Discussion: Exclude DM and CTF from The Demo?

UO Staff Joined: 19 May 2003 Posts: 129 Location: UK

There is a very interesting discussion going on over at the Atari forums concerning which maps should feature in Epic’s forthcoming UT2004 Demo.

Long-standing community member and forum regular TseTse has proposed the controversial notion that “No Deathmatch or Capture The Flag maps should be included in the demo” stating his reasons why he feels this would be a good move.

Needless to say the conversation gets very heated, and many interesting scenarios on how the demo should present itself have been put forward. There are some great points in defense of this notion, and other good points against it:

For: The basic premise behind the defense of excluding these most core game-types from the demo is that Deathmatch and Capture The Flag do not thrill new players who are used to the new modes presented by games such as Halo, BattleField 1942, Call Of Duty, and CounterStrike. DM and CTF are overwrought, passe, and no longer sell games. The focus should be on the new game-types: Assault and Onslaught.

Against: The prime concern in excluding these game-types from the demo is the fear that such a move would drive the old-school community away; those who relish in the old game-types, and who actively take part and contribute to the roots of the community.

The thread has reached in excess of 9 pages with 30 posts per-page, with many arguments and counter-arguments. I have even posted my own views on the subject (usual disclaimer; they don’t represent the views of UnrealOps. Wink

What do you think? Should the demo focus on the new aspects of UT2004 only? Follow the link below to give your feedback.

UO Staff Joined: 19 May 2003 Posts: 190 Location: BoooooM

Didn´t Epic say that it would only include Assault and Onslaught a long time ago ? We pretty much know how DM and CTF is going to be like so it´s not needed for people (at least people who played UT2003) to try those game modes !

-dp-

UO Staff Joined: 19 May 2003 Posts: 129 Location: UK

I think Epic said they would only include a single Onslaught map, no Assault maps, and the usual two Deathmatch, one Capture The Flag map.

In my own view, I think a better choice would be:

2 Assault maps.
1 Onslaught map.
1 Deathmatch map.

I also think it would benefit to have no mutators in the demo, even though I do play InstaGib. But I doubt this will happen. Wink

I think 2 Assault maps is the only way to show off this game-mode. Epic already said that they would not include one Assault map because they are all so different. At least with two you can see how varied the game-type can be, and it is much better to show off AS with ONS, since together they more successfully tout the new vehiclular focus of the game.

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 2:41 pm

they definately shouldnt include the skaarj mothership or desert train maps tho !
gotta keep those for the final ver.
anyhoo, my online connection sux, so i usually play against bots, so id like to see how dm and ctf gameplays have been improved (bot ai, weapon balancing etc...)
that means assault and onslaught maps in little number, cos there probably is no bot support (can't be much fun anyway)...

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:35 pm

personally, we diddnt play much CTF/DM on the demo i played, but we did play a whole helluva lot of ONS and AS, I see that we need all of the gametypes even if there are a few of the gametypes that are not going to be played by some, just dont play them. simple as that.

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 5:00 pm

Rav: size of the demo matters... of course ONS and AS have bot support. I don't see any reason having DM and CTF

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:25 pm

My opinion here is that the demo should have AS but not ONS... reason is that we all know of AS maps and playing them on a new ut title would be fun but still with the omission of ONS maps there still is alot for the so called " element of surpise" meaning that we kind of know what to expect from 2k4 but not the whole deal.... Frankly I'm to not to concered about what the demo will have in terms of maps...but in terms of balance and layout compared to the demo of 2k3 which was kind of strange but i guess gotten to used to... the big thing that the demo MUST HAVE is the return of the CLASSIC SNIPER......oh lots of fun with that
Twisted Evil

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:14 pm

Took the words right out of my mouth. The demo already is gonna be huge.....I'd rather have maps of new stuff instead. And as far as I've heard there's bot support for both types. Mr. Green

Stick with AS and ONS maps and "give us teh demo" Razz

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:18 pm

Unfortunately, it sounds like its been nerfed a bit from old skool UT. Probably a good thing since it was pretty powerful. I also heard the lightning gun is being slowed down.......wtf? It's weak enough already especially after thet tighten up the headshot zone.

whatever......

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:18 pm

hmmm strange, no comments from cheetah, you know what im talkin about Wink

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:16 am

Unfortunately, it sounds like its been nerfed a bit from old skool UT. Probably a good thing since it was pretty powerful. I also heard the lightning gun is being slowed down.......wtf? It's weak enough already especially after the tighten up the headshot zone.

whatever......

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 11:47 am

Kharn, I'd take the news of the lightning gun's slower ROF with a hefty dollop of salt. Nearly every preview I've read says something about the lightning, some say the ROF has been increased, others say it's been decreased. As the lightning's pretty slow as it is, my guess is that it'll have a very slightly quicker ROF.

As for the old-school sniper, you can't use it like the UT sniper rifle because when you shoot a cloud of smoke blocks the scope, meaning you have to move to the side and reacquire your aim. It's a great idea imo, UT matches in more open maps were just sniper battles; which the game wasn't designed for... sniper addicts should be playing Delta Force.

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 11:52 am

huh? what should i comment to that>?
i dont see anything to joke about.

and i am sure i replyed to this topic somewhere..
but i dont see my posts.. weird..

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 2:06 pm

huh? what should i comment to that>?
i dont see anything to joke about.

and i am sure i replyed to this topic somewhere..
but i dont see my posts.. weird..

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 2:17 pm

wait.. now im all confused..??

what was you confused about?
and what did i need to explain?
and what should i make a comment about?