Huxley Game, Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter Game, MMOFPS

Felix12g · 24-06-2006, 06:52 AM

Something you have to remember. This is an unreal engine. Aiming, recoil and the drawbacks are not the same as you'd find in a realism shooter. Unreal is all about the fast gameplay. They don't reward people for slowing down or crouching to aim. The goal of these engines is pure aiming. Who's got better aim than the other guy. Screw random recoil or head bobbing, it's who can get the cursor on the other guy the fastest and keep it there all the while their other hand is going crazy on the movements.

This gameplay isnt for everbody, so go check out UT2004 and see if you like that type of gameplay. Granted they won't be identical, but from the e3 vids it looks exactly like an Unreal Tournament map complete with pickup bases and sprite emitter jump pads. Granted that was for a closed environment to show it off so the MMO won't feel like that, but the gameplay is the same.

Coke-a-cola · 24-06-2006, 10:16 AM

Or the quake movement.

Silenoz666 · 24-06-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Primetimekillz

ok refresh me please,

I've only played the Unreals a handful of times and don't remember being able to lie down in any of those games...
My question:
Will we most likely be able to lie down in Huxley as to avoid detection or even help stabilize weapons such as the sniper?

You can't lay down in UT2004, or atleast I don't know how and have never seen anyone doing it. Crouching is nearly pointless, unless you can do it real fast to dodge. So I'm doubting this will be a factor in Huxley. Avoid detection, yes if they put this feature in the game. Stabilize snipers? Doubtful.

Ebok · 25-06-2006, 04:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felix12g

Something you have to remember. This is an unreal engine. Aiming, recoil and the drawbacks are not the same as you'd find in a realism shooter.

lol the engine doesn't define any of that.

Felix12g · 25-06-2006, 11:04 AM

True, but that's comparative to what you'd find if you tried out a socom halo or metal gear game. Those engines have different feels. This engine, and what the vids and devs have shown, follow the stock coding for the weapons pretty closely. I know there have always been mods coverting ut engines into fantasy slasher and anti terrorist mods, but Unreal tournament always has the same feel.

PuNkEr · 26-06-2006, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felix12g

It's just a matter of what people's perceptions are. To me when I first started out on games, doom and wolfenstein it was just alot of shooting, then quake of fast ass moving. Games came out with bad graphics and awesome fast paced gameplay.

These days all that's coming out is the damn stealthy fire no more than 3 shots or you fail the mission kind of pos games. Granted they're fun, but it's been a while since they made good fast games. It's all about realism and counter terrorism, whoopty fucking doo. UT is the only one that's really kept true to FPS'

Gamers these days need to go back to the oldschool fun games where it's skill not a goddamn shadow that keeps you alive.

Quoted for truth. I don't think anyone could have put it any better. GG.

connnnn · 02-07-2006, 10:03 PM

Doom 3

Fatal1ty

Lights Out

shadowned

$$$$$$$$

end of story

PuNkEr · 04-07-2006, 01:55 AM

wow, lets just list of names of well-known pro gamers hoping that we may somehow be associated with them and people might think we are l33t too?????!?!??!

connnnn · 05-07-2006, 12:06 PM

The day I have to prove myself as a player by impressing a bunch of random people on an unfinished game's internet forum is the day my computer goes out the window. Even if you don't have the slightest clue what I'm referencing, you could just google the first 3 terms and you'd still figure it out. It's not that much effort...

Fine... basically at Quakecon's big Doom 3 tourney, Fat shot out the lights and hid in darkness vs Daler who ran around with no clue where he was. It was funny/lame/effective and the next day competitive doom 3 died (abridged).

It just illustrates what can happen when fast paced DM style games begin incorporating realism too much.

nubs · 05-07-2006, 12:53 PM

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

Read that, its a very well written, amusing and hopefully relevant article with regards to game content, its mainly looking at consoles but still has relevance to the PC as well.

I dont 100% agree with the writers comments but i do agree with a lot of what he has said.

Falcon · 05-07-2006, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nubs

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

That article is a load of BS in my opinion. Let me explain why the Xbox lost money instead of gaining it.

Microsoft loses about $80 dollars a console they sell, because it costs more to make the console then they are selling it at. The reason is simple. Save money for the customers on the console. Drag them in, and have them buy a bunch of $60 dollar games, accessories, Xbox Live memberships, etc., etc.

The graphics part is dead wrong. Take a look at a game from 97 and from 04. They are absolutely different in effects and many other details. Especially if you throw hardware in the mix.

I think that gaming may ultimately hit this barrier, but now is not its time. Just because some unknown guy thought that the games they showed at E3 sucked doesn't spell the end of gaming itself

Felix12g · 05-07-2006, 11:51 PM

It's a good thing the guy who wrote that is an idiot and is able to waste out time.

First point, ever since the Atari 2600 came out, the companies realized that they didn't make their money off of the consoles. They made them off of the games. Before these consoles came out games were in arcades. They were designed around short quick fun to keep people popping in quarters. They played off the fact that people like to be social and compete against each other, which is why arcade parlors did so well.

When consoles came out they needed to rethink how they made games to give people with consoles longer playing experience since they weren't popping in quarters. What happened after that is people sitll wanted to be social, thus arcade parlors stayed in business. What was found then is people got tired of games because of their low replay value and bought more, thus they made more money on games than they did consoles.

Second Point his supposed decline of video games. According to him that's because of people' uninterest in video games and caused them to go down.

In actuality it was because of atari's open development policy for their console. Any third rate group could make a game for the atari, slap a sticker on it sell it, which was a great idea for Atari since they made money without doing anything. The problem? The games were terrible. Most were knockoffs of other games, buggy and low budget and this lead to a bad reputation for the games, not the actual game makers. IE bad gameplay = bad rep = less people buying. This pretty much killed atari.

Third Point This dumbass is going on and on about graphics.
It's amusing which games this guy chooses as his examples. Perfect for his spin. Goldeneye vs red faction? Goldeneye was a console game that had great graphics for it's time, on the other hand red faction was a game not based on great graphics, but it's fully destructable environment, which he happily neglects to mention.

5 years ago the grapics were so so, now look at what's out with things like oblivion and half life 2. Apparently those aren't major upgrades (they are btw) His point about ET? Yeah, everybody knows that was the biggest flop yet, it still happens, somebody in marketing tries to make a game even though they haven't a clue how.

Fourth and last point
Accoding to this guy online games aren't relevant because so few people use the online functions. Going to have to call BS here. Maybe if he pulled his information from US and counted everybody who plays flash games and solitaire as gamers it might come close. One thing he doesn't mention is the asian market has massive amounts of people who do MMO's. And face it, Asia has alot of people. Towards the end he's spouting off how the market is going to die because microsoft and sony have such overpriced consoles and there's going to be so few gamers around. Frankly this isn't true. Sure alot of people aren't going to get the new ps3 because of the price, on the other hand some will, though maybe not as many. Microsoft has lost 4 billion in the 360? Great, and in 8 years when that console is still out there pumping out games and sales they'll have made 10 times that.

The gaming industry is a multi billion dollar industry, it's not going to dry up because of a couple consoles' prices. As long as games are fun, people are going to play them.

One major thing that's getting better even though the graphics are slowing down is the actual gameplay. The phyics are superb, the AI is excellent and the online play is getting better and better.

All in all this guy is a dumbass.

Falcon · 06-07-2006, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felix12g

It's a good thing the guy who wrote that is an idiot and is able to waste out time.

First point, ever since the Atari 2600 came out, the companies realized that they didn't make their money off of the consoles. They made them off of the games. Before these consoles came out games were in arcades. They were designed around short quick fun to keep people popping in quarters. They played off the fact that people like to be social and compete against each other, which is why arcade parlors did so well.

When consoles came out they needed to rethink how they made games to give people with consoles longer playing experience since they weren't popping in quarters. What happened after that is people sitll wanted to be social, thus arcade parlors stayed in business. What was found then is people got tired of games because of their low replay value and bought more, thus they made more money on games than they did consoles.

Second Point his supposed decline of video games. According to him that's because of people' uninterest in video games and caused them to go down.

In actuality it was because of atari's open development policy for their console. Any third rate group could make a game for the atari, slap a sticker on it sell it, which was a great idea for Atari since they made money without doing anything. The problem? The games were terrible. Most were knockoffs of other games, buggy and low budget and this lead to a bad reputation for the games, not the actual game makers. IE bad gameplay = bad rep = less people buying. This pretty much killed atari.

Third Point This dumbass is going on and on about graphics.
It's amusing which games this guy chooses as his examples. Perfect for his spin. Goldeneye vs red faction? Goldeneye was a console game that had great graphics for it's time, on the other hand red faction was a game not based on great graphics, but it's fully destructable environment, which he happily neglects to mention.

5 years ago the grapics were so so, now look at what's out with things like oblivion and half life 2. Apparently those aren't major upgrades (they are btw) His point about ET? Yeah, everybody knows that was the biggest flop yet, it still happens, somebody in marketing tries to make a game even though they haven't a clue how.

Fourth and last point
Accoding to this guy online games aren't relevant because so few people use the online functions. Going to have to call BS here. Maybe if he pulled his information from US and counted everybody who plays flash games and solitaire as gamers it might come close. One thing he doesn't mention is the asian market has massive amounts of people who do MMO's. And face it, Asia has alot of people. Towards the end he's spouting off how the market is going to die because microsoft and sony have such overpriced consoles and there's going to be so few gamers around. Frankly this isn't true. Sure alot of people aren't going to get the new ps3 because of the price, on the other hand some will, though maybe not as many. Microsoft has lost 4 billion in the 360? Great, and in 8 years when that console is still out there pumping out games and sales they'll have made 10 times that.

The gaming industry is a multi billion dollar industry, it's not going to dry up because of a couple consoles' prices. As long as games are fun, people are going to play them.

One major thing that's getting better even though the graphics are slowing down is the actual gameplay. The phyics are superb, the AI is excellent and the online play is getting better and better.

All in all this guy is a dumbass.

Very, very, well put.

1Shot1Kill · 06-07-2006, 04:23 AM

Holy shit! 94 posts in a few days?

Falcon · 06-07-2006, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1Shot1Kill

Holy shit! 94 posts in a few days?

Yeah 25 posts a day...kinda bored lately.

I have been doing other stuff though, like I will do some sig work and then check the forum.

connnnn · 06-07-2006, 10:38 AM

Yeh pretty much an article with no knowledge behind it that was typed by someone who probably just found out about most of what he mentioned...

Original NES systems are still crazy popular in parts of Asia. I think they stopped being MANUFACTURED a couple years ago. Not to mention the sales of handheld gaming systems that rely entirely on gameplay to sell.

One could go on and on about why this author is basically ranting and praying that something similar happens so he can try to claim he predicted it. The article definitely lives up to its URL... it's about as credible as the bum on the street telling you the world is going to end every other tuesday.

nubs · 06-07-2006, 11:32 AM

Seems to me that a lot of you are rebuking his arguements saying he has no proof with your own arguments that also have no proof...

Yes console makers make money on the games.. and there are thousands of games but how many of those thousands actually make money? Its a minority that actually make a profit, and those are usually the games that stand out from the crowd because they offer something radically new or they are a games series with a dedicated fan base.

From my own personal experience of this..

GTA3 on the PS2.. loved it, played it to death really looked forward to GTA Vice City.. got it played it.. dropped it after a couple of hours because i'd done it all before in GTA3, this offered a few bells and whistles but was essentially the same game.. end result? I didnt bother with San Andreas and wont bother with any of their newer GTA products unless they actually offer something new.

I probably will get a PS3 but i certainly wont get one until they reduce the price to something sane.

The Unreal Tournament series.. its the same game with a small graphics overhaul and a new mod added each year... i gave up buying that after onslaught, whereas i had been an avid fan of those games.

Look at "Black", this was billed as the PS2/xbox generations last big hitting game.. what was it? a rancid pile of turd that relied entirely on pretty graphics.

There are a few gaming series that are gold plated, like the Gran Turismo series, who'se basic principle appeals to pretty much all gamers and each revolutions offers enough content and gameplay as to make it worthwhil

24-06-2006, 06:52 AM	#41 (permalink)
Felix12g Super Moderator Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 547	Something you have to remember. This is an unreal engine. Aiming, recoil and the drawbacks are not the same as you'd find in a realism shooter. Unreal is all about the fast gameplay. They don't reward people for slowing down or crouching to aim. The goal of these engines is pure aiming. Who's got better aim than the other guy. Screw random recoil or head bobbing, it's who can get the cursor on the other guy the fastest and keep it there all the while their other hand is going crazy on the movements. This gameplay isnt for everbody, so go check out UT2004 and see if you like that type of gameplay. Granted they won't be identical, but from the e3 vids it looks exactly like an Unreal Tournament map complete with pickup bases and sprite emitter jump pads. Granted that was for a closed environment to show it off so the MMO won't feel like that, but the gameplay is the same. __________________ If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing. ~W. Edwards Deming

25-06-2006, 11:04 AM	#45 (permalink)
Felix12g Super Moderator Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 547	True, but that's comparative to what you'd find if you tried out a socom halo or metal gear game. Those engines have different feels. This engine, and what the vids and devs have shown, follow the stock coding for the weapons pretty closely. I know there have always been mods coverting ut engines into fantasy slasher and anti terrorist mods, but Unreal tournament always has the same feel. __________________ If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing. ~W. Edwards Deming

05-07-2006, 12:06 PM	#49 (permalink)
connnnn Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: TX, USA Posts: 425	The day I have to prove myself as a player by impressing a bunch of random people on an unfinished game's internet forum is the day my computer goes out the window. Even if you don't have the slightest clue what I'm referencing, you could just google the first 3 terms and you'd still figure it out. It's not that much effort... Fine... basically at Quakecon's big Doom 3 tourney, Fat shot out the lights and hid in darkness vs Daler who ran around with no clue where he was. It was funny/lame/effective and the next day competitive doom 3 died (abridged). It just illustrates what can happen when fast paced DM style games begin incorporating realism too much. Last edited by connnnn; 05-07-2006 at 12:09 PM.

05-07-2006, 12:53 PM	#50 (permalink)
nubs Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Kent, UK Posts: 166	http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html Read that, its a very well written, amusing and hopefully relevant article with regards to game content, its mainly looking at consoles but still has relevance to the PC as well. I dont 100% agree with the writers comments but i do agree with a lot of what he has said. __________________ [img]http://uk.geocities.com/edbennett@btinternet.com/NordicLogo7.jpg[/img]

05-07-2006, 11:51 PM	#52 (permalink)
Felix12g Super Moderator Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 547	It's a good thing the guy who wrote that is an idiot and is able to waste out time. First point, ever since the Atari 2600 came out, the companies realized that they didn't make their money off of the consoles. They made them off of the games. Before these consoles came out games were in arcades. They were designed around short quick fun to keep people popping in quarters. They played off the fact that people like to be social and compete against each other, which is why arcade parlors did so well. When consoles came out they needed to rethink how they made games to give people with consoles longer playing experience since they weren't popping in quarters. What happened after that is people sitll wanted to be social, thus arcade parlors stayed in business. What was found then is people got tired of games because of their low replay value and bought more, thus they made more money on games than they did consoles. Second Point his supposed decline of video games. According to him that's because of people' uninterest in video games and caused them to go down. In actuality it was because of atari's open development policy for their console. Any third rate group could make a game for the atari, slap a sticker on it sell it, which was a great idea for Atari since they made money without doing anything. The problem? The games were terrible. Most were knockoffs of other games, buggy and low budget and this lead to a bad reputation for the games, not the actual game makers. IE bad gameplay = bad rep = less people buying. This pretty much killed atari. Third Point This dumbass is going on and on about graphics. It's amusing which games this guy chooses as his examples. Perfect for his spin. Goldeneye vs red faction? Goldeneye was a console game that had great graphics for it's time, on the other hand red faction was a game not based on great graphics, but it's fully destructable environment, which he happily neglects to mention. 5 years ago the grapics were so so, now look at what's out with things like oblivion and half life 2. Apparently those aren't major upgrades (they are btw) His point about ET? Yeah, everybody knows that was the biggest flop yet, it still happens, somebody in marketing tries to make a game even though they haven't a clue how. Fourth and last point Accoding to this guy online games aren't relevant because so few people use the online functions. Going to have to call BS here. Maybe if he pulled his information from US and counted everybody who plays flash games and solitaire as gamers it might come close. One thing he doesn't mention is the asian market has massive amounts of people who do MMO's. And face it, Asia has alot of people. Towards the end he's spouting off how the market is going to die because microsoft and sony have such overpriced consoles and there's going to be so few gamers around. Frankly this isn't true. Sure alot of people aren't going to get the new ps3 because of the price, on the other hand some will, though maybe not as many. Microsoft has lost 4 billion in the 360? Great, and in 8 years when that console is still out there pumping out games and sales they'll have made 10 times that. The gaming industry is a multi billion dollar industry, it's not going to dry up because of a couple consoles' prices. As long as games are fun, people are going to play them. One major thing that's getting better even though the graphics are slowing down is the actual gameplay. The phyics are superb, the AI is excellent and the online play is getting better and better. All in all this guy is a dumbass. __________________ If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing. ~W. Edwards Deming

24-06-2006, 10:16 AM	#42 (permalink)
Coke-a-cola Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 64	Or the quake movement.

02-07-2006, 10:03 PM	#47 (permalink)
connnnn Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: TX, USA Posts: 425	Doom 3 Fatal1ty Lights Out shadowned $$$$$$$$ end of story

04-07-2006, 01:55 AM	#48 (permalink)
PuNkEr Training Grounds Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 13	wow, lets just list of names of well-known pro gamers hoping that we may somehow be associated with them and people might think we are l33t too?????!?!??!

06-07-2006, 04:23 AM	#54 (permalink)
1Shot1Kill Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 186	Holy shit! 94 posts in a few days?

06-07-2006, 10:38 AM	#56 (permalink)
connnnn Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: TX, USA Posts: 425	Yeh pretty much an article with no knowledge behind it that was typed by someone who probably just found out about most of what he mentioned... Original NES systems are still crazy popular in parts of Asia. I think they stopped being MANUFACTURED a couple years ago. Not to mention the sales of handheld gaming systems that rely entirely on gameplay to sell. One could go on and on about why this author is basically ranting and praying that something similar happens so he can try to claim he predicted it. The article definitely lives up to its URL... it's about as credible as the bum on the street telling you the world is going to end every other tuesday.