My complaints about none bots in Quake Wars!

(kamikazee) #21

This is what would seem logical from a developer’s view: (If I was a developer in the first place)
[view]

ET:QW is a MP game. No SP, as it has been decided from the start.
Keeps over: a mode where bots assist humans, and a semi-SP mode where there’s actually no-one around.

But, if bots are merely used when players can’t find themselves a human oponent, how much time is worth it to be invested in making them work? Time is money…
How many time is necessary, and how much will it pay off?

[/view]

Now you do give some examples. But I’d simply look for a good server out of the hundreds which is admined well. We try to keep a fair policy on my clan’s server where we don’t mind one guy spawn killing, as long as he give’s the other team a fair chance to break out. (Artillery spamming is a no-go. Try to play railgun if there’s a constant amount of airstrikes going on on the axis spawn.)
The same goes for skill, we try to balance things.

Finding an alternative to leading bots is harder to find though. As said on these forums, making bots which respond to loads of conditions asks serious logic and processing power. Get a new machine then, since an army of bots could take it on it’s knees. (Q4 allready has special rules for map making, since the physics system can seriously mess up if lots of bodies pile up or if some object gets trapped.)

(baff) #22

From a developer point of view, I think this game will only have bots if they have enough time to write them in.
I’ll take a bet they can find the code to do it, and that long as they are not trying to compete with the heavy AI titles of FEAR and Far Cry but just going for some basic workable plums, it’s feasable.
But I concur.
The developers may not have it prioritised as highly as I do.
Most likley it is too late already, if it isn’t in by now I don’t suppose it will be.

Dying by spawn rape isn’t an especial issue for me personally, but it is an example of how easy it is to be outclassed by other players. Since I own my own servers also, I am easily able to police them to my own preferences and whimsies.
However…I don’t want to. I can’t be bothered. I’m just like having a little game with my mates. Admining is easy, if they don’t play nice I punch them.

I own my own internet/lan servers and always keep them upgraded to handle as many AI as possible.
If the game is good and meets my needs I am very willing to spend the money.

Physics systems are increasingly a problem. I think they should be applied sparingly in most games. Presumably there is a server assignable timer to delete dead bodies or a bodycount maximum as in many other games.

(Nissen2k) #23

I saw this. SD is looking for a guy to work on Quake Wars gameplay, and they are looking for these skills:

Preferred Skills and Experience

Knowledge of OpenGL
Knowledge of id technologies (esp. Doom 3)
Experience with AI <---- Why are they looking for someone with AI experience to work on Quake Wars?
Experience with rigid body dynamics
Experience with game networking

(Joe999) #24

why don’t you play those games with bots then? if there are so many games with bots, you already have quite a bunch to choose from. why should there be another game which is the same as all the others?

a bot is nothing compared to the fun you get by playing with humans against humans.

besides far cry may have A, but certainly no I.

(baff) #25

why don’t you play those games with bots then?

I do.

if there are so many games with bots, you already have quite a bunch to choose from. why should there be another game which is the same as all the others?

There are more multiplayer games on the market with no bot modes, than there are with bot modes. should I ask you why you need another?
Because I like them and I want more of them. As do many other people. We all have money and we are willing to pay.

Equally I might say If you are so happy with Enemy Territory, why buy Quake Wars?
We are all looking forward to something new.

a bot is nothing compared to the fun you get by playing with humans against humans.

No.

I get more fun playing bots,YOU get more fun playing humans.

The more features you add to your game the more people will buy it.
I don’t think the inclusion of bots would mean humans could no longer play against each other.

(Joe999) #26

because i’ve played it from the beginning and that’s a loooong time and i need something new and there is nothing equal to it except et:qw. i still play ET because the other games simply suck. maybe the developers should have better focused on gameplay and quality instead of trying to put everything into the game like e.g. bots in order to get a large market share.

(Dazzamac) #27

baff I’ll put this in perspective here. You are arguing your point in a forum populated almost entirely with ET players. Many of them have tried all of the competitors and have come to the conclusion that ET is best. I have quite a collection of £30 coasters, doorstops and paperweights now. Nobody on this forum cares how much it did or didn’t cost to make or buy. If ET was sold in the shops, many would still buy it and it would still be popular.
So before you dig yourself into a deeper hole here, whilst your point might be entirely valid in your perspective. Trying to argue it to a crowd of people that have already decided to buy it the moment its released, and have had that mindset since it was announced, is a losing battle.

(baff) #28

maybe the developers should have better focused on gameplay and quality instead of trying to put everything into the game like e.g. bots in order to get a large market share.

Maybe they should do both.
Why have either or when you can have both.

in order to get a large market share

maybe everyone should work for free and embrace poverty as life goal.

@ dazz there are fanboys on every forum for every game.
ET is a very worthy game to be hooked on.
I’m not here to persuade you that you will like other games more.
I undserstand that you feel ET was and still is a very saleable product, and that other devoted fans in the forum will agree, that is to be expected.
It is of Historical note however that the owners and makers of the game, did not, and do not agree with your appraisal.
I think they made a wise choice to distribute it free, as at the time of release it was graphically showing it’s age. I hope that they capitalise on their endeavours this time round with a big hit as reward.

This is a good resource for finding out more about Quake Wars which is game I am intrested in. You should expect more noobs with more varied opinions in the months to come.

(Nissen2k) #29

Good bots = Good gameplay for those who enjoy bots! Trust me, there are many!

(Joe999) #30

i told you: quality. i bought them all. the best was vietnam: i played it for 6 hours, then dropped it. cs:source i gave to my nephew including the whole steam account. i’ll never buy any game again that comes with steam. far cry … well, i hope crytek only makes single player games in the future. all wasted money. doom 3 multiplayer: no comment on that one. quake 4 multiplayer: short term fun for 30 to 60 minutes a day for approx 2 weeks.

don’t be sarcastic here. most of the games lack from quality. and that’s why you want to have another game as well. putting everything into one game isn’t good for the game’s quality.

apropos “work for free”: even if et:qw would suck, i’m prepared to spend the money blindfold only to reward the pleasure that SD gave me in the past years for free. are you willing to do the same?

(Dazzamac) #31

^^^^ What he said

(baff) #32

don’t be sarcastic here. most of the games lack from quality. and that’s why you want to have another game as well. putting everything into one game isn’t good for the game’s quality.

No.
Thats why YOU want another game perhaps?

I don’t suffer from a lack of quality games I own and enjoy many. I fully expect this release (judging by it’ predecessor) to be quality also.
I want more and new games because I am a games fan.

Viz. Not putting enough into a game isn’t good for a games quality.

apropos “work for free”: even if et:qw would suck, i’m prepared to spend the money blindfold only to reward the pleasure that SD gave me in the past years for free. are you willing to do the same

What’s stopping you?

(Dazzamac) #33

the lack of a paypal button on the homepage :moo:

Not putting enough into a game isn’t good for a games quality.

Ever hear of the term ‘Quality, not quantity’ Games that are full options, bots and modes tend to be trying to make up for their own inadequacy

(baff) #34

hang on i’ll get you the postal address

(Joe999) #35

honestly: do you read what you write? or are you simply the kind of guy who wants it all, no matter what, main thing is: all. i for my part want a quality game which i can enjoy with my friends online, which makes me not look for the next one. that’s why i still play ET, and nothing of the new ones.

that wasn’t the question.

(baff) #36

it is now.

(B0rsuk) #37

Long story short: etqw looks far too complex to allow creation of bots in a reasonable amount of time.
Short story long: anything by Dickens.

You may have not noticed, but W:ET already is more complex than most games out there. You can’t just kill and insult everyone to win, like in CS.
Here, every class is different, and every map is different. There are lots of special abilities to use - landmines, mobile mg42, mortar, flamer, panzer (well this one not really) are quite tricky and situational. Going triggerhappy with airstrikes and artillery is harmful - I’ve seen too many idiots block the only way we can attack. 5 snipers in allied team is not good. If many pub players have such problems , you expect bots to be smarter ?
And now, in ET:QW, stuff like deployables makes it even harder to make proper bots. Oh, and BIG maps. Too many factors.
Another thing is that SD are apparently obsessed with balancing the game. There are probably balance changes flying around all the time; map layout changes (no predefined both paths/waypoints), etc. Bots just get in the way, a game has to be pretty much finalized before you can start on bots. Or so I believe. Now ET:QW isn’t just ET2003 or ET2007 - it introduces many gameplay changes, most importantly outdoor areas, vehicles, deployables. There’s enough to balance already.
All games mentioned in first post are pretty straightforward, perhaps except BF2, but in case of BF2 … well, it’s an EA game, need I say more ? ‘EA game’ means “a game which doesn’t change too much, if ever”. So it’s not like bot developers have to chase a moving target in case of BF2.

I’d rather have a game with no bots and great multiplayer rather than average multiplayer and half-assed bots. Because contrary to what some people believe, it takes time (and therefore money) to develop bots.

No bots for ET:QW and you ‘threaten’ not to buy it ? Fine, you’ve just discovered not all games are good for you.

And last, but not least, if W:ET success is purely because it’s free, why is America’s Army Propaganda Game nowhere as popular ?

(Joe999) #38

there is nowhere i can buy the game. it’s as simple as that.

nuff said.

(baff) #39

buy the game?
my mistake i thought you only wanted to reward the pleasure that SD gave you in the past years for free

I misread this

i’m prepared to spend the money blindfold only to reward the pleasure that SD gave me in the past years for free

many apologies.

@ dazz

Post it to
Spalsh Damage ltd.
London
England

(Joe999) #40

kid, i’m not wasting my time anymore with your arrogance.