ET:QW - SP & Bots ???

(kamikazee) #101

That’s an interview for Q4 BTW. Gotcha? :smiley:

(BR1GAND) #102

Umm read the whole thread and youll see its on topic pal!

(kamikazee) #103

Ehm… What do you mean with the “whole thread”? Just the page you linked to or some other link on it as well?
I haven’t seen anyone mentioning ET:QW on that page… It could be me, of course.

Please quote the right part then.

(BR1GAND) #104

Im talking about this thread. Q4 game design is very relevant to QW:ET. Which has been discussed at length in this thread. Gotcha! :eek:

And to further clarify. It has been said serveral times in this thread that to devote time and effort into making a game with mp ai, like in Q3, BF2, Joint OPS, JEDI Academy… ect ect ect. Would somehow lessen the quality of the game. I am submitting that if we are developing voicechat (which is only being done because of the xbox crowd imo) when we have better 3rd party voice chat out there… then the whole resource management aurgument is bunk.

(kamikazee) #105

It’s relevant but it’s NOT the same codebase.

And now to the point: this new function is developed for Quake 4 for the Quake 4 engine.
Q4 is developed by Raven. ET:QW by SplashDamage.
The only link is id and their engine, so no time or resources are wasted for ET:QW itself.

Can I finally claim my ‘Gotcha’ or de we keep arguing? :smiley:

(Lanz) #106

Hmm, I read it, where’s the connection?

It’s developed for Q4 and then ported over to ET:QW, what’s your point?

(BR1GAND) #107

My point is simply Q4 unlike Q3 was released without bots. QW:ET will be entirely MP online only. Why no offline practice mode? Evidently because its a waste of resources… but yet we will waste the time to develop in-game voice chat. Maybe Raven and SD arent directly influenced by ID and Activision, I think they are. I just dont like the trend. And that trend is affecting both games.

(SCDS_reyalP) #108

Given an off-the-shelf library for VOIP, adding it to a game is a very much simpler task than creating decent bots for a complex team/class based game like ET:QW. So that argument doesn’t really hold up, even if we do accept your opinion that in-game VOIP is a ‘waste’.

(BR1GAND) #109

Really… even if we do accept your opinion that adding voip to a game is a much simpler task… Modders like Maleficusl are doing a good job on the cheap. We should get more for our money then features that wont be used over features that definitely will.

(Lanz) #110

It’s really not an opinion, it’s a fact. It’s much easier to implement VOIP than bots and especially so if they bought a lib for it.

I’m not really going to defend their decision to not implement bots since I really don’t know the exact reason for it. I do know though that I rarely if ever play agaist bots personally and wont miss them.

And you know this how? I’m not saying you are right or wrong but it’s a bold statement.

(SCDS_reyalP) #111

Really… even if we do accept your opinion that adding voip to a game is a much simpler task…
[/quote]
It’s a pretty educated opinion :moo:
Writing good VOIP from scratch is hard, but you would be foolish to do that when you can just license it. VOIP is pretty much independant of the game. Bots OTOH, will always have to be tailored to the specific engine, gameplay and map representation (and in many cases, each specific map), even if you do already have the basic tech.

Modders like Maleficusl are doing a good job on the cheap.

Yes, and look at how long he’s been working on them. Sure, he doesn’t work on them full time, but don’t forget that Fritz/ET benefits from all the work done on Fritz/RTCW

(Mordenkainen) #112

Not to mention that bots as a game feature is like a criticism magnet. They’re never challenging enough or varied enough or even believable enough for most people.

With VoIP you have one major problem to optimise: bandwidth utilisation. With bots you have: CPU utilization and flexibility. The later can really suck in a lot of man hours to get maps to play nice with bots or vice-versa. Getting bots into BF2 is relatively easy in this regard because flag-capturing is just one of the many types of objectives ET has.

Making a game or any other type of creative endeavour is all about priorities. Your creation is never “done” so you always have have to sacrifice something. For a MP game in 2006 SD decided VoIP is of higher priority than SP bots. If they had decided otherwise you’d be happy but other people that prefer VoIP wouldn’t be. And as I mentioned above, the sacrifice to implement VoIP pales in comparison to what you’d need to do to get bots into QW.

And btw, Q3 had bots because it had no SP mode. Quake 4 does have a 10 hour long SP campaign. Not to mention that 5 years separate both games. Back in late 1999 gaming over the internet was still relatively new for many.

(Vam) #113

Not really (I’m not that old either…), but dialup was still very popular and bots allowed gamers to play offline. I don’t think id was thinking about the “future market” with Q3, it was thinking about the current market that existed. Which is why VoIP is likely to be added to this game, because the current market is likely to handle it with no problems (broadband users).

Likely bots could be developed for Q4 faster than ET:QW because Q4 has a single player campaign and the “AI” is in the game for bots. I think they should have added them honestly. It will likely take modders much longer to develop bots for QW. If SD adds AI, modders can build single player mods much more faster I think.

(BR1GAND) #114

Ok I get that its not 1999 anymore and everyone is not using dialup… But i still believe you make a game for both online and offline, mp should be fun with 1 to 20 ppl, single player can be fun once, twice or even 3 times but it doesnt give the replay value that bots do, but even at that at least its something, MP only cant be played offline and solo period.

(DarkangelUK) #115

Welcome to a new era where online only games are being developed. May be a good thing, may be a bad thing, who knows, you don’t and neither do i… but someone has to take the leap, and it looks like it’s SD. How about we wait and see how thing’s pan out with the game after release, then you can say “i told you so” if all doesn’t go well, instead of repeating the same crap over and over again. Please, for all our sanity, throw the broken record out the window.

(BR1GAND) #116

Sorry, please point me to the forum where you give input or feedback on game design, I guess im making a groupie go insane.

(DarkangelUK) #117

“Your game will fail because if has no bots/sp portion” is hardly constructive feedback now is it (not a quote by you, but in general)… and repeating it over and over doesn’t hammer it home any more (which you do by the looks of most of your posts… handy little option in the profile there). You say the same thing over and over… it’s getting old man… doesn’t take a “groupie” to notice that. Oh and i like how everyone is a “groupie” that doesn’t agree with your thoughts… well done on that one.

(ayatollah) #118

This point has been discussed numerous times over and am getting pretty bored of people showing and saying the same point which has been counter-argued to oblivion, some people want bots, more people don’t, most don’t care…Of those that don’t care are SD and there will be no bots. It is painful to read through this arguement again and again. You want bots play BF2, if you want a fresh, enjoyable, sociable experience every time you load up a game play W:ET until ET:QW comes out.

(BR1GAND) #119

If the issue wasnt important theres no reason to comment or gawk… jest move along. Nobody is forcing you to read the thread. Youll still keep your sanity and you wont be bored to death.

(Joe999) #120

can someone lock this thread please? as is well known there neither will be a sp version, nor will et:qw come with bots out of stock. besides the discussion on this page shows no arguments anymore, it only contains the rant of some kid which doesn’t get what it wants. the thread has been buried in october and has been bumped up 6 months later by that kid for the sole purpose of flaming. this leads nowhere.

nuke plz! :bump: