Go Back   The Older Gamers Forums > TOG Public Forums > Shooter Games: The Range

Shooter Games: The Range Public discussion forum for all shooter games.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10th February 2010, 05:23 AM   #1 (permalink)
Retired Administrator
Ryo
Retired Administrator
Ace - Post: 7823
 Ryo's Avatar

Default Why did UT3 "fail"?

Did it? Or only at TOG?

I mean, I still play UT3 from time to time and I scratch my head at why it doesn't get more love.

Are there any games like it, sci-fi, very fast paced, etc that are on the horizon that stand a chance of folks rallying to it? Or are TOG folks just over that genre of FPS?

GA is around, and I still may wind up playing it more - but its third person etc.
__________________

Add me on Facebook
Ryo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 10th February 2010, 09:28 AM   #2 (permalink)
dks
Competent - Post: 431
 dks's Avatar

Lurking
Default

I could never get into UT2k3/4 and UT3, still play UT99 alot lol
seems the scifi fps doesn't exist anymore, all third person these days.
__________________

I kicked your monkey then I used your goat.
dks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 09:59 AM   #3 (permalink)
Lethal - Post: 5501
 King_Rocket's Avatar

Pensive
Default

For me its pretty simple, UT stopped being fun. It used to be about two teams competing in a sports style game (with guns!) the whole war storyline was lame and took away what was rather unique about the series. The graphical chance from a more cartoon-y look in UT 2003/4 to the Gears of war look wasn't an improvement either.
__________________

"If a job's worth doing, no further justification is required." - Alice: Madness Returns
"It takes just as much work to achieve failure as it does to achieve success."
King_Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 10:54 AM   #4 (permalink)
Spammer - Post: 25479
 Reoh's Avatar

Amused
Default

Global Agenda as you mentioned, but yeah its third person view. Section 8 perhaps, except I hear that servers are kinda ghost towns. I'm presuming you mean typical FPS multiplayer action so I'll just ignore the recent Mass Effect. How about AvP? Its sci-fi technically. Oh Brink! Have you seen Brink? That might do it for you.

Brink
__________________

We need you, Citizen!
Reoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 11:10 AM   #5 (permalink)
Retired Administrator
Ryo
Retired Administrator
Ace - Post: 7823
 Ryo's Avatar

Default

Brink definitely looks interesting.

I've been playing Quake Live here and there for my fix, UT3, and looking at a game called Warsow.

Just seems like the fast paced movement angle is becoming a dying breed as compared to psuedo realistic movement in FPS and has been for quite some time.

I can't remember the last game that came out where rocket jumping was something you could do. Heck for a good while even things like circle strafing have been being replaced by vehicles and gadgets for all practical purposes. Mainstays of what used to be the FPS genre.

Planning seems to be replacing speed and has been for years. I reckon its because the playerbase is aging and because consoles aren't condusive to the elements of shooters I dig, what with the lack of solid mouse options (and I've looked).

I really would like to see Id rise from the ashes and reboot the genre, or at least provide a serious alternative. Quakelive though isn't yet taking off, and its niftiness is its accessbility, not the game itself. The latest ET that they farmed out was a joke.

But if Q5 Arena was done right, done well, and had everything just so - has the market shifted so much that it would flop? The uni kids of the day are playing consoles a lot more than PCs, and it darned sure wouldn't work with a console controller. So dunno.
__________________

Add me on Facebook
Ryo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 02:47 PM   #6 (permalink)
Retired Captain
Squad Officer
Left 4 Dead
Lethal - Post: 7437
 Drac's Avatar

Yeehaw
Default

I don't think people want deathmatch games anymore, they want team based games.

If you have a team based game online you need to capture a massive audience to keep things dynamic. To capture a larger dynamic player base you need to cater to at least a few different types of play styles.

One game has done this best, and that's TF2.

IMO it has single handedly usurped the multiplayer crown once held by the likes of Quake and UT.

Also, the concept of spawning with a pistol then running to the uber weapon of choice that was always in the exact same spot was never actually fun. That was simply a mechanic and the only way (at the time) of adding some variety to the game and not spawning players with every weapon to begin with, which would have been even less fun.

Now that shooters use class or "kit" systems and the like there's just no reason to hang on to that outdated idea, it wasn't fun then, it's still not fun now (I'm looking at you AvP Demo!!!!!)

When making TF2 valve looked at the different ways people liked to play all of those styles of games and packaged them up so you could jump in and instantly be playing the game you wanted to play. And that's the genius of it, that's all they really did, remove the scattered weapons and make you pick from the start what you wanted.

Love rocket jumping? Play the soldier.
Like super fast and crazy jumping about shenanigans? Play the scout.
Like being tricky and bouncing explosives around corners? Play the demoman.
Like being a total nutcase? Play the Pyro.

It's simple and it works. Has the speed and rocket jumping of Quake, the mobility of UT, the precision of Counterstrike and the tactical team based aspects of Team Fortress Classic.

In my opinion, UT3 failed to notice that even though they were about to release the same game (more or less) for the 4th time in a row that other developers had already outclassed them with a more approachable and more widely appealing game.

UT3 was released with poor documentation and a dinosaur of a design that most of us had totally forgotten about. I've logged about 10 hours in UT3 and still can't figure out most of the game modes, nothing in it seems obvious or intuitive and it just feels old.
__________________
.
. . . .
.

Last edited by Drac; 10th February 2010 at 02:50 PM.
Drac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 02:55 PM   #7 (permalink)
Dangerous - Post: 669
 Mysterio3's Avatar

Cheeky
Default

UT has alwasy been more of a lan game for me than an online game... for online, i want something that require a bit more thinking than "Ooooh! I saw movement!" *pull trigger*
That kind of game play is so easy it can be done drunk (and it often is)... and drinking alone sucks, so lans =]
__________________

^.^
Mysterio3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 12:41 PM   #8 (permalink)
Spammer - Post: 25479
 Reoh's Avatar

Amused
Default

I disagree.

Sure some people like team based games. I like team orientated objectives and so forth. But when regularly you see half or more of the team hiding just trying to get cheap kills. I can't see them pushing the objective at all. No, I don't think most gamers want team orientated objectives except to make it easier to kill people who take risks.
__________________

We need you, Citizen!
Reoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 01:01 PM   #9 (permalink)
Retired Administrator
Ryo
Retired Administrator
Ace - Post: 7823
 Ryo's Avatar

Default

You guys must have never spent time in a QW/Q3A CTF clan. It was pure teamwork from the bottom to the top.

Faster? Yes.

But I'm not talking about deathmatch vs modern FPS objectives based play.

I mean there was the original TF, a massive CTF culture, UT2004 had Onslaught, etc. And even clan arena was a lot more complicated and team based than just "team deathmatch", loads more.

Really straight deathmatch was never in the majority. CTF, Rocket Arena, Clan Arena etc were all the mainstays, and those weren't resource camps. The first one spawned you in a base with close at hand resources and RA and CA starts you fully loaded.

The main difference is the movement speed, vs today. Its still fragging. Its still teamplay.

The difference is movement speed is about half what it used to be.

Not mouselook speed, forward movement speed.

Some games ala GA have jetpacks like Tribes did.

But does anyone remember the Zoid CTF hook? Much less the Thunderwalker hook? Those sorts of things are long gone.

Yes, they were less "realistic" - as if any of these games are.

But it was fun. We played it for hours and hours.

Would it be any less fun today?

Why would it?

But console controllers simply can't be set to make that sort of movement workable for 99% of people. You need a hell of a mouse sensitivity and a bit of practice to be able to quick flick about.

And since games are being made with console ports as a matter of course planned into them, or worse, a PC port from a console game - that sort of gameplay style simply isn't on the list.

Slower moving games are more profitable, because they are accessible to console users.

But I reject that they are better. Or more of a "thinking man's game". I mean, I play every genre just about there is - strategy, MMOs, etc. Its not like thinking is a turnoff.

But moving at a snails pace is. For adrenaline they have to rely on explosions and scale.

But man those old school Quakeworld CTF matches, woo! You would be straight out heart pounding like mad, over a run of the mill, nothing at stake map.

No FPS has given that to me in the same way since. Oh sure, some single player games are fantastic for "oh shit" scares. Amazing at it, and I dig it. Some are just awesome for big explosions and the like, and complex (if linear) group achievements. And games like Eve get the heart pounding from a different direction (risk/reward pvp).

But the original Quakeworld/Q3A community had that every single map of every game, and the key difference to me was the movement speed was about twice the norm of FPS games today.
__________________

Add me on Facebook
Ryo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 02:44 PM   #10 (permalink)
Elite - Post: 4172
 Snott's Avatar

Default

I recently bought UT Pack on Steam as it was cheap but found it hard to get into without an existing core of players I know, and haven't played it in a month or so now. Did some Multiplayer but was kids who said "noob" and similar stuff a lot so I got bored of that real fast.

Brink does look good, I'll add it to the Sig I'm making to remind myself of new games I am waiting on lol.

Is the speed difference (slower) so that those with poorer ping have slightly more chance these days?
__________________
Trying out ArcheAge... liking it...
Snott is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +11. The time now is 10:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0