[QUOTE=Gir;400176]I don’t want SD to make Wolf ET 2, because it will never be the same as the original, and there is already community efforts on making it happen.
Splash damage should re-use Wolf ET Mechanics but with a different non-serious Universe
[/QUOTE]
Cool idea. The issue with this is it would attract a very specific type of player (casuals), due to it being a non serious universe. And their skill level will not be aligned with the skill ceiling ET requires for it to work.
How about ET: Revolution
The problem is the market was previously saturated with WW2 and now modern warfare with allies vs middle eastern terrorism or Russians etc.
So instead why not a Police State (totalitarian Axis) vs The People (Allied) set now unlike in the future in some other games.
That way you could incorporate both WW2 weapons and modern weapons into the game. The People would have raided museums, or used home made devices, or got hold of guns from mercenaries etc collecting pre 90s guns such as Thompson, mg42 ppsh41 or AK47, and use improvised explosives etc. Whereas the State would have modern guns and with sophisticated gadgets and bombs, with hi tech Radio controlled car or quadrocopter as opposed to the people who would use a bodged rc toy car or rc toy helicopter.
Same classes as ET maybe different names depending on faction, spy instead of cov op, or scout instead of field ops for the people etc.
Need to obviously improve some of the underused classes in original ET such as the Covert ops and maybe the assault soldier.
Covert Ops/Spy - New weapons:
Decoy - via music player that plays a sound requesting a medic which has a “i need a medic” symbol appear on the map.
Pick Pockets - steal the ammo and small weapons such as hand gun or knife and grenades from the enemy.
Linguistics. If close enough to enemy can talk in or listen to their team chat, would obviously be more successful with a stolen uniform.
Spear gun(axis) or a medieval cross bow(allied) - for shooting underwater or silently.
Soldier/Assault - New Weapon.
Grappling hook with rope to climb things.
For air raids i guess the scout would need to “hack” into the police state and override their drones seeing as the people wont have an air force.
What with situations with the Arab Spring and the current crisis in Greece and the Euro it could be one step ahead of the game or at least be popular under the current climate.
penguins vs tapirs, lions vs elephants… aliens vs mad girls, vatican vs rome…
whatever you want, important is that the game is fast, adrenalinic, team play based and cool like rtcw
(watch out i said rtcw, not et)
everything else is a bull****
I voted other. I’ve hopped around games since I quit ETQW (mostly playing CSS), and I played Quake Live last night for the heck of it. I came to the realization that the game I would want SD to make is an arena shooter with objectives. I don’t even want 3 objectives per map, I just want 1 major set piece that two teams fight over in a Quake/Unreal manner. I don’t want a game with assault rifles or sniper rifles, I want rocket launchers, railguns, and lightning guns. Heck I finally got to play A/D in Quake Live and even if SD just expanded on that idea it would be great.
Can someone remind me what we know they are working on, other than Rad Soldiers? A PC-exclusive F2P game, and something for consoles? Or just the PC game.
They are releasing a PC exclusive later this year, and working on a console game for massive publisher.
The latter may also be using the F2P model since Fireteam is designed for all platforms, but dont quote me on that.
[QUOTE=BR1GAND;393939]Dynamic Campaign mode (as promised in ETQW 1)
[/QUOTE]
I still think it’s a bad idea. Because not all maps are (or can be) created 100% balanced, the campaign process will always shift through a couple of really common paths. Maps or scenarios that are the result of a hard to win goal will be left obscure.
Players are really picky about what they play. There’s always that map that you don’t fancy playing and will see it as a nice point to take a break or end the session. To implicitly and unintendedly obscure certain content and favour other content you’re only making this worse.
In the end it’s really just a gimmick that doesn’t add anything to the existing gameplay. There ought to be better ways to put matches within an overarcing context.
That said, map voting is pretty outdated concept as well. Players should be indicating which maps they don’t want to play and then have a random pick from the remaining content. That way you don’t always end up with the three favourites being rotated.
That would just cause mass confusion; everyone has gotten use to the way voting works now and changing it would be like shooting yourself in the foot even more. Instead of doing that they should look at the user-created voting systems for TF2 (Pretty sure it’s SourceMod that has the nicest one, but I’m not 100% sure) and copy it. You can nominate maps before the match ends, but if the map has been played recently (most servers have it so if it was played within the last 5 matches) then it is not available to be nominated. It causes every map to get some playing time; however if there is a bad map in the bunch it’s weeded out because no one wants to nominate it.
TF2’s voting system is exactly what I think is problematic. People keep picking their favourites or even worse, preferences out of the mob’s favourites (because their own favourites dont stand a chance) leading to the same small cycle of maps being played over and over again.
Players (or people even) rather have control over what doesn’t happen to them than what does happen to them. Control over the negative outweighs the control over the positive by far. Vetoing against those few maps you really hate ensures diversity and an insurance against wasting your time, as an additional perk, developers can quickly pick up on problematic content by investigating why particular maps get the brunt of the vetoes.
TF2 gets boring after 30 minutes, pretty much the same maps over and over, i tried the Map Editor, really complicated to use compared to Radiant.
Call of Duty is pretty boring too, always the same maps, the Servers are always strict, i got banned from a Server because i pressed the “Space Bar”, You have to fork out tons of Money to buy new Maps, Wolfenstein Enemy Territory has over 600 free to play maps.
The Cod Developers pretty much make a bunch of New maps, slap a new title on the game and sell it for over £50 on release.
I have also seen so many fps games copying of CODs boring gameplay mechanics Please SD, Don’t COPY COD, copy Quake 3/ET instead.
[QUOTE=tokamak;400665]TF2’s voting system is exactly what I think is problematic. People keep picking their favourites or even worse, preferences out of the mob’s favourites (because their own favourites dont stand a chance) leading to the same small cycle of maps being played over and over again.
Players (or people even) rather have control over what doesn’t happen to them than what does happen to them. Control over the negative outweighs the control over the positive by far. Vetoing against those few maps you really hate ensures diversity and an insurance against wasting your time, as an additional perk, developers can quickly pick up on problematic content by investigating why particular maps get the brunt of the vetoes.[/QUOTE]
The default TF2 voting (or at least what I assume is the default as I only ever see it on VALVe) is extremely horrid, but SourceMod’s is brilliant. Did you even read what I wrote? You can’t keep picking your favorite map over and over, because the mod doesn’t allow you to pick it. It’s unselectable for approximately 5 maps (it’s a setting that the admins can change which gives the power to the player; also assuming each map is 20 to 30 minutes, that’s a pretty long time when you think about it), because it was already played. It causes you to play other maps because the mob’s favorites are only playable every so often and if the maps aren’t completely awful most of the time you get to cycle through about every map. If you truly think the mob mentality will take over if you actually select the map you want to play, then just remove the voting numbers from view. It solves the problem of being swayed based on everyone else, because you don’t know what they have picked.
How would you eliminate a map from the pool? If you did it when one person picks the map, then the entire map list will be vetoed, because everyone has different tastes and very few maps are universally loved (although lots of universally hated and for good reasons). If you have to have a certain percentage of the players on the server pick the map, you also will rarely get the majority to pick the same map to veto.
It’s pretty obvious to developers there’s a problem when a map is never played; it doesn’t require some new voting concept to understand that. It also isn’t hard to swap servers if you really hate the map that is played.
My best guess is that the gunplay for the PC F2P game will be “power armor themed”, somewhere in between an arena shooter and a modern style shooter.
That way, you can have interesting weapons without random spread (which I’m very confident they will strive for after the Brink feedback) and lots of player health for long duels…without making the game feel unsatisfying or too hard for casuals.
Unreal Tournament 3 is sort of like that… it follows competitive principles enough so there is a high skill ceiling, but at the same time, new players can jump in and get kills, because it isn’t that fast, and the hitboxes are big. Something like, a pro player kills in 4 seconds, and a casual player kills in 8 seconds … as opposed to say Quake or Tribes, where the new player can’t even land a hit.
Personally, I don’t really want a 100% arena style shooter like Quake 3 Fortress… I love it for duel and deathmatch modes, but not so much for a Enemy Territory gametype. I’d like for it to be as skill-based as possible, but still somewhat grounded. I guess because its a team-based gametype, and if the action is lightning fast, there is less of a feeling of being in a squad.
Thoughts?
Not sure of Treyarch, they did very good work with Black Ops and with zombies.
But yeah, new CoD every year is just money making crap-.-
The weight of the veto diminishes inversely proportionate to the standard deviation of the maps vetoed. Or in normal English, the more diverse the pool of veto’d maps, the more chance on of those maps will still be played.
It’s pretty obvious to developers there’s a problem when a map is never played; it doesn’t require some new voting concept to understand that. It also isn’t hard to swap servers if you really hate the map that is played.
A map can be totally fine and still not be played if the same favourites are being repeated. However, if a player indicates he definitely doesn’t want to play that map then there’s something wrong.
Unreal Tournament 3 is sort of like that… it follows competitive principles enough so there is a high skill ceiling, but at the same time, new players can jump in and get kills, because it isn’t that fast, and the hitboxes are big.
It’s a terribly underrated game. It’s not as technical as Quake, but it’s way less whimsical than COD and far more raw and visceral than anything else.
I would buy W:ET remake without ever reading game reviews.
A new ET game has been requested for years, you just need to read this forum to notice that. The old W:ET even today 10 years later is being played.
We really need a new Wolfenstein Enemy Territory. There has not been a similar game in 10 years, awesome teamplaying and good for competition.
[QUOTE=Vividor;402015]I would buy W:ET remake without ever reading game reviews.
A new ET game has been requested for years, you just need to read this forum to notice that. The old W:ET even today 10 years later is being played.
We really need a new Wolfenstein Enemy Territory. There has not been a similar game in 10 years, awesome teamplaying and good for competition.[/QUOTE]
With decent and satisfactory game-engine, because the graphical update has been demanded by community.
Well if they sold out then they did a heck of a job because I love that game more then any other BF game. Heck if anything Brink was a sell out more then ETQW.
OK this is for SD specifically though I am sure others will jump in on what I say.
What SD game would I love to see next?
I would love to see an ET:QW style team based multi player game based on Warhammer 40k universe. I don’t think there has ever been a decent FPS of any W40K game and its such a shame that two UK based companies don’t come together to try this out. I mean combine the massive and well established W40K world with the mechanics used in ET based games and I am certain you are on to a winner.
You have a good mix of weaponry. You have a good mix of races/body types with diverse strengths and weaknesses (that balance better than Brinks attempt). Map wise you can have heavily infantry based maps for competitive play (For example one team as Space Marine terminators boarding a space hulk and the opposing team as as tyranids, both trying to accomplish tasks as a team) or alternatively you can still have mass infantry/vehicle based battle field maps that a lot of non-competitive players still want.
I mean Space Marine for example is a good game (too simple to be competitive but what do you expect from a third person shooter?) and as far as I am concerned has by far the best balancing of weapons in any game I have seen but it lacks the skill level to be a great game. A team based FPS along those lines would be mind blowing.
In fact its making me hard just thinking about it.
I would like to see a ET:QW style game based on the Rage universe, maybe with three factions fighting it out in maps. It already has the factions and the maps having three factions rather than two would make it quite the challenge. Also delivering extra set of game modes, for example a Brace style game mode.