Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do you think UT3 is balanced?

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

    #61
    well he's right

    Comment


      #62
      Originally posted by Lucius2 View Post
      well he's right
      In part, yes. However, you don't throw full UT3 communities out the window or the 1 million copies sold on console. These sales are what make investment in a new UT viable, it's delusional to think otherwise. Exchanging guaranteed cash by wishful thinking and "I'm sure that a PC exclusive would be successful". Are you sure? lol!

      I have the impression that people mis-understand me. Just because I see UT3 a compromise between PC and consoles, never I said I like it. I'm not a fan of consoles, I don't like the basic and wierd UI. However, just because that consoles are gaining on PC on generic games, that shouldn't overshadow UT. When you say PC "only", please show it's better for the UT franchise and not for "PC gaming"

      For me, "PC gaming" potential influence on gameplay is worse. When today someone talks about "PC gaming", the have a very specific sub-genre in mind: online, multi-player, tactical, realistic, first person shooters. Look at what UT is inspired on:
      [SHOT]http://turtlegt.planetaclix.pt/ut3/tut1.png[/SHOT]
      Deathmatch is a sport, fast paced, free-for-all. Destroy ... by all means necessary. No real life combat, slow paced, squads or ranks
      [SHOT]http://turtlegt.planetaclix.pt/ut3/tut2.png[/SHOT]
      Always moving, not camping.
      [SHOT]http://turtlegt.planetaclix.pt/ut3/tut3.png[/SHOT]
      This is an interesting one. Wait. Lovely? This probably I've already described what I wanted of UT4: beautiful and brutal without being afraid of being neither. In UT and last decade games, beautiful never meant "emo", neither brutal meant ultra-violent, there was a balance.

      There's something else about ultra-violent games that bother me. Now, I'm a fan of MMA, love horror movies and play gory shooters. It's that besides artificially rasing the PEGI ratings from 14+ to 18+ (have you noticed that UDK is rated Teen?), people stopped playing to win. While in older shooters, including UT and UT2004, dead bodies were just screen clutter, now people find violence particularly entertaining and almost goal of the game. It's not a side aspect anymore, it's glorified and predominant.

      Also regarding older games, they are vastly more innovative than newer. This is a quote from Wikipedia, by the Electronic Arts CEO:
      One critique compared EA to companies like Ubisoft and concluded that EA's innovation in new and old IPs, "Crawls along at a snail's pace,"[26] while even the company's own CEO, John Riccitiello, acknowledged the lack of innovation seen in the industry generally, saying, "We're boring people to death and making games that are harder and harder to play. For the most part, the industry has been rinse-and-repeat. There's been lots of product that looked like last year's product, that looked a lot like the year before."
      There are other reasons, but this is enough to illustrate why I'm not really a fan of "UT should be PC only" or how "PC vs consoles" gets mixed with UT. My stance which I will defend permanently, is: if for you, UT being a PC game is more important than being UT and you defend that "PC should become first than consoles" or PC gamers are prioritary, then please understand that you aren't the most influencing neither, who are, are the fans that play more UT than other games combined. That includes console gamers, sorry.

      Edit: actually, 2 more reasons:
      1) Geographic division.
      Consoles aren't threatening PC everywhere. I remembered about this graphic a while ago, I'll post it here too. This if for Europe:
      [SHOT]http://turtlegt.planetaclix.pt/misc/PcGamingIsDead.png[/SHOT]
      Look at how residual is the XBox360 and how popular are the Playstations. Read this report if you wish: http://knihovnam.nkp.cz/docs/ISFE_Co...port_final.pdf
      The point is, why am I forced to cope with what is happening elsewhere (mostly U.S., actually still some parts of Europe and a few others). I could go on and say, why don't I have cross-platform with PS3? Since the Xbox stagnates and the PS3 raised above it in one year, we'd have a decent sized community in Europe at night and weekends.

      2) Content Creation community
      PS3 is extra audience for content creators. Now, I'm not the one to speak in their name since I don't create Unreal Engine based stuff, but you realize that it would reduce their audience and their aspirations to reach those gamers. It's up to them to decide if they want it, it's not to me to prevent it from happening if I defended "PC only"

      Edit2: I suggest you guys at Epic to read that report

      Comment


        #63
        Tech trend data like that becomes very old, very quick. Only a short time ago PC gamers were drowning in negativity. Even Tim Sweeney said that there was a huge problem with PCs with integrated graphics, causing a sort of PC HW apartheid, making scaling a game impossible for studios. I think this doesn't hold now, it assumed everyones PC HW was static. Those that note each month's Steam PC HW survey know things are a lot better, with a vast majority having multicore cpus and dx10 capable gpus.

        It's also worth remembering that Vista's flop had a huge negative impact on PC gaming, one that it's only just recovering from now, Windows 7 has already surpassed Vista in terms of uptake. MS did get one thing right too - giving Vista users DX11.

        Comment

        Working...
        X