goliathvt@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:17 pm :
zeh@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:57 pm : So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Nonetheless, that's great. Thank you id/SD for being one of the few developers that distribute stuff via torrent. Torrent download is so much better/safer for me, it's not even funny. :/
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:07 pm : zeh wrote:
So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Maybe it had something to do with the need for a limited release and Key Code distribution?
parsonsbear@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:11 pm : Yeah, the FP debacle was a total scam. Aside from distribution, SD's forums were way better than the lame bug reporting forums FP offered (umm... if they're serious isn't a ticket system a better way to handle that?). The only thing i can think of that FP may have been useful for was the key tracking. Hopefully id's learned their lesson and don't deal with those scumbags(FP) again.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:30 pm : Downloading.
*finally*
goodoldalex@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:32 pm : Has anyone tried it under Linux with Wine? I can't get it to even start.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:11 pm : After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
Gazado@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:16 pm : Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
That's pretty much how BF always is, which is one of the reasons why I hated playing that game with my gaming friends (and I didn't play long). But ET: QW seems to eventually smooth out once people figure it out, at least that's what happened in the Beta. Once everyone had a chance to familiarize themselves with the game, most servers were filled with players that generally knew what to do. Jobs were getting done as needed. I also always saw significant changes in behavior and skill of players after Splash Damage released their map walk-throughs, like the valley's
"Strollin' Soldier" guide. After that went up on the website, I actually started to see people following that guide in-game.
But the demo released, and these people playing, I think, are new players that didn't play the beta. I just got off the game after playing for 2-3 hours, and I see a lot of n00bs just standing around, no doubt trying to figure the game out. As with all multi-player games, especially more complex ones (and ET: QW is pretty complex), I think players just need time to figure it out. And with a team-based games you can really only enjoy the game if your teammates know how to play.
I also see a lot of people giving their first impressions of the demo. People saying "This game is awesome!" or "This game sucks", obvious signs of they just downloaded it...
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : Gazado wrote:
Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
I like deathmatch, played a lot of quake 3 in 'my time' online and often still fire up those bots, I just haven't found a game since then with that much style.. it still looks gorgeous to me.
But for teamplay a different style and a certain amount of self control needs to be there, unfortunately I don't have the time and interest anymore to join (or post) on a forum outside of this one or become part of some clan just for the occasional gg. Still easier for me then to fire up Q3 and join the old servers to meet some old mates.
But for the game, seriously quality all around, very well executed.
zeh@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:04 am : Every game is like that. I remember the first week after the W:ET release was pretty much the worst online gaming experience I had on my entire life.
The ET:QW beta curve was similar. People will either learn or move on to other games.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:31 am : they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:53 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
IIRC in the beta while on the server listing screen it had a little number in brackets next to each server showing how many of the players were bots, is that not there anymore?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:44 am : it's there but how do I know who's actually a bot when in game? Most of the GDF left in mid-game & other people joined.
parsonsbear@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am : since the pk4's aren't encrypted you can check out the botnames file and get to know 'em on a first name basis
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:14 am : that's 125 different names.
Phobos@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:22 am : Wow, so far the demo is fantastic.
TelMarine@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:28 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
that's 125 different names.
if you bring up the scoreboard, there is a orange stick figure type thing next to their name indicating it is a bot.
heXum@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:44 am : I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:46 am : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
That's where teamwork should come in, especially with these large maps. Get people to figure out where he is and then sneak up behind up and kill the bugger.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
goliathvt@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:17 pm :
zeh@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:57 pm : So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Nonetheless, that's great. Thank you id/SD for being one of the few developers that distribute stuff via torrent. Torrent download is so much better/safer for me, it's not even funny. :/
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:07 pm : zeh wrote:
So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Maybe it had something to do with the need for a limited release and Key Code distribution?
parsonsbear@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:11 pm : Yeah, the FP debacle was a total scam. Aside from distribution, SD's forums were way better than the lame bug reporting forums FP offered (umm... if they're serious isn't a ticket system a better way to handle that?). The only thing i can think of that FP may have been useful for was the key tracking. Hopefully id's learned their lesson and don't deal with those scumbags(FP) again.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:30 pm : Downloading.
*finally*
goodoldalex@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:32 pm : Has anyone tried it under Linux with Wine? I can't get it to even start.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:11 pm : After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
Gazado@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:16 pm : Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
That's pretty much how BF always is, which is one of the reasons why I hated playing that game with my gaming friends (and I didn't play long). But ET: QW seems to eventually smooth out once people figure it out, at least that's what happened in the Beta. Once everyone had a chance to familiarize themselves with the game, most servers were filled with players that generally knew what to do. Jobs were getting done as needed. I also always saw significant changes in behavior and skill of players after Splash Damage released their map walk-throughs, like the valley's
"Strollin' Soldier" guide. After that went up on the website, I actually started to see people following that guide in-game.
But the demo released, and these people playing, I think, are new players that didn't play the beta. I just got off the game after playing for 2-3 hours, and I see a lot of n00bs just standing around, no doubt trying to figure the game out. As with all multi-player games, especially more complex ones (and ET: QW is pretty complex), I think players just need time to figure it out. And with a team-based games you can really only enjoy the game if your teammates know how to play.
I also see a lot of people giving their first impressions of the demo. People saying "This game is awesome!" or "This game sucks", obvious signs of they just downloaded it...
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : Gazado wrote:
Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
I like deathmatch, played a lot of quake 3 in 'my time' online and often still fire up those bots, I just haven't found a game since then with that much style.. it still looks gorgeous to me.
But for teamplay a different style and a certain amount of self control needs to be there, unfortunately I don't have the time and interest anymore to join (or post) on a forum outside of this one or become part of some clan just for the occasional gg. Still easier for me then to fire up Q3 and join the old servers to meet some old mates.
But for the game, seriously quality all around, very well executed.
zeh@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:04 am : Every game is like that. I remember the first week after the W:ET release was pretty much the worst online gaming experience I had on my entire life.
The ET:QW beta curve was similar. People will either learn or move on to other games.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:31 am : they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:53 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
IIRC in the beta while on the server listing screen it had a little number in brackets next to each server showing how many of the players were bots, is that not there anymore?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:44 am : it's there but how do I know who's actually a bot when in game? Most of the GDF left in mid-game & other people joined.
parsonsbear@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am : since the pk4's aren't encrypted you can check out the botnames file and get to know 'em on a first name basis
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:14 am : that's 125 different names.
Phobos@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:22 am : Wow, so far the demo is fantastic.
TelMarine@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:28 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
that's 125 different names.
if you bring up the scoreboard, there is a orange stick figure type thing next to their name indicating it is a bot.
heXum@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:44 am : I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:46 am : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
That's where teamwork should come in, especially with these large maps. Get people to figure out where he is and then sneak up behind up and kill the bugger.
Zenix@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:47 am : Yeah, it can be a bitch trying to work out why you died. Would've really liked a 'killcam', I think CoD's had this since the first one.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:22 pm : BF1942 had a killcam.
I really had no problem figuring out HOW I died & WHERE to attack, is was my teammates who wouldn't do anything about it! Once a person sees you coming they go after you so I was useless to take things out.
goliathvt@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:52 pm : ETQW turns your camera right towards the person who killed you unless there's a medic/technician nearby. Trust me... against a good set of players, you'll need to move almost every spawn wave when you're sniping. Keep in mind there are a ton of folks who never played the game before so... yeah... noobfest for a few weeks.
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:02 pm : heXum wrote:
...but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
right after you die, your camera view snaps to the location of the player that killed you. snipers HATE this feature for obvious reasons. so if you do snipe, move around a little bit after each couple of frags.
SD has put in counter measures to just about every tactic you can think of. use them to your advantage!
Mordenkainen@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:45 pm : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Whenever you're killed the camera will point to the location of the enemy so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote:
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
1) Death cam
2) Deploy a radar and check the map
3) Spot a sniper and it will momentarily show up on the map
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:29 pm : someone has made a few night time screens with the demo. looks very cool!
http://community.enemyterritory.com/for ... 05&page=11
Zenix@Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:52 am : I never noticed the death cam, but I'll believe you. Will have to give it a shot once I finish downloading the COD4 beta
zeh@Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:24 pm : The ET:QW demo is now out on Steam.
This pretty much means the retail game will be available there as well.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:37 am : Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:48 am : Phobos wrote:
Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Yes it is, but it's subtle not the OMG, MY EYES! some other games seem so fond of.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:02 am : Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:26 am : Phobos wrote:
Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
That's the MY EYES ARE BURNING version so I'm glad they changed that. But you can see from that pic that's not all they've changed. The polygon (shadow casting even) newspapers were replaced with low-rez decals and they've removed those purty bottles. Unlike the exagerated bloom, these kinds of detail props did improve graphics by not making the ground look so barren. The MT is of lower quality in that shot, they probably didn't yet have the detail texture mask.
Anyway, if you want to see Bloom in action I suggest you look at the GDF's HQ model and switch between r_megadrawmethod 0 and 3 and you can see the faint orange sheen around it goes away in the lower quality setting.
Dante_uk@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:33 pm : Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
ratty redemption@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:51 pm : dante_uk, I was also thinking of those shots recently as I've not seen anything like them in the beta or demo vids so far.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 4:12 am : Dante_uk wrote:
Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
From yesterday's XFire chat:
SD wrote:
We also originally had the Domination Hub and Command Centre with working insides (the CommanD Centre was in the 2005 E3 trailer) but we decided to remove those from the game
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:53 am : mordenkainen, did they give a reason why?
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:36 pm : Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
Phobos@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:55 pm : Mordenkainen wrote:
Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
In that case i'm sort of glad they took it out.
I get that feeling in the demo when I used to play Field Ops, go to the other side of the map and start calling in artillery only to see it get blown up back at my spawn point. It got really irritating having to run back and forth, and eventually I just gave up that class because most people in the demo aren't smart enough to repair disabled deployables. So I get where they're coming from, in a sense.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:07 pm : FYI, the "bases" have defenses that can't be destroyed so putting artillery there should be ok (it will eventually get destroyed but the machine guns at the bases take even a walker/talk out fast). And now we know why the Strogg can hack to the GDF base, but there's no point to doing it.
With those bases it sounded a LOT more like CnC:Renegade. you could purchases better classes/weapons/vehicles.
I would of loved the command centers. Here's my "work around". There's AP guns inside & AP/AV guns outside. When you hack you become normal. If you don't hack defenses the guns shoot at you. If you have full health, or there's a distraction guy with you (IE someone else to shoot at) you can hack (you'll die if you stay). Lasts for 30 seconds. Baddies can't get in to base anymore because it's "locked down" & are basically stuck. when everything re-activated, they get slaughtered. No reason to truck back unless you want to "repair" the systems just like you can remove mines, explosives, turrets, etc. But just like temporarily disabled equipment (hacked or EMP'ed) it's back in in 30 seconds.
would be awesome in an object based map as you defend the control room. If you loose the control room a door (or something) lets the other team by to get to the main objective.
goliathvt@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:56 pm : Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
goliathvt@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:17 pm :
zeh@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:57 pm : So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Nonetheless, that's great. Thank you id/SD for being one of the few developers that distribute stuff via torrent. Torrent download is so much better/safer for me, it's not even funny. :/
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:07 pm : zeh wrote:
So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Maybe it had something to do with the need for a limited release and Key Code distribution?
parsonsbear@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:11 pm : Yeah, the FP debacle was a total scam. Aside from distribution, SD's forums were way better than the lame bug reporting forums FP offered (umm... if they're serious isn't a ticket system a better way to handle that?). The only thing i can think of that FP may have been useful for was the key tracking. Hopefully id's learned their lesson and don't deal with those scumbags(FP) again.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:30 pm : Downloading.
*finally*
goodoldalex@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:32 pm : Has anyone tried it under Linux with Wine? I can't get it to even start.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:11 pm : After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
Gazado@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:16 pm : Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
That's pretty much how BF always is, which is one of the reasons why I hated playing that game with my gaming friends (and I didn't play long). But ET: QW seems to eventually smooth out once people figure it out, at least that's what happened in the Beta. Once everyone had a chance to familiarize themselves with the game, most servers were filled with players that generally knew what to do. Jobs were getting done as needed. I also always saw significant changes in behavior and skill of players after Splash Damage released their map walk-throughs, like the valley's
"Strollin' Soldier" guide. After that went up on the website, I actually started to see people following that guide in-game.
But the demo released, and these people playing, I think, are new players that didn't play the beta. I just got off the game after playing for 2-3 hours, and I see a lot of n00bs just standing around, no doubt trying to figure the game out. As with all multi-player games, especially more complex ones (and ET: QW is pretty complex), I think players just need time to figure it out. And with a team-based games you can really only enjoy the game if your teammates know how to play.
I also see a lot of people giving their first impressions of the demo. People saying "This game is awesome!" or "This game sucks", obvious signs of they just downloaded it...
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : Gazado wrote:
Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
I like deathmatch, played a lot of quake 3 in 'my time' online and often still fire up those bots, I just haven't found a game since then with that much style.. it still looks gorgeous to me.
But for teamplay a different style and a certain amount of self control needs to be there, unfortunately I don't have the time and interest anymore to join (or post) on a forum outside of this one or become part of some clan just for the occasional gg. Still easier for me then to fire up Q3 and join the old servers to meet some old mates.
But for the game, seriously quality all around, very well executed.
zeh@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:04 am : Every game is like that. I remember the first week after the W:ET release was pretty much the worst online gaming experience I had on my entire life.
The ET:QW beta curve was similar. People will either learn or move on to other games.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:31 am : they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:53 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
IIRC in the beta while on the server listing screen it had a little number in brackets next to each server showing how many of the players were bots, is that not there anymore?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:44 am : it's there but how do I know who's actually a bot when in game? Most of the GDF left in mid-game & other people joined.
parsonsbear@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am : since the pk4's aren't encrypted you can check out the botnames file and get to know 'em on a first name basis
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:14 am : that's 125 different names.
Phobos@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:22 am : Wow, so far the demo is fantastic.
TelMarine@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:28 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
that's 125 different names.
if you bring up the scoreboard, there is a orange stick figure type thing next to their name indicating it is a bot.
heXum@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:44 am : I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:46 am : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
That's where teamwork should come in, especially with these large maps. Get people to figure out where he is and then sneak up behind up and kill the bugger.
Zenix@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:47 am : Yeah, it can be a bitch trying to work out why you died. Would've really liked a 'killcam', I think CoD's had this since the first one.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:22 pm : BF1942 had a killcam.
I really had no problem figuring out HOW I died & WHERE to attack, is was my teammates who wouldn't do anything about it! Once a person sees you coming they go after you so I was useless to take things out.
goliathvt@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:52 pm : ETQW turns your camera right towards the person who killed you unless there's a medic/technician nearby. Trust me... against a good set of players, you'll need to move almost every spawn wave when you're sniping. Keep in mind there are a ton of folks who never played the game before so... yeah... noobfest for a few weeks.
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:02 pm : heXum wrote:
...but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
right after you die, your camera view snaps to the location of the player that killed you. snipers HATE this feature for obvious reasons. so if you do snipe, move around a little bit after each couple of frags.
SD has put in counter measures to just about every tactic you can think of. use them to your advantage!
Mordenkainen@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:45 pm : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Whenever you're killed the camera will point to the location of the enemy so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote:
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
1) Death cam
2) Deploy a radar and check the map
3) Spot a sniper and it will momentarily show up on the map
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:29 pm : someone has made a few night time screens with the demo. looks very cool!
http://community.enemyterritory.com/for ... 05&page=11
Zenix@Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:52 am : I never noticed the death cam, but I'll believe you. Will have to give it a shot once I finish downloading the COD4 beta
zeh@Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:24 pm : The ET:QW demo is now out on Steam.
This pretty much means the retail game will be available there as well.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:37 am : Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:48 am : Phobos wrote:
Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Yes it is, but it's subtle not the OMG, MY EYES! some other games seem so fond of.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:02 am : Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:26 am : Phobos wrote:
Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
That's the MY EYES ARE BURNING version so I'm glad they changed that. But you can see from that pic that's not all they've changed. The polygon (shadow casting even) newspapers were replaced with low-rez decals and they've removed those purty bottles. Unlike the exagerated bloom, these kinds of detail props did improve graphics by not making the ground look so barren. The MT is of lower quality in that shot, they probably didn't yet have the detail texture mask.
Anyway, if you want to see Bloom in action I suggest you look at the GDF's HQ model and switch between r_megadrawmethod 0 and 3 and you can see the faint orange sheen around it goes away in the lower quality setting.
Dante_uk@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:33 pm : Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
ratty redemption@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:51 pm : dante_uk, I was also thinking of those shots recently as I've not seen anything like them in the beta or demo vids so far.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 4:12 am : Dante_uk wrote:
Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
From yesterday's XFire chat:
SD wrote:
We also originally had the Domination Hub and Command Centre with working insides (the CommanD Centre was in the 2005 E3 trailer) but we decided to remove those from the game
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:53 am : mordenkainen, did they give a reason why?
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:36 pm : Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
Phobos@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:55 pm : Mordenkainen wrote:
Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
In that case i'm sort of glad they took it out.
I get that feeling in the demo when I used to play Field Ops, go to the other side of the map and start calling in artillery only to see it get blown up back at my spawn point. It got really irritating having to run back and forth, and eventually I just gave up that class because most people in the demo aren't smart enough to repair disabled deployables. So I get where they're coming from, in a sense.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:07 pm : FYI, the "bases" have defenses that can't be destroyed so putting artillery there should be ok (it will eventually get destroyed but the machine guns at the bases take even a walker/talk out fast). And now we know why the Strogg can hack to the GDF base, but there's no point to doing it.
With those bases it sounded a LOT more like CnC:Renegade. you could purchases better classes/weapons/vehicles.
I would of loved the command centers. Here's my "work around". There's AP guns inside & AP/AV guns outside. When you hack you become normal. If you don't hack defenses the guns shoot at you. If you have full health, or there's a distraction guy with you (IE someone else to shoot at) you can hack (you'll die if you stay). Lasts for 30 seconds. Baddies can't get in to base anymore because it's "locked down" & are basically stuck. when everything re-activated, they get slaughtered. No reason to truck back unless you want to "repair" the systems just like you can remove mines, explosives, turrets, etc. But just like temporarily disabled equipment (hacked or EMP'ed) it's back in in 30 seconds.
would be awesome in an object based map as you defend the control room. If you loose the control room a door (or something) lets the other team by to get to the main objective.
goliathvt@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:56 pm : Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
goliathvt@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:17 pm :
zeh@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:57 pm : So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Nonetheless, that's great. Thank you id/SD for being one of the few developers that distribute stuff via torrent. Torrent download is so much better/safer for me, it's not even funny. :/
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:07 pm : zeh wrote:
So they "needed" FP to handle the beta download, because of the oh so massive demand, but they don't need it for the official demo?
Maybe it had something to do with the need for a limited release and Key Code distribution?
parsonsbear@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:11 pm : Yeah, the FP debacle was a total scam. Aside from distribution, SD's forums were way better than the lame bug reporting forums FP offered (umm... if they're serious isn't a ticket system a better way to handle that?). The only thing i can think of that FP may have been useful for was the key tracking. Hopefully id's learned their lesson and don't deal with those scumbags(FP) again.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:30 pm : Downloading.
*finally*
goodoldalex@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:32 pm : Has anyone tried it under Linux with Wine? I can't get it to even start.
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:11 pm : After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
Gazado@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:16 pm : Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
Dinky@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : BloodRayne wrote:
After 'spectating' some games I find I'm not to positive about it all. The game is nice, everything is done beautifully, professionaly and all around great. The thing I'm bothered with isn't the game, it's the gamers playing it. Shouting at eachter, 'newb' this, 'OMG GDF SUXXORS' there. Spectating alongside experienced snipers, sniping the spawnareas, newbies trying to learn the game being slaughtered. No companionship, teams or anything. Just a bunch of chaotic fanboys running around in disorganised chaos.
Somehow I don't think I'll ever get into this sort of thing as long as the players aren't being actively forced to play their role inside a team I just don't think this kind of gameplay will work well (atleast it doesn't for me). To each his own, I guess.. I love SP a lot more, a storyline and no bothersome people around.
That's pretty much how BF always is, which is one of the reasons why I hated playing that game with my gaming friends (and I didn't play long). But ET: QW seems to eventually smooth out once people figure it out, at least that's what happened in the Beta. Once everyone had a chance to familiarize themselves with the game, most servers were filled with players that generally knew what to do. Jobs were getting done as needed. I also always saw significant changes in behavior and skill of players after Splash Damage released their map walk-throughs, like the valley's
"Strollin' Soldier" guide. After that went up on the website, I actually started to see people following that guide in-game.
But the demo released, and these people playing, I think, are new players that didn't play the beta. I just got off the game after playing for 2-3 hours, and I see a lot of n00bs just standing around, no doubt trying to figure the game out. As with all multi-player games, especially more complex ones (and ET: QW is pretty complex), I think players just need time to figure it out. And with a team-based games you can really only enjoy the game if your teammates know how to play.
I also see a lot of people giving their first impressions of the demo. People saying "This game is awesome!" or "This game sucks", obvious signs of they just downloaded it...
BloodRayne@Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:31 pm : Gazado wrote:
Pub servers are normally like that for most popular FPS, you either learn to deal with it or play as part of a community where people are regulars on a forum with their own private server for those forum goers (works like a clan, but without having to play seriously, just for fun) - alternativly join a clan to get that kind of teamwork your looking for.
Either way, the beta was like that when it was first released but it sorted itself over time as the community calmed down. Now there are a load of new players who are all excited like that again, so in a few months it'll not be so bad anymore
I like deathmatch, played a lot of quake 3 in 'my time' online and often still fire up those bots, I just haven't found a game since then with that much style.. it still looks gorgeous to me.
But for teamplay a different style and a certain amount of self control needs to be there, unfortunately I don't have the time and interest anymore to join (or post) on a forum outside of this one or become part of some clan just for the occasional gg. Still easier for me then to fire up Q3 and join the old servers to meet some old mates.
But for the game, seriously quality all around, very well executed.
zeh@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:04 am : Every game is like that. I remember the first week after the W:ET release was pretty much the worst online gaming experience I had on my entire life.
The ET:QW beta curve was similar. People will either learn or move on to other games.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:31 am : they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:53 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
they need to show if someone is a bot or not. I ether had complete morons as teemmates or they were bots. Wouldn't help out, never picked classes that could be useful & never bothered doing anything useful. How many times do I have to type "build the towers so I can lock on to the walker!" before they understand!
i'm assuming it was bots on my side but I quit the damn game. to infuriating.
IIRC in the beta while on the server listing screen it had a little number in brackets next to each server showing how many of the players were bots, is that not there anymore?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:44 am : it's there but how do I know who's actually a bot when in game? Most of the GDF left in mid-game & other people joined.
parsonsbear@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am : since the pk4's aren't encrypted you can check out the botnames file and get to know 'em on a first name basis
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:14 am : that's 125 different names.
Phobos@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:22 am : Wow, so far the demo is fantastic.
TelMarine@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:28 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
that's 125 different names.
if you bring up the scoreboard, there is a orange stick figure type thing next to their name indicating it is a bot.
heXum@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:44 am : I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
Tron@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:46 am : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
However, once I tried sniping and got into a position I really enjoyed owning fools with no real danger of being found... cheap as it may be. I must have killed 10-12 guys before a tank took a shot in my general direction.
I'm used to the CoD4 killcam now, after playing that beta so much. In my opinion, that really forces the snipers to keep moving after they've used that location to get a few shots in.
Regardless, I played at home for hours (even with my crappy connection) so it must be pretty fun. Still a lot for me to figure out, I think I'll give it a go at work where my connection and computer are twice as good.
See you out there!
That's where teamwork should come in, especially with these large maps. Get people to figure out where he is and then sneak up behind up and kill the bugger.
Zenix@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:47 am : Yeah, it can be a bitch trying to work out why you died. Would've really liked a 'killcam', I think CoD's had this since the first one.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:22 pm : BF1942 had a killcam.
I really had no problem figuring out HOW I died & WHERE to attack, is was my teammates who wouldn't do anything about it! Once a person sees you coming they go after you so I was useless to take things out.
goliathvt@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:52 pm : ETQW turns your camera right towards the person who killed you unless there's a medic/technician nearby. Trust me... against a good set of players, you'll need to move almost every spawn wave when you're sniping. Keep in mind there are a ton of folks who never played the game before so... yeah... noobfest for a few weeks.
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:02 pm : heXum wrote:
...but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
right after you die, your camera view snaps to the location of the player that killed you. snipers HATE this feature for obvious reasons. so if you do snipe, move around a little bit after each couple of frags.
SD has put in counter measures to just about every tactic you can think of. use them to your advantage!
Mordenkainen@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:45 pm : heXum wrote:
I'm *really* not happy with the way you often die for no reason. I mean, I know you're being shot from some distant sniper or something but you have no idea where it came from or anything!
Whenever you're killed the camera will point to the location of the enemy so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote:
Couple that with the maps being so big there really is no chance of finding that sniper (besides checking the obvious spots).
1) Death cam
2) Deploy a radar and check the map
3) Spot a sniper and it will momentarily show up on the map
pbmax@Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:29 pm : someone has made a few night time screens with the demo. looks very cool!
http://community.enemyterritory.com/for ... 05&page=11
Zenix@Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 8:52 am : I never noticed the death cam, but I'll believe you. Will have to give it a shot once I finish downloading the COD4 beta
zeh@Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:24 pm : The ET:QW demo is now out on Steam.
This pretty much means the retail game will be available there as well.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:37 am : Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:48 am : Phobos wrote:
Is the all-so-advertised bloom/hdr shader thing used in the demo?
Because if it is, I either have it turned off or I honestly can't tell.
Yes it is, but it's subtle not the OMG, MY EYES! some other games seem so fond of.
Phobos@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:02 am : Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
Mordenkainen@Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:26 am : Phobos wrote:
Well it must be pretty subtle compared to what some people were expecting after shots like this one:
That's the MY EYES ARE BURNING version so I'm glad they changed that. But you can see from that pic that's not all they've changed. The polygon (shadow casting even) newspapers were replaced with low-rez decals and they've removed those purty bottles. Unlike the exagerated bloom, these kinds of detail props did improve graphics by not making the ground look so barren. The MT is of lower quality in that shot, they probably didn't yet have the detail texture mask.
Anyway, if you want to see Bloom in action I suggest you look at the GDF's HQ model and switch between r_megadrawmethod 0 and 3 and you can see the faint orange sheen around it goes away in the lower quality setting.
Dante_uk@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:33 pm : Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
ratty redemption@Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:51 pm : dante_uk, I was also thinking of those shots recently as I've not seen anything like them in the beta or demo vids so far.
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 4:12 am : Dante_uk wrote:
Biggest thing I miss from the early shots is the footage from the original trailers were you see inside the command post with the big maps & computer screens etc.
Plus vehicle driving out of transporters. I hope they have that in a couple of the maps.
From yesterday's XFire chat:
SD wrote:
We also originally had the Domination Hub and Command Centre with working insides (the CommanD Centre was in the 2005 E3 trailer) but we decided to remove those from the game
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:53 am : mordenkainen, did they give a reason why?
Mordenkainen@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:36 pm : Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
Phobos@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:55 pm : Mordenkainen wrote:
Locki elaborated on a later question:
SD wrote:
[SD]Locki: pookoluva4e: why did you choose to remove the command center and the Domination Hub?
For a while we allowed the Covert Ops and Infiltrator to break into the bases, and once inside the Command Centre or Domination Hub, they could choose one of three hacks (disable reinforcements, disable deployable drops, or disable vehicle drops). Back then players spawned and equipped in the Command Centre so you could change class without dying, and the Command Centre had this really detailed interior with lots of cool animations for when it arrived and deployed. (Cont...)
[23:27] [SD]Locki: However, the game mechanic caused frustration – whenever you had to travel or spawn back at the base to kill the hacker, it felt like you’d had to stop playing the actual game and go do a chore - so we threw all the base structure interior art and animation work out and they’re unhackable now.
In that case i'm sort of glad they took it out.
I get that feeling in the demo when I used to play Field Ops, go to the other side of the map and start calling in artillery only to see it get blown up back at my spawn point. It got really irritating having to run back and forth, and eventually I just gave up that class because most people in the demo aren't smart enough to repair disabled deployables. So I get where they're coming from, in a sense.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:07 pm : FYI, the "bases" have defenses that can't be destroyed so putting artillery there should be ok (it will eventually get destroyed but the machine guns at the bases take even a walker/talk out fast). And now we know why the Strogg can hack to the GDF base, but there's no point to doing it.
With those bases it sounded a LOT more like CnC:Renegade. you could purchases better classes/weapons/vehicles.
I would of loved the command centers. Here's my "work around". There's AP guns inside & AP/AV guns outside. When you hack you become normal. If you don't hack defenses the guns shoot at you. If you have full health, or there's a distraction guy with you (IE someone else to shoot at) you can hack (you'll die if you stay). Lasts for 30 seconds. Baddies can't get in to base anymore because it's "locked down" & are basically stuck. when everything re-activated, they get slaughtered. No reason to truck back unless you want to "repair" the systems just like you can remove mines, explosives, turrets, etc. But just like temporarily disabled equipment (hacked or EMP'ed) it's back in in 30 seconds.
would be awesome in an object based map as you defend the control room. If you loose the control room a door (or something) lets the other team by to get to the main objective.
goliathvt@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:56 pm : Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:23 pm : very interesting.
goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release
with the concept ideas that you guys have demonstrated here, it seems that the community could quite easily think of uses for the stuff that sd took out, so it makes sense to me that those assets be given to the community to use in our maps.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:36 pm : I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one. You can make classic TF maps & it would play similar to TF. You can make makes similar to the original ET. You can make maps similar to UT's Assault. You can make maps & game play similar to CnC:Renegade's MP mode. Or you have it as ET:QW.
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:24 am : The Happy Friar wrote:
I see ET:QW as TF, ET, UT Assault & CnC:Renegade all in one.
[...]
this seems to be one of THE most flexible game's out there in terms of game types just by the layout of the map.
so hardly any modding would be needed?
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:46 pm : it's just that they way it's setup is conducive with different game styles already. Heck, if you wanted a "king of the hill" map you could setup an objective that must be destroyed by an explosive. The team who blows it up wins. I'd imagine you could put both a strogg & human objective there to blow up.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm : understood and cool.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:54 pm : so download & try out the damn game already!!!!!!!
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:27 pm : but I keep hearing people who have a more powerful system then mine saying they only get smooth fps in qw if they play on low quality settings, and that would ruin the experience for me, so I'd rather wait till I can see high detail textures displayed at least 30 fps.
when I attempt to play d3 at high quality settings on this system I get between 5 and 30 fps and thats only at 1024x768 with no af or aa filtering. sure I can take screen shots at a higher quality but its not playable.
The Happy Friar@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:35 pm : everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say. SD made the game for people to play. If they didn't want people to use lower quality then they wouldn't of included the option to make it so.
it's a free demo right now. how is it going to hurt if you try it? My PC specs are barely good for BioShock but I still tried it. Ran good to me imho.
ratty redemption@Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:46 pm : The Happy Friar wrote:
everybody whines they can't play the way "they should." People complain if they get less then 120fps @ 1600x1200. Ignore what others say.
understood, I see your point now, thanks.
Dante_uk@Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:50 pm : goliathvt wrote:
Actually I think it'd be interesting if SD left these available in the source/full release... kind of like vehicles were "working" and just needed a functioning/rigged model in D3. Here's how I'd change them to make them useful and be less of a chore:
Before you started hacking, you'd have to choose which type of hack you'd do and where it would happen (front line? Outpost? etc.). The instant that you entered the control center, the enemy would be alerted of a breach, giving them a chance to stop you. If they didn't, this would be the consequence:
- Reinforcments: No one spawns at one spawn point of the hacker's choice for 45 seconds. Anyone who wanted to spawn would be forced to do so at a different location, the default being one spawnpoint behind the "Frontline" if frontline hack was chosen, or, if a player has chosen the same location as the hacker for spawning, they'd be forced to the Frontline.
- No deployables: No deployables possible for any "dropper" class for 45 seconds.
I'd remove the Vehicle drop choice, as that's not terribly useful unless it also impacted vehicle respawns at a location for a period of time. I'd make the impact be 1 minute for these.
To me, the balance and removal of the chore aspect would be simple:
Hacking the command post killed you.
At the start of the hack, a countermeasure sequence starts that is just slightly slower than the time it takes to perform the hack. Within a second of a successful hack, the countermeasure kills you, and the center goes into a lock-down mode for a specified time. This would ensure a side can't be disabled and hacked repeatedly. For example, the command centers can only be hacked once per game or at an interval, like once every 10 minutes.
This would remove the "chore" of having the hacked side go kill the hacker... if a side didn't stop them in time, they would have to deal with the aftermath of the intrusion... but the hacker couldn't keep disabling spawns or vehicles over and over.
It could still be a great boon to the hacker's team, though, worth doing if done right, but the costs, I think, would be comparable to the potential advantage gain.
I'd love to see those assets too. Now's the time to start raising the subject on the official etqw forums since they should be putting the sdk together soon ( I suspect just after the 1.2 patch is released ).
