Support NeoGAF

[Vrolokus]

I won't go ad-nauseam over my dislike for COD4 SP, but it was quite clear that IW spent far more resources refining the MP of the game. Actually, the SP feels like a huge after thought.

Um, no. The SP campaign in UT3 is a "huge afterthought". COD4's is very likely what the majority of gamers bought the game for. I mean look at its sales numbers - those people aren't all on Live or PSN. A huge number of people bought it, played through the SP portion, and never touched MP (the same can be said of Halo 3 and the Orange Box).

Maybe you didn't care for it, but I'm having trouble of thinking of many FPSs with a stronger SP campaign.

And deathmatch in COD4 is completely basic and simplistic.

Compared to what? It's not basic or simplistic compared to UT3's.

 

[Davidion]

Oh wait...all of the alternatives you guys listed were also tired sequels that introduced little to nothing to the genre. You guys are slamming UT3 for being stale, but I think thats just an excuse. What's so fresh about Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, System- excuse me BioShock, or TEAM FORTRESS 2, A FORMULA WE'VE BEEN PLAYING FOR 10 YEARS.

Oh thats right. They get a free pass from this line of thinking because OMFG BEST GAME EVER NEXTGEN GOTY 10/10 OMGOLOLOLOLO

I can't speak for Halo and Call of Duty 4, but Bioshock brings quite a bit of new things to the table. Just because it takes certain elements from System Shock doesn't mean it doesn't feel and play like a completely different game.

Oh, and if you or anyone else really hold that opinion about Team Fortress 2, then you have either never played or didn't pay a lick of attention to either it or its predecessors. Way to be completely ignorant of the series' history.

UT3's sales might be a little harshly low, but what alterations does it make to the old formula set forth by the older UT games? Not nearly as much as some of the other series do to theirs, that's for sure.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Needed a 360 version for the spillover. At this point in the game devs are just plain stupid not to have day and date releases of everything. Except PC. PC versions should be delayed.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Compared to what? It's not basic or simplistic compared to UT3's."


Uh...yeah it is.

 

[eibboR]

The thing you seem to be missing about all the current FPSs out there is DEPTH. We need more nowadays than just pretty arenas filled with respawning weapons. Class systems like TF2, ticket/territory based systems like Battlefield, and XP/Perk systems like COD4 are all, even at this point, miles ahead of classic arena stuff.

And yeah, that criticism goes for Halo 3 as well.

I love how people consider having classes with limited weapons depth.

Don't get me wrong, TF2 is great and I've probably put 40+ hours overall into it. The thing is though, limiting me to 3 weapons does not have depth written all over it. TF2 is a very simple game to play because the classes only have three weapon, and all the classes are straight forward.

UT3 is complex and I feel people don't like the game because of this. To me, gathering weapons and knowing when to use them in the given situation has more depth than being limited to three weapons, which you are just given, in which you fill find yourself saying, "Man, I can't even WIN this situation."

UT3 has depth, just not teamplay depth. UT games have never had teamplay depth. Why are people just noticing this?

If you disagree with me there is a good chance you haven't put an ass hair of time into the FPS genre like I have.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"UT3 has depth, just not teamplay depth. UT games have never had teamplay depth. Why are people just noticing this?"


This only applies to DM and more or less TDM. CTF is, obviously, all about teamplay.

 

[eibboR]

"UT3 has depth, just not teamplay depth. UT games have never had teamplay depth. Why are people just noticing this?"


Er, if you ignore CTF, sure.

Gotchya before the edit

Please explain where the depth is? Some people defending and some people translocating all over the map getting the kills and running the flag back? That isn't depth.

1 v 1 has WAY more depth than that and that is what arena shooters are all about, 1 v 1.

 

[rezuth]

i went back to quake 3 seems people only want counter strike these days or cs clones aka cod4

How the fuck is CoD4 a CS clone? You are a joke!

 

[JonAmikar]

The thing you seem to be missing about all the current FPSs out there is DEPTH. We need more nowadays than just pretty arenas filled with respawning weapons. Class systems like TF2, ticket/territory based systems like Battlefield, and XP/Perk systems like COD4 are all, even at this point, miles ahead of classic arena stuff.

And yeah, that criticism goes for Halo 3 as well.

Depth? None of those games have any fragment of depth when it comes to movement and tricks compared to DM shooters. You just strafe around and spam hitscan weapons utilizing "TEAMWORK" and "DEEP STRATEGY" which mostly results in something like "Hey, we lets go the left way! Throw a nade!" Lemee guess? LOL NUB THE PROS USE L33T STRATEGY LOOK AT THIS FRAG VIDEO THE 4 DUDES USE SUPERIOR INTELLECT TO WIN.

XP systems are better? Miles ahead of DM? LOL. YOU KILLED SOEM DUDES SO NOW YOU GET A FASTER SPRINT OLOLO ITS LIKE AN RPG DEPTH +500

Now don't get me wrong, I play a few team-based shooters and I enjoy playing them, namely Enemy Territory and Quake Wars. But team-based shooters aren't in any sense a superior, "MORE CEREBRAL" evolution of the genre. If anything, its just TDM with complications.

There's more to depth than some arbitrary XP system. And deathmatch in COD4 is completely basic and simplistic.

Pwnt. Everything in COD4 has been done before. BUT WAIT THE DEPTH AND STRATEGY OLO. If you want some REAL strategy, go play some KOHAN. (But of course you've never heard of it and won't seek the truth)

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Stop arguing over "depth". It's a stupid concept and doesn't have shit to do with the price of tea in china.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Please explain where the depth is? Some people defending and some people translocating all over the map getting the kills and running the flag back? That isn't depth."


Uh, even some of the stuff from 1v1 carries over, I.E. specific pick up timing and control. Also, map specific positions, strategies, routes, flag running mind games, etc. And your argument for why it's not "deep" is the same old flawed logic that people tend to use, stripping a game down to its absolute basics as if that's all there is to it.


"1 v 1 has WAY more depth than that and that is what arena shooters are all about, 1 v 1."


1v1 and CTF play completely differently and can't really be compared "depth" wise to each other, since they're largely different in focus. A good CTF player may be a horrible 1v1er and a great dueler may be a horrible CTF player.


Also:

"If you disagree with me there is a good chance you haven't put an ass hair of time into the FPS genre like I have."

Shit like this doesn't cut it. If you can't make a compelling argument that stands on its own (even if I marginally agree with you about UT3's complexity), then don't say shit.

 

[Vrolokus]

"Compared to what? It's not basic or simplistic compared to UT3's."

Uh...yeah it is.

Ok.

UT3 isn't being played because it's painfully one-dimensional - even by FPS standards - and not something people are going to spend $60 on when there are so many excellent alternatives, games that actually bring some small new thing to the table or distinguish themselves somehow. TF2, COD4, Halo 3, BioShock, Resistance, HL2, PORTAL... those are all distinct flavors that make UT3 look like bologna sandwiches and Red Bull.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one. UT3 isn't big because it's not as good as the competition.

 

[Speevy]

I say that if you have a PS3, you should have this game.

There are many complicated factors surrounding why PS3 games don't sell. But you don't have to be part of the problem.

It's a fun game which provides exactly the sort of experience you expect from it, and boasts more extra content than every other console shooter this generation combined.

 

[Speevy]

Ok.

UT3 isn't being played because it's painfully one-dimensional - even by FPS standards - and not something people are going to spend $60 on when there are so many excellent alternatives, games that actually bring some small new thing to the table or distinguish themselves somehow. TF2, COD4, Halo 3, BioShock, Resistance, HL2, PORTAL... those are all distinct flavors that make UT3 look like bologna sandwiches and Red Bull.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one. UT3 isn't big because it's not as good as the competition.

That's nonsense. UT3 is every bit as entertaining as those games. Its success has nothing to do with quality.

 

[keyrat]

Ok.

UT3 isn't being played because it's painfully one-dimensional - even by FPS standards - and not something people are going to spend $60 on when there are so many excellent alternatives, games that actually bring some small new thing to the table or distinguish themselves somehow. TF2, COD4, Halo 3, BioShock, Resistance, HL2, PORTAL... those are all distinct flavors that make UT3 look like bologna sandwiches and Red Bull.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one. UT3 isn't big because it's not as good as the competition.

Yea, no. UT3 is what Halo3 should have been. Instead Halo3 is a frickin' sloth of a game in comparison.

 

[Speevy]

Also, anyone who thinks Team Fortress 2 would sell as a standalone on the Xbox 360 is insane.

 

[Diablos]

I regret buying UT3, mostly because no one is playing.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"UT3 isn't being played because it's painfully one-dimensional - even by FPS standards - and not something people are going to spend $60 on when there are so many excellent alternatives, games that actually bring some small new thing to the table or distinguish themselves somehow. TF2, COD4, Halo 3, BioShock, Resistance, HL2, PORTAL... those are all distinct flavors that make UT3 look like bologna sandwiches and Red Bull."


How exactly does UT3 distinguish itself from...whatever any worse than Halo 3? BioShock is a "streamlined" (simplified) System Shock, it's "new" to people who weren't PC gaming in 94/99 I suppose. Lots of vague talk and analogies, very little actual substance.


"Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one. UT3 isn't big because it's not as good as the competition."


Well, I'm glad we've got the final word on how good UT3 is.

 

[NullPointer]

LOLCAT OMFG GLUK GLUK GLAR *drool*

So, you can see the depth in such a simple setup as an arena shooter, but you can't be bothered to fathom what team strategy or tactics you can accomplish with customized weapon/equipment loadouts, perks, and support options? Yeah, sure.

The thing is, what can you do gameplay wise in UT3 that you couldn't do in UT2003 or UT2004?

COD4 carries over what was great about COD2 but adds additional layers of complexity - and thats what piques people's interest. Luckily all the new stuff works as well in practice as they hyped it to be and they're reaping their just rewards for all the hard work.

 

[Kreuzader]

I'm waiting on the Linux client on the PC side before I get it, so I've been playing Quake Wars in the meantime.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"The thing is, what can you do gameplay wise in UT3 that you couldn't do in UT2003 or UT2004?"


The big difference between UT3 and 2004 is the removal of the dodge jump and levels designed around it completely reined in hitscan weapons, where in UT2003/2004 it was just a mad dash to the lightning gun/shock rifle.

As well as the removal of the shield gun.

It's a pretty major rebalancing.

 

[NullPointer]

How exactly does UT3 distinguish itself from...whatever any worse than Halo 3?

Halo 3 had far better marketing, slower gameplay (more accessible), and the fully fleshed out SP campaign mode meant there were more potential multiplayer gamers out there carried along for the ride. Add in all the absolutely batshit ambitious community features that Bungie made and you can see they meant to keep that community going as long as they possibly could.

Oh, you mean gameplay wise? Not much really. Subtle things.

 

[nesmar]

I'm surprised to see TF2 hate in this thread.

TF2 is awesome people :l

 

[FLEABttn]

If you want some REAL strategy, go play some KOHAN. (But of course you've never heard of it and won't seek the truth)

What the hell does an RTS have to do with FPS depth? Serious, knock that shit off.

 

[Speevy]

I have an idea.

Instead of the disorganized mess that is the current UT3 thread, why don't we organize all the people on Neogaf who are willing to dedicate time to this game.

PSN IDs, what maps they want to play, what mutators they like, etc.

We'll have daily and weekly games on that basis. There's no reason fans of this game should suffer.

 

[Whipped Spartan]

I just bough the PS3 version. There is a good amount of people online. hopefully it stays up. Great game, glad I bought it

I just wish you could get mods as add on packs at the PS store.

 

[bee]

How the fuck is CoD4 a CS clone? You are a joke!

lol insults, search and destroy is cs 100% cloned, the same nade spam at the start of every round, kill a few noobs through walls like cs 1.6, then find your favourite camp spot and point that red dot on that same pixel you like so much, then go plant the bomb at one of the 2 sites, oh wait a minute i remember that from somewhere

yes its got other modes the ffa/tdm is generic mindless action the player limit on the servers (pc) is simply way too high, the xp system rewards time played not skill a complete idiot is gonna get to the same level as a pro player just takes longer, the other modes are... well the amount of players actually playing the other modes says it all.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

The thing is, what can you do gameplay wise in UT3 that you couldn't do in UT2003 or UT2004?

but CoD4 is just Counterstrike.

"The big difference between UT3 and 2004 is the removal of the dodge jump and levels designed around it completely reined in hitscan weapons, where in UT2003/2004 it was just a mad dash to the lightning gun/shock rifle.

As well as the removal of the shield gun.

It's a pretty major rebalancing."

Seriously? Seriously? That's what you are arguing against "It's just UT2k4 all over again" with? Why get up in arms when people say UT3 is meant solely for the UT fanbase then?

 

[Speevy]

Halo 3 had far better marketing, slower gameplay (more accessible), and the fully fleshed out SP campaign mode meant there were more potential multiplayer gamers out there carried along for the ride. Add in all the absolutely batshit ambitious community features that Bungie made and you can see they meant to keep that community going as long as they possibly could.

Oh, you mean gameplay wise? Not much really. Subtle things.

UT3 has the most accessible gameplay of any FPS I can recall. Anyone can dive right in and start killing dozens of players.

 

[TheDuce22]

My ID is Eaglefan22 if anyone wants to add me. Im pretty good compared to other controller users. I dont have a headset though.

 

[Speevy]

Seriously, someone start a thread in the online forum. We can really get something going.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Seriously? Seriously? That's what you are arguing against "It's just UT2k4 all over again" with? Why get up in arms when people say UT3 is meant solely for the UT fanbase then?"


Where have I said it isn't meant for the UT fanbase? Of *course* the next game in a long running series is for its fanbase.

I'm not sure what people are expecting from the "3rd" (4th) game in a series. None of the other series with 3-4 games have changed gameplay in any significant way, but because they're currently the style/setting du jour and tack on XP and/or stripped down modding features it's a major reinvention or something.

 

[JonAmikar]

Did you guys not play QuakeWorld....or something when you were younger.

/me no understand

That would explain alot.

 

[Dyno]

There's more to depth than some arbitrary XP system. And deathmatch in COD4 is completely basic and simplistic.

You don't gain XP artibrarily. You have to do stuff. They tell you what it is and when you do it you gain XP. That is the OPPOSITE of what arbitary means. How else would an XP based system give out XP?

Deathmatch is the bread and butter of mulitplayer. Every MP game has deathmatch and they are all the same. If you made a deathmatch game with a bunch of innovations it wouldn't be deathmatch and you would call it something else... which every game does as well.

 

[levious]

My ID is Eaglefan22 if anyone wants to add me. Im pretty good compared to other controller users. I dont have a headset though.

are you still using wifi? What was it you said in the other thread that you did with your router?

 

[JonAmikar]

Deathmatch is the bread and butter of mulitplayer. Every MP game has deathmatch and they are all the same. If you made a deathmatch game with a bunch of innovations it wouldn't be deathmatch and you would call it something else... which every game does as well.

No.

/facepalm

 

[Teknopathetic]

"You don't gain XP artibrarily. You have to do stuff. They tell you what it is and when you do it you gain XP. That is the OPPOSITE of what arbitary means. How else would an XP based system give out XP?"

I didn't say the XP was arbitrary, I said the system was. It's in place for no other reason than to keep folks hooked online longer as they "progress" in multiplayer and hopefully that shit just stays in COD4.

 

[TheDuce22]

are you still using wifi? What was it you said in the other thread that you did with your router?

I had to disable auto channel scan to fix the insane packet loss that was going on with the PS3 wifi. I have it set to always use channel 2 now. This is my router btw.

http://games.dlink.com/products/?pid=370&#DGL-4300

 

[levious]

awesome, I have a dlink as well, I'm gonna see if I can do that. Thanks.

also:

GamerLounge™ Wireless 108G Gaming Router, powered by GameFuel™

funny stuff

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

I think the hardware demands and the lack of marketing/commercials pretty much made the PC version bomb the way it has.

PS3 version (yay for imports!) seems to doing okay, but the amount of servers is low, compared to early UT's.

 

[eibboR]

"Please explain where the depth is? Some people defending and some people translocating all over the map getting the kills and running the flag back? That isn't depth."


Uh, even some of the stuff from 1v1 carries over, I.E. specific pick up timing and control. Also, map specific positions, strategies, routes, flag running mind games, etc. And your argument for why it's not "deep" is the same old flawed logic that people tend to use, stripping a game down to its absolute basics as if that's all there is to it.


"1 v 1 has WAY more depth than that and that is what arena shooters are all about, 1 v 1."


1v1 and CTF play completely differently and can't really be compared "depth" wise to each other, since they're largely different in focus. A good CTF player may be a horrible 1v1er and a great dueler may be a horrible CTF player.


Also:

"If you disagree with me there is a good chance you haven't put an ass hair of time into the FPS genre like I have."

Shit like this doesn't cut it. If you can't make a compelling argument that stands on its own (even if I marginally agree with you about UT3's complexity), then don't say shit.

*sigh* I wish such a large majority of FPS gamers would venture off into competitive gaming so they can see how a game is played at its highest level.

 

[Dyno]

I didn't say the XP was arbitrary, I said the system was. It's in place for no other reason than to keep folks hooked online longer as they "progress" in multiplayer and hopefully that shit just stays in COD4.

Semantics. The system is as unarbitary as the XP it doles out. The reason it's in place is so that more interesting perks, weapons, and attachments are given out. It rewards returning and effective players in this manner.

I can't see how anyone could bash it when comtemporary games like Halo 3 or UT 3 only offer custume changes instead. I can understand if you don't like it, but that in no way means it's a poor system.

 

[Gattsu25]

Semantics. The system is as unarbitary as the XP it doles out. The reason it's in place is so that more interesting perks, weapons, and attachments are given out. It rewards returning and effective players in this manner.

Um...isn't that exactly what Tre` just said?

eibboR
Banned

 

[Dyno]

Um...isn't that exactly what Tre` just said?

I'm perplexed that he can spin it as a bad thing. How would one do it better, taking into account that you can't use griping in place of code?

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Um...isn't that exactly what Tre` just said?"

Yep.


"Semantics. The system is as unarbitary as the XP it doles out. The reason it's in place is so that more interesting perks, weapons, and attachments are given out. It rewards returning and effective players in this manner."

It's really just rewarding who plays more. Furthermore, unlike BF2 whose rank upgrades weren't much of a deal (more choice than anything), COD4 offers things that makes higher level players more powerful, I.E. more grenades, laser sights, other ability perks. What happened to returning players getting rewarded by getting better?

 

[KTallguy]

"You don't gain XP artibrarily. You have to do stuff. They tell you what it is and when you do it you gain XP. That is the OPPOSITE of what arbitary means. How else would an XP based system give out XP?"

I didn't say the XP was arbitrary, I said the system was. It's in place for no other reason than to keep folks hooked online longer as they "progress" in multiplayer and hopefully that shit just stays in COD4.

Man, you're right, but it's really good at hooking me.
I enjoyed UT a lot in the past, and sure, it's a very strategic, deep FPS.
COD4 is pretty simplistic, but the twists on some of the older CS conventions (perks, airstrikes, etc) as well as the use of claymores being super important, and furthermore the presentation (!) really makes the game extremely enjoyable.

It's definitely not as twitch as UT3, but I really enjoy it, and I think that if UT adopted some kind of arbitrary tracking system which allowed you to customize your character more and more, it might hook people on it more. Then again, isn't there already something like that in place?

It's really just rewarding who plays more. Furthermore, unlike BF2 whose rank upgrades weren't much of a deal (more choice than anything), COD4 offers things that makes higher level players more powerful, I.E. more grenades, laser sights, other ability perks. What happened to returning players getting rewarded by getting better?

This is true, and really worried me at first, but the difference between someone who's leveled up and a completely new player is incredibly small, so small that the player that is really skilled will always win.

 

[Dyno]

It's really just rewarding who plays more. Furthermore, unlike BF2 whose rank upgrades weren't much of a deal (more choice than anything), COD4 offers things that makes higher level players more powerful, I.E. more grenades, laser sights, other ability perks. What happened to returning players getting rewarded by getting better?

I get the feeling that you haven't played this game much.

Constant playing will slowly level up your character, yes. You have to provide some measure of reward for determined, but not skillful players. Playing well however, like winning matches, or achieving a high number of kills with a particular weapon, net you huge bonuses that allow you to fly through levels.

As well, I was impressed that while later weapons and perks have their strong points, they are not so strong as to eclipse starting rollouts. The game is well balanced and incredibly subtle.

And finally, the game matches you according to your skill level, your kill/death ratio, and other factors. No match is ever so one sided.

Seriously, how much of this game have you played? I would think that after a few hours what I'm talking about would be evident.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"I get the feeling that you haven't played this game much."


I'm getting sick of the generic "you haven't played the game enough!" retort shit.


"Constant playing will slowly level up your character, yes. You have to provide some measure of reward for determined, but not skillful players. Playing well however, like winning matches, or achieving a high number of kills with a particular weapon, net you huge bonuses that allow you to fly through levels.

As well, I was impressed that while later weapons and perks have their strong points, they are not so strong as to eclipse starting rollouts. The game is well balanced and incredibly subtle.

And finally, the game matches you according to your skill level, your kill/death ratio, and other factors. No match is ever so one sided."


Firstly, I'm well aware of the matchmaking (on consoles) to make the teams balanced, of course you're still going to face someone who's higher level than you, of course it won't be the *whole team* but you will still come up against at least one person. However, I played the PC version. I'm personally not a fan of matchmaking in general so this isn't a bad thing.

And things like more grenades is definitely not a subtle difference at all. Grenade spam, even with the indicator (you can only move so fast), the same thing that's plagued all games that let you carry a hefty amount of grenades.

 

[NullPointer]

And things like more grenades is definitely not a subtle difference at all. Grenade spam, even with the indicator (you can only move so fast), the same thing that's plagued all games that let you carry a hefty amount of grenades.

Its true that you can't get the 3xGrenades perk until you've played for longer and completed more challenges, BUT, if you want to use that perk you are effectively sacrificing all of the other type 1 perks.

The system isn't just rewarding more skilled players with better perks - if you want to use a newly unlocked perk that means you aren't using something else like extra health, extra stopping power etc. I'm pretty damn amazed at how well the system works, because I had the exact same worries about it.

 

[Dyno]

I'm getting sick of the generic "you haven't played the game enough!" retort shit.

I felt compelled to ask how much COD4 MP you have played because your comments illustrate barely a surface knowledge of the games functions.

So how much? Did you fuck around with a cracked copy or have to actually put down for the title? Because you have a whole boatload of opinions for a game you don't own.