|
|
|
|
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
UT2007 - New shaky cam video *Third part available
If you don't like videos made with a handheld camera that is a bit shaky I suggest you stop reading now. However if you don't mind the shakiness then I suggest you click the read more link so that you can get to the latest video from Unreal Tournament 2007 which actually shows some new things.
The video is split into two parts and it gives us our first view of the map DM-CarbonFire as well as some of the weapons in the game. The hud as you can see looks the same but that is probably because they haven't even tried to change it yet. So without any further delays here are the links:
Part 1 at GameTrailers.com
Part 2 at Gametrailders.com
Update
The third part of the video is now available for all to see. It shows us a part of a very "unpolished" Torlan remake and some new vehicles. Be sure to listen in the beginning of the video as they have something important to say about the rocket launcher.
Part 3 at Gametrailders.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006/04/24 - 23:35 - Comments (88) -  Nosnos
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Zeta
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:27
ah its a waste of time .. i tried
i have a good reason to be sceptical about all points i mentioned above.. i am sorry that u arent whining about the fps.. not everyone has so much money to buy an über pc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nosnos
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:32
I dont think you will need an über pc to play the game, sure you will need one to play it at maximum details and resolution but then again you needed that for 2k3 as well, I even think 2k3 was worse in that respect... I think and hope that the game will be playable for a standard priced computer when the game is released. Epic is about earning money and making a game that 5% of gamers can enjoy isnt really profitable :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Ado
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:38
if the game is away like 6 months, we can expect the demo even some sooner
how much earlier was ut2k4 demo before ut2k4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Fhwendel
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:41
Believe I haven't seen this one before too (not so much new stuff under the sun though;) )
Have to admit, UT2k7 really seems promissing to me, hope they deliver it well:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nosnos
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:44
a month? 6 weeks? I dont remember tbh :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 gastfreund
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 14:48
I played ut2k3 on lowest settings with my nforce1 oboard graphics *pretty* fluently. I doubt ut2k7 will work with any kind of onboard solutions :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 code
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 15:05
i'm really gonna love this game :D -- don't worry about the fps on world sized maps and the movement will pwn (having the best ut2k4 players testing it at E3 will b good playtesting, no?) -- sell the game to EVERYONE and mod the shit out of it later !!! UT > ALL !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Fenris
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 15:39
##and i dont care if the game will sell good..##
The stupidity and narrow-mindedness of pro-gamers. There are many reasons why a game should sell good. One being if Epic is even bothered to focus on the continued development of the UT series after they took a look at their sales statistics. Homework for you: If UT2k7 sells 500.000 copies and Gears of War 5.000.000 copies. What is the most likely move of Epic going to be?
And I'm sure you can come up with other reasons as well. If you just sit down and think a bit more and broader than what impact a 0.5 sec slower rof of the ASMD and other similar stuff is going to have on the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zeta
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 16:02
dude u dont get it
no offence but if the gameplay is really good, better players will switch and the game has a future.... at least for the competitiv part.. and i dont need 2 million servers with 99,9% crap ppl...
people buy the game because of the graphics, yes thats true but will they play it for years? i dont think so...
and if i am interested in new ut series? why should i if the developer is a total crap....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nosnos
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 16:22
True about the importance of good gameplay, but just because a game has good gfx doesnt mean that it will have bad gameplay. To get a really popular game that is interesting to sponsors of big events you need to have a game that attracts a lot of people and not just "pro"-gamers. And to get that you need both good gfx and good gameplay and up to this point in time it has obviously been more important to get the fundamentals in check like the engine (gfx) and the tools to create the game. They got plenty of time to tinker with different walkspeeds, gravity settings, weapons, etc etc... anyone who can make a mutator can do that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Jink
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 16:22
There is still way more 'noobs' playing than 'competetive players'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fenris
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 16:47
Relying on an already established player base in this niche isn't going to cut it even competetive wise. Hardcore gamers are reluctant to make a switch from their beloved UT99, UT2k4 or Quake game for a longer period of time. Quake 4 showed this. UT2k3/4 showed this. Painkiller most definitely showed this. I dare say most UT2k4 players who still are active was introduced to UT by either UT2k3 or UT2k4.
No you don't actually get it. Graphics is a much larger factor for selling a game than gameplay. The average gamer simply doesn't care about old school sci-fi shooter games if there is not some marketing hype around it, being good graphics, a new game type etc. to make them interested. The only way to make a large competetive community which lasts is to introduce the game to as many as possible.
As for the gameplay, I'm certain it's better than UT2k4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 mnzy
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 17:17
zeta: it's not really important how many players play the game over years, because they won't spend any money on it. it's another thing with games like wow, they have to have things in the game to make players want to play it for a very long time. the only reasons why they have to have a good gameplay are the game-testing magazines and to sell its successor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zeta
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 18:45
and they have to have the gameplay for me... and i am not a magazine or? =)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jstx
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 19:18
looking forward to 2k7 even more now.. and im not really nervous about the gfx etc cause i will be playing it on lowest anyways..
i just hope it has a function like disabling the background movement etc. cause thats gonna be the hardest gfx strain by the look of it.
gameplay looks promising dunno if that run speed was increased but i like uber active fast gameplay. pk&ut ftw. btw faster rox means more airox? yay!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 MysTikal
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 20:10
Well......I just hope this isnt going to be another q4.....Too much stuff and not enough "hardcore" play. I mean, i love the graphics and all that, but I just hope its not going to be like q4. The graphics just look a little too real for unreal :x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Sulaco
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 22:00
Just dont make another q4 pls pls pls !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charlatan
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 22:47
nothing really new here was it? walking speed really seemed too fast to be like that in the final version.. im not so sure we can trust the rocket speed or whatever either.. but the rockets idd looked way faster than ut2k4 which is a good thing.
and all the ppl that complain that they just care about graphics, i just dont get it.. shouldnt a new game have better graphics than games 2 years old? of course graphics should be better imo, i wouldnt buy a game that looked like ut1 today even if it had great gameplay.. im sure a lot of people will disagree with me there, but im sure a lot of ppl agrees with me too... and some ppl complain its nothing new, well everytime they add something new ppl whine even more (like bombing run or onslaught). if you hate better graphics so much just stick with the old games? no one is forcing you to change games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Love'UK
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 23:47
To much detail imo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 ints
|
Posted: 2006/04/23 - 23:58
Charalatan wrote:
and all the ppl that complain that they just care about graphics, i just dont get it.. shouldnt a new game have better graphics than games 2 years old? of course graphics should be better imo, i wouldnt buy a game that looked like ut1 today even if it had great gameplay.. im sure a lot of people will disagree with me there, but im sure a lot of ppl agrees with me too... and some ppl complain its nothing new, well everytime they add something new ppl whine even more (like bombing run or onslaught). if you hate better graphics so much just stick with the old games? no one is forcing you to change games.
Of course no one's forcing anyone to do anything but you see, many people here have high expectaions and it would just suck if epic would fuck this game up by concentrating only on gfx :/.
btw, Have You Noticed that the best games of their genere are 5 to 10 years old? Very few good games have been released lately (lately being post-2000).
IMHO:
Best turn based RPGs -- Angband (it's like 20 year old game) and Fallout 2 (1998). Then there's Jagged Alliance 2 (1999), whatever it's genere is. Best turn-based strategy (or whatever it is) -- HOMM 3 (1999). Best pure RTS -- I love Total Annihilation (1997), but some prefer Starcraft (1998), successor of good old WC and WC2.
Fortunately the situation is a bit better in single player FPS world, I actually loved painkiller single player, nice braindead action and very good music. And then there was SOF.. and so on, there IS something out there at least.
Another night I tried HOMM 5, it's almost identical to HOMM 3 with some changes here and there and new 3D gfx overlay. Game itself was quite cool, but the damn 3D gfx just CRIPPLES the gameplay, it took whole evening to just play couple of weeks in the game. I couldn't think of even ONE benefit the 3D gfx gave, NONE, it was just pain in the ass. That's why I called it 'overlay' -- it's just new sux interface on a good old game. (with no actual benefits). Ok, that's bad example in this context, mainstream FPS just needs gfx to become popular nowadays.. nevermind.
From time to time when I have some time to waste or I just want to relax couple of weeks after exam-session or smth like that I try to find a good new RTS or RPG game to help kill time. But the problem is that I just can't find anything. All the games have awesome gfx and all, but I don't get addicted by them :p. In the end I'll just look up my JA2 / F2 CDs or Angband and play them all over again (and again).
oops, got carried away, bit offtopic..
Anyway, the point. Ten years ago the developers couldn't play with graphics THAT much, so they would have to sell their game by creating godlike gameplay. Nowadays.. blah. Everyone's concentrating on gfx and forgetting or saving up on the gameplay. I think that no one actually hates the gfx but it's the main reason why very few games are actually playable and don't get boring just after 2 weeks. Developers just don't have enough time/money to perfect the gameplay after they have wasted everything on gfx.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
