I think Epic is trouble with UT3 sales numbers and game activity and they know it

[soccerballtux]

Hurray for browser cache and the back button!

Text1
Text2

You can read their forums rules for the General Chat here.

Looks like I violated #10; no message from mods though.

As for that 400 number, I'm wondering if Gamespy is fibbing the numbers for Epic or something; because there's DEFINITELY not that many players on in the US, and I don't imagine there are another 350 in the rest of the world that I'm missing.

Anybody have any suggestions for other multiplayer games with good graphics? I jumped on UT3 cause I thought it would be great like UT2k4 was; gameplay is nice, and like that guy at the bottom thread said, Warfare is fun and I would definitely like to play some right now except that with the least restrictive search settings on right now and no firewall, I'm getting a total of one(1) server in Warfare with two(2) players currently.

So I suppose I'll say what I told my friend-- stay away for now; you're not missing much.

Back to 2k4 I guess.

 

[Thraxen]

I see roughly 80 people in Warfare right now. So i think that 400 number may be correct. Even so, 400 is a rather pitful number for an online game. UT has fallen a long way... which is sad because I've always loved the series.

 

[Acanthus]

The genre evolved and UT didnt really come along for the ride...

I loved UT, liked 2k3 alright, didnt buy 2k4, and dont care about the console versions.

Heres hoping the engine leads to some games i care about, UT3 isnt on that list.

 

[Pocatello]

I'm too old to play games like UT, my reflexes aren't the same as it was back then, which was already pretty bad then.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
The genre evolved and UT didnt really come along for the ride...
I loved UT, liked 2k3 alright, didnt buy 2k4, and dont care about the console versions.
Heres hoping the engine leads to some games i care about, UT3 isnt on that list.

I don't agree with that. I don't believe UT needed to evolve, it doesn't need BF2 style maps with vehicles or realistic gameplay like CSS, it needs exactly what it dishes out.

UT3 still has time to catch on, given that most everyone I know that would play UT3 is currently playing TF2. But if it doesn't catch on it could possibly go down as the last of the fast shooters. Perhaps it will be considered another deathblow to a good game caused by poor release timing, another claimed by the Christmas rush. Maybe the server browser will be blamed, although I'd be surprised if it isn't fixed. Or maybe people will state that gamers simply don't want that style of game play anymore, but I doubt that, it won't be long before gamers are asking what happened to the fast fps and why aren't more being made.

 

[sswingle]

Are the different versions, ie PS3 and PC able to play with each other? I think that may be somewhat part of the problem when the same game is divided into 2 or 3 user groups.

 

[RandomFool]

I still love the original UT. 2k3 was disappointing. 2k4 was better and probably what 2k3 should have been. UT3 just didn't grab me. The graphics are getting to the point where they're too distracting and take away from the gameplay.

TF2 really did things right by simplifying the look of things so that it's more about the gameplay than graphics.

 

[chizow]

While I'm sure they would've liked UT3 to sell better, I highly doubt they're in panic mode given the number of 2008 titles that will be using the Unreal Engine 3. Personally I think games like this (QW:ET as another example of a poor selling installment of a highly regarded franchise) have underestimated the need to include an engaging, well-polished single-player campaign in the current FPS market with the likes of COD4, Crysis, STALKER (although it lacks the polish lol), etc out there.

 

[duragezic]

For me, it is not the lack of a polished single player campaign that matters. Yeah, I think that sucks that it is selling so poorly, as it is a good game and Epic deserves to sell more than that!

Same as ET-QW in a way, which at least according to Gamespy stats, has at least a couple thousand playing. I thought QW was awesome actually. Anyway, the Gamespy stats piss me off to see how many people still play crappy ass CS, and how many people play crap like MOH and COD1 online, which never had good multiplayer!

Both games, especially UT3 just came out at a time when there was so many other shooters out. I personally have not bought either game and have only played the demo. I can't justify spending the money when I have so many other games going on right now, even though I enjoyed the demos of both games.

I agree that I am not into or as good at the fast-paced shooters as when I was younger, but they are still fun to play and I can hold my own against the average player. Quake 4 also pretty much flopped like that... hardly any multiplayer being played for a sequel for one of the best and most important FPS games ever.

 

[jandrews]

2k4 was a blast, especially that game where you had to hold several points haha man that was fun. Anyway, havent played ut3.

 

[Slick5150]

I lost complete interest in UT around 2k3. It just got way too much "same old same old". Just wasn't particularly fun anymore.

I keep meaning to try QW out though.

 

[PingSpike]

They changed UT to much with 2K3 for me to enjoy it. The game modes were ok, but all the stupid dodge moves sounded annoying so I never picked it up when it came out. I ended up buying 2K4 for $11 though so I could play the Killing Floor mod.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: jandrews
2k4 was a blast, especially that game where you had to hold several points haha man that was fun. Anyway, havent played ut3.

Thats funny cuz I thought Double Domination was the one mode that sucked.
Having to hold two points at the exact same time then wait for a countdown was a major pain in the ass. If the teams were too skilled for each other they would get a last second save and it would start all over again. You could run around for half an hour waiting to get a single point. With 3 or more points required for a match the game could go on to be mind-numbing.

I much preferred classic Domination where the points built up automatically. Then it was just a test of who could keep the most points for the longest time, but NOT in intervals.
The game HAD to end, which kept things moving.


As for the OP, I find it amusing the guy would complain about not enough people playing the game he's telling people to not play.

 

[CP5670]

I find it quite puzzling that UT3 flopped so badly, and it's hard to pinpoint a single reason why that happened. My impression of the demo was generally quite favorable despite a few shortcomings. I was a big UT99 fan but I'm holding off buying this game because I don't want to pay full price for a predominantly online game that has so few people playing. Even if there are 400, that's still way too little considering it only came out a month or two ago.

I posted some other thoughts on this in the other UT3 thread down the page:

The much-criticized server browser (in the demo, at least) was mediocre but still usable, and I have seen worse in the past. You would expect this game to sell a fair number of copies from just the UT name alone. The engine is also well optimized and it's not something people would avoid just because they don't have the hardware for it.

I don't buy the "this has all been done before in previous UTs" argument either, as that applies to most multiplayer sequels and it hasn't stopped others from selling well. I suspect that a bigger reason for its failure may be that this sort of gameplay has fallen out of fashion over the years, because it's much less forgiving to noobs and casual players than slow paced games. This is essentially why the 360 degree gameplay of the Descent series died out in the late 90s, and it would be very sad if the same thing has happened here.

 

[sanzen07]

Something's fishy here. There's the "it's changed too much since the original for me to enjoy it" people and there's the "it's just more of the same" people. Well which is it? Is it the same or is it different? It's got to be one or the other.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hurray for browser cache and the back button!

Text1
Text2

You can read their forums rules for the General Chat here.

Looks like I violated #10; no message from mods though.

As for that 400 number, I'm wondering if Gamespy is fibbing the numbers for Epic or something; because there's DEFINITELY not that many players on in the US, and I don't imagine there are another 350 in the rest of the world that I'm missing.

Anybody have any suggestions for other multiplayer games with good graphics? I jumped on UT3 cause I thought it would be great like UT2k4 was; gameplay is nice, and like that guy at the bottom thread said, Warfare is fun and I would definitely like to play some right now except that with the least restrictive search settings on right now and no firewall, I'm getting a total of one(1) server in Warfare with two(2) players currently.

So I suppose I'll say what I told my friend-- stay away for now; you're not missing much.

Back to 2k4 I guess.

Are you trying to say they're in financial trouble, or just that UT3 didn't light anyone's fire?

The latter would be correct, and the former is just asinine. Unreal 3 is probably THE most licensed engine right now, and Gears of War sold roughly a bajillion copies. UT3 is a disappointment, but let's not pretend Epic was betting their last dime on it.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: sanzen07
Something's fishy here. There's the "it's changed too much since the original for me to enjoy it" people and there's the "it's just more of the same" people. Well which is it? Is it the same or is it different? It's got to be one or the other.

Well, you have two camps I suppose - people who don't want anything to change ever because they're fanboys, and people who want more than just a graphical update. Personally, I fell into the latter. It felt like I'd played this game before...three times.

Frankly, I think UT has run its course for the time being. 4 games in 9 years is run into the ground, alot like EA did with the Battlefield name. Epic needs to come up with a few new IPs (Gears was a good start) and let people get a little lonely without UT. Put a gap in there.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hurray for browser cache and the back button!

Text1
Text2

You can read their forums rules for the General Chat here.

Looks like I violated #10; no message from mods though.

As for that 400 number, I'm wondering if Gamespy is fibbing the numbers for Epic or something; because there's DEFINITELY not that many players on in the US, and I don't imagine there are another 350 in the rest of the world that I'm missing.

Anybody have any suggestions for other multiplayer games with good graphics? I jumped on UT3 cause I thought it would be great like UT2k4 was; gameplay is nice, and like that guy at the bottom thread said, Warfare is fun and I would definitely like to play some right now except that with the least restrictive search settings on right now and no firewall, I'm getting a total of one(1) server in Warfare with two(2) players currently.

So I suppose I'll say what I told my friend-- stay away for now; you're not missing much.

Back to 2k4 I guess.

Something is very wrong with your connection. Are you on patch 1.1? I'm showing about 50 populated Warfare servers right now. Also 150 populated DM servers and another 300 TDM servers. There is a shortage of servers, but nothing so bad as what your describing. I can almost always find a low ping Warfare server with about 25 people.

Another thing is that Epic is in no trouble at all. They probably have more money right now than any other independent game studio due to Gears of War and the hundreds of Unreal Engine 3 licenses that have been bought from them.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux


Anybody have any suggestions for other multiplayer games with good graphics? I jumped on UT3 cause I thought it would be great like UT2k4 was; gameplay is nice, and like that guy at the bottom thread said, Warfare is fun and I would definitely like to play some right now except that with the least restrictive search settings on right now and no firewall, I'm getting a total of one(1) server in Warfare with two(2) players currently.

So I suppose I'll say what I told my friend-- stay away for now; you're not missing much.

Back to 2k4 I guess.

Have you played team fortress 2 ?
Call of duty 4 ?

Both are fun multiplayer .

Epic is fine. UT3 is just another tech demo for the unreal engine.
They made enough off of gears of war that they could sit back and not sell anything for a couple years.

Epic sold over 3 million copies of gears of war on just the xbox, even if they only got 10.00 a copy (i'm sure they got more), thats 30 million

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: soccerballtux


Anybody have any suggestions for other multiplayer games with good graphics? I jumped on UT3 cause I thought it would be great like UT2k4 was; gameplay is nice, and like that guy at the bottom thread said, Warfare is fun and I would definitely like to play some right now except that with the least restrictive search settings on right now and no firewall, I'm getting a total of one(1) server in Warfare with two(2) players currently.

So I suppose I'll say what I told my friend-- stay away for now; you're not missing much.

Back to 2k4 I guess.

Have you played team fortress 2 ?
Call of duty 4 ?

Both are fun multiplayer .

Epic is fine. UT3 is just another tech demo for the unreal engine.
They made enough off of gears of war that they could sit back and not sell anything for a couple years.

Epic sold over 3 million copies of gears of war on just the xbox, even if they only got 10.00 a copy (i'm sure they got more), thats 30 million

Yes because every penny you pay for a game goes directly to the developer.

You dolt.


Don't get me wrong - Epic made bank off GoW, but it wasn't no $60x3 mil = 180 mil. There's a bit more to it than that.

 

[Deinonych]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Yes because every penny you pay for a game goes directly to the developer.

That's not what he said. He estimated $10 per copy and made it pretty clear (to me, at least) he was pulling that number out of the air.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ja1484
[Yes because every penny you pay for a game goes directly to the developer.

You dolt.


Don't get me wrong - Epic made bank off GoW, but it wasn't no $60x3 mil = 180 mil. There's a bit more to it than that.

You return with your attitude I see.

First I said 'even if they only got $10.00 a copy', most sane people would understand that as a guestimate.

Second , I bet I understand the industry far more than you do .
Do you have 8 games that have shipped and sold that you have personally worked on ?
How about a resume with a list of references with 11 publishers ?
Oh , you don't ?

I don't bring my attitude to the forums and normally don't bring up that I have clients in both the gaming and film industries but sometimes its warranted.

 

[MmmSkyscraper]

Originally posted by: CP5670
I find it quite puzzling that UT3 flopped so badly, and it's hard to pinpoint a single reason why that happened.

I don't, the demo was terrible. Poor menus, graphics which didn't look any better than a console and horrible random lag earned this a quick uninstall. There were other problems with it, including UK players not being able to type @ for the email field. Every other character was fine, just not the one that you had to use in order to complete the mandatory account signup. How retarded is that?

The only thing 'epic' about it was the amount of fail.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: jandrews
2k4 was a blast, especially that game where you had to hold several points haha man that was fun. Anyway, havent played ut3.

Thats funny cuz I thought Double Domination was the one mode that sucked.
Having to hold two points at the exact same time then wait for a countdown was a major pain in the ass. If the teams were too skilled for each other they would get a last second save and it would start all over again.

That's what made it great. It was one the tensest games ever. With teams being only a second away from victory, and then have a last second save is great. No game has that much tension that often.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: jandrews
2k4 was a blast, especially that game where you had to hold several points haha man that was fun. Anyway, havent played ut3.

Thats funny cuz I thought Double Domination was the one mode that sucked.
Having to hold two points at the exact same time then wait for a countdown was a major pain in the ass. If the teams were too skilled for each other they would get a last second save and it would start all over again.

That's what made it great. It was one the tensest games ever. With teams being only a second away from victory, and then have a last second save is great. No game has that much tension that often.

It sucked compared to the original Domination. It was much more intense having to try and keep control of multiple control points at once, especially when you had four team playing.