spite of Bungie themselves avoiding it. Shoot a vehicle? Passengers take a percent of damage. Shoot a passenger? He takes damage. Vehicle never dies.

Why? Reward. You secure a vehicle, you're rewarded with the vehicle and with the enemy's loss of the vehicle (as well as some frag points). You're rewarded for your successful risk management. Also, punishment -- the driver should have been more cautious and thereby got part of his team killed... punishment? His team loses his vehicle.

In a sense all game design comes down to is properly managing risks, punishments and rewards on a game-rules scale. The next tier is level design which does similar risk/punishment/reward management just on a map scale. The final tier is just making it flow properly and match the gameplay-atmosphere of the game itself. After that -- its just aesthetics and environment-atmosphere. Not to downplay the tedium and implementation of this statement, but for the most part, where items are laid out will affect gameplay more than the color palette used. Albeit, both are equally important...

Note how realism doesn't actually come up during this list? Just because you have the power to make things realistic, doesn't mean you should. Sure -- most games do realism really well, that's their thing. Some games, however, have their own things. Realism can be amazingly fun... non-realism can also be amazingly fun. Embrace variety.

Look at Final Fantasy... it doesn't always need to make sense.

Well said.
Plus, the game is called Unreal Tournament.

I personally don't care about realism, all I want is fun fun fun.

[Carinae]

.........AND great gameplay

Want a more "realistic" game where most players have no chance against vehicle armour? Play Battlefield.

Realism or not, IMO the UT franchise provides far more enriching and skill-rewarding gameplay than Battlefield. And this dynamic should stay

[Xyx]

UT is not about realism, but about beeing fun. If you want realism go and play realistic tactic shooters, that is not UT.

Realism is fun, silly is not. If you want silly, go play Mario.

What happens when you are at a node (or even the core) without rox? Do you just lay down and die?

Yes. Serves you right for being caught with your pants down.

There do happen to be quite a few popular shooters that work like that. If it weren't "much fun", then how do you explain the success of these titles?

gameplay-atmosphere [...] environment-atmosphere. [...] Note how realism doesn't actually come up during this list?

We must be looking at two different lists, then. Atmosphere thrives on immersion. Lack of proper realism ruins atmosphere.

There is a fine line between abstracting realism for gameplay purposes and plain silliness. Third person perspective? Abstraction. Shooting through a wall of steel with a pistol? Silly.

the game is called Unreal Tournament.

Indeed. Note well how it is not called Silly Tournament.

Want a more "realistic" game where most players have no chance against vehicle armour? Play Battlefield.

Want silly nonsense? Play Mario.

This whole debate is but focusing on the ends of the spectrum. Unreal Tournament can be and needs to be both playable and realistic.

[MonsOlympus]

I think realistic is actually a hard thing to define, especially in relation to gaming. Realism in graphics doesnt always mean realism in gameplay and the opposite is true also, then take the words skillful and depth. If I say a game is skillful and has alot of depth Im not necessarily talking about realism.

One thing I noticed with TV and Movies these days is the shaky cam, that is soo over used to get things to look dramatic and real but it doesnt really help unless used in the right area's. Same principle, yeah things can be realistic in UT but those things should be limited to area's where it will help the feel of things. Over realism would be a bad move for the franchise I think but you really have to look at something in the gameplay as just that.

You cant really take said feature and say yes that will add to realism because realism in itself is a whole concept and not just pieces. Battlefield not only attempts to simulate a battle field but provides realism as much as it can, yet in areas its actually more arcade than realism (if you ever played a flight sim you'd know what I mean). This was done most likely to improve the overall feel of the game and gameplay itself.

Again same principal if a feature adds depth and skill it doesnt make it realistic even if the concept behind the idea is equal to something real. Its the way its implemented and integrated with the whole which will make it feel the way it does. This in my eyes is where gameplay and gameflow differentiate, gameplay can be realistic but to get the right flow certain gameplay elements might be streamlined to improve the flow.

[Phopojijo]

gameplay-atmosphere [...] environment-atmosphere. [...] Note how realism doesn't actually come up during this list?

We must be looking at two different lists, then. Atmosphere thrives on immersion. Lack of proper realism ruins atmosphere.

There is a fine line between abstracting realism for gameplay purposes and plain silliness. Third person perspective? Abstraction. Shooting through a wall of steel with a pistol? Silly.

Atmosphere doesn't actually thrive on proper realism provided consistency. Reality should be a context built by the developer and given to the player.

And by the way, I was originally referring to atmosphere as in how a game plays. Contrary to popular belief, a lot more popular than I wish, two games can play two different ways and still be fun. Halo plays one way, Unreal plays another, Battlefield yet another, Counterstrike yet another, and HalfLife crowbar-carves yet another path of its own.

Each has their fanboys who fail to acknowledge any other game (mostly Counterstrike)... all are "just first person shooters"... and yet each play in very different ways if you get to know them. (So yea, wrong definition of atmosphere )

Do you have fun playing Unreal Tournament?

[The5thviruz]

Forgot to mention killing a tank with an assault rifle is easy if your on a high hill at which the Cannon turret cannot fire (well minigun can).

So get in the minigun turret and kill him. Or, get out of the tank, kill him and get back in it.