CEONSS

And everybody forgets that it is impossible to make a game, which will please the UT99 fanbase, the UT2004 fanbase and the UT3, because these 3 games work quite differently.

I'm just worried about the next Unreal game guys. It has the potential to be so great with community input. It also on the other hand has the potential to be a disaster because of some knuckleheads who've only played UT3 and not the whole series. Or people who come over from games like dota or call of duty or battlefield and try to make the game totally the opposite of a sci-tech fps .Im in my mid 30's. Ive played every Unreal Tournament release. I just want to see it done right. Do you blame me? lol

We don't blame you, but many UT2004 players no longer care about the series since the disappointment of UT3. I know ppl personally, who were disappointed by UT3 and sticked to UT2004, but eventually they stopped playing and they no longer care about the series. And players who didn't play a real UT game or started with UT3 have no experiences about the previous games.

Excellent comment, Funky.

No worries, s2ta, no one blames you. We just have our reasons for not posting there, I guess.
I've stayed away from the new UT forum because I've only played UT2004, so I can't really say anything about what was better in which part or what should be included again/left out.

Did any of you like UT3's Warfare gametype in UT3? There has been discussion https://forums.unrealtournament.com/forum.php in the development of the next UT in keeping Warfare the way it is, in place of Onslaught. What do you guys think of that?

Seems to me this thread was created to discuss the exact same thing that the already existing other topic was doing regarding the development of the new UT. There's also little room to interpret this thread as some kinda exceptional or emergency call to rally, seeing as most members here already seem to know that the issues you're bringing up have been debated at that msg. board for awhile now, and could convey what's been going on there to a more informative degree than even you. Thus, I cannot see any reason to keep two discussions of the same thing going in parallel instead of merging this thread with the previous one.

Lastly, in your ongoing participation here, I'd like to ask of you to please avoid creating new threads for subjects that are already being discussed in other, existing topics so as to avoid unnecessary and untidy bloat. Thanks for understanding and welcome to the msg. board.

š2tå wrote:Did any of you like UT3's Warfare gametype in UT3? There has been discussion https://forums.unrealtournament.com/forum.php in the development of the next UT in keeping Warfare the way it is, in place of Onslaught. What do you guys think of that?

Epic said in one of there streams that they want all loved game modes from previous games to be in the game before release, this includes Onslaught and Assault. They also mentioned that the Alpha build they release to the public will hopefully include DM, TDM and CTF, these game modes are there main focus in early development. The great thing about this New UT and previous UT titles, is the chance to Modify the game, So for example if Onslaught isn't in the base game, you know somebody will make it themselves. The marketplace they're introducing will be fantastic, it won't be a choir to find and install mods/skins/maps ect. One thing i was disappointed in this new game, is the movement. I was totally biased towards UT2004 movement because there current build doesn't include double jump, or dodge jump. I realised UT2004 fans will make mutators to suit there needs, and there will be plenty servers running mutators to suit peoples preferred UT game style. For example, the most popular UT3 VCTF server runs a UT2004 movement mutator.

Epic have a live stream (Twitch) every Wensday to tell the community the progress on the game. They upload the streams to there youtube channel, there has been 3-4 already so check them out >>> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXArNj ... qyyqjYVysA

The last part of the streams are questions asked by the community. You can submit your own questions on the forums, they make a sticky each stream.

The most recent stream and the stream about artwork direction are particularly interesting.

I think the developers listen mostly to the UT99 players, because many who have been following the UT series for long say that the best UT game is UT99, so I guess many things will be based on UT99. I remember that there was double jump in UT99, but there was no dodge-jump in it IIRC.

So other than watching Epic's Project Update video from almost 2 weeks ago that Funky linked to above, it occurs to me that it's been well over a month since I last found the time to properly sit down n' read through several of, what seemed to me, the most important threads on the new game's msg board for a couple o' hours in order to remain current with the major developments in the UT4/UT2014/UT2015/whatever project. Given my previous doubts and expressed misgivings towards the actual prospects of Epic seeing this thing through to the end and managing to complete an actual and full game for purchase out of this joint development deal, then, I thought I might just pose a few questions on some key issues that still remained up in the air last time I was reading, and hope that some more recently apprised folks here will be able to shed some light into some of those for everyone's benefit here. So, here's what I'm wondering about, and would appreciate any fresh updates on:

- I remember reading awhile back that the team of Epic's own staff that had been actively committed to producing/developing for this game amounted to just 8 people; not talking about the much longer list of Epic's devs and assorted personnel that can be said to be more loosely connected or affiliated with the project, btw. Has the number of UT4-committed in-house devs increased from those 8?
- It's been a few months since, I believe it was, Great Emerald proposed a dual licensing scheme, whereupon a distinction would be made between people wishing to employ the entirety of UE4's features for their own projects and who'd still need to pay the $19 per month (and be bound by the current licensing agreement) to do so, and those that'd be interested in just helping with UT4 development by donating code or assets exclusively for it and for whom Epic should consider providing that specific subset of UE4 functionality free of charge. The idea was to allow for Epic to continue getting financial support from people considering getting hands-on experience with the new engine a sensible business investment (your small studio pros and bedroom indie coders/groups), while keeping the opportunity cost at 0 for the vastly greater number of people who'd just care to dip their toe in custom content creation for the next Unreal Tournament game, but would be driven away instantly if they'd have to pay anything for that - as has been the case for every UT before it. Assuming I've got the gist of it right and not misrepresenting GE's concept here, has anything become of this proposal? Has Steven Polge or any other Epic higher-up of equal stature offered any kind of public response to this? Are they still just going ahead with the $19 paywall for everyone?
- As I understand it, unlike previous UTs, the code side of custom content for the next one will not be based on an intermediate scripting language system that resides, is compiled and safely "executed" between the core engine and the end result, but will rather be contained in more lower level, un-decompileable modules executing closer to the core (binary code even?) that servers will distribute to clients upon entry as necessary. If this interpretation is correct, needless to say that the "black box" approach raises all sorts of questions regarding the reliability and trustworthiness of random mods that servers will be pushing to players, to say nothing about any potential for malicious, custom-tailored code to be executed from within the game to all kinds of nefarious purposes and results. What I'm wondering here is, is the black box, undecompileable (thus unexaminable) mod still the standing design mentality that Epic is abiding by here? If so, have they stated why (my guess is to protect through obscurity the marketplace monetization potential of custom content creators' coding work)?
- Speaking of examinable custom content, has Epic stated whether they intend to include a map editor with the game at any point before or at its published state, or will all that need to be done through the UE4 devtool perpetually?
- Speaking of malicious content and behaviours, how has Epic's official approach regarding anticheat progressed so far? Considering the open development nature of the project will in all likelihood attract people of nefarious intent, cheatware creators included, long before the game is even ready, have they gotten into how they plan on handling issues like resources' integrity validation, tamper/injection-proofing or anything else?
- Switching back to demonstrating actual commitment, has Epic laid out exactly what part (or even what percentage) of the game they officially intend to fully develop by themselves so as to jumpstart things so far? I assume they'll be doing all the core work, such as game-specific netcode, UI, player movement and bot logic (objects' placement and memory management, events system and physics probably already built into UE4 itself), and I think they've said they'll do some work on the [T]DM gametype, but is that all they've let on we should expect from their devs? Is there an official roadmap of where they plan to stop and let the community build any other gametypes (and assorted content) they want as necessary?
- Lots of people are apparently already eager to contribute all kinds of audiovisual assets; particularly models, textures and sounds; and even if Epic will be doing limited work on just one gametype, that implies they'll need to have a few maps, which, in turn, will need to be populated by aforementioned types of assets. Will Epic only be using their own content there, and, even beyond that scope, have they stated whether they plan to act as the project's deduplication and bundling authority to prevent dozens of people fighting to establish whose the "definitive door frame" st.mesh will be, for example? Will there be no texture or any kinda model-based bundles this time around instead for fear of licensing issues or whatnot?
- Lastly, to delve a bit more into the licensing topic, when it comes to modders intent on releasing their content for free in the marketplace, will Epic be recommending or promoting any specific licensing scheme that's different from their for-profit counterparts? Will they be using said assets themselves or be allowed to distribute 'em in the game's official released state? I'd really like to see how they'll avoid getting burned on IP rights issues when trying to (ultimately) publish a game they'll apparently only have developed a fraction of themselves, tbh...


Anyway, sorry for the number and length of my questions there, and thanks in advance to anyone able to provide some insight into those not-so-trivial issues .

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014- ... might-look