Change engine ASAP!

[Animosity]

Last night I played UT2003. - Nuff said.

Now, for those who dont understand my compact little complaint above, AO has engine that is only slightly better than the original doom, and not much better than the first 3D version of Duke Nukem. For those of you who dont like anchient history, that was over ten years ago. Many great games with more realistic handling have come and gone. Quake, Wolfenstine, UT, serious Sam. WTF is AO doing with such a crappy engine? why can you not jump from one platform to another one without first going down to the ground. Why do multiple level dungions not work correctly, and i keep falling through the floor? Why am i getting stuck on invisible objects in Stret West bank? Why is it possible to do a super jump of a slightly sloping wall? Why dont i have to aim? Why did Mech Warrior 1 have a more complex fighting engine 12 years ago? Why do they just make monsters harder instead of engine improvements? Why not make a boosted booster pack that includes a $5 licensing fee for getting the quake engine, or the quake2 engine, or another engine that works better? Speaking of UT2003 Has anyone noticed any lag on that game? I didn't. Is AO code linted? Is there much work on optimization of bandwidth? Nice buffs, but have you seen a lightening gun in UT? Is there a plan to give us a better engine? how long will we have to wait? I for one would prefer to know that a change is coming, rather than not hearing that. At present I think FC has political and monitary issues to improving the engine, and care more about some developers feelings than creating a smoother engine.

I have a strong resentment of people who say "change this or I will cancel my accounts" or any other pathetic noise like that. I understand AO is a different game than others, and that improvements are being made. I will say though, without threat, is that people will play what they enjoy playing. If UT2003 tickles my fancy, more than the clumsy, clunky, chunky engine of AO, it is just logical that I will spend more time playing UT.

Please tell us if you are planning an improvement.

[lilnymph]

erm, UT doom and every other FPS are COMPLETLY different types of game to this. This is a roleplaying game, which bases your ability to shoot on the skills of your character, not your skills. Also I could be wrong, but I didn't think those other games you listed had 1000's of players playing the same game at the same time. again, coud be wrong, as the only fps that interested me where the original doom, and half life.

hugs

lilnymph

[Animosity]

This is not a fps, but there is no reason to use that as an excuse. To raise the question "why can I not jump from one platform to another?" is not logically answered "because this is a skills based game." I understand that there are comprimises, and no FPS has had 100's of people playing tham at a time, but again game play can be improved.

as for your comment as 1000's of people playing, There may be 1000's of clients active, but they are in hundreds of playing fields. Proof? In ICC, there are many smaller playing fields where you can view only a small group of people. as you run from one side to the other, you will get new groups of people you can see. This is because you are passing through small play areas. groups of 20 people work just fine (as they de in FPS games). When there is a large scale event, where hundreds of people do gather in the same spot, there are problems. now there are elements of the game, like chat server where every one is connected but, thats old technology that works well.

i am saying that the engine suxxor. I think that we all would enjoy the game more if they improved it. It is possible to play by hitting Q and then walking away from your keyboard.

I am also saying that the "its an RPG" mentality has weakened gameplay, made it boring at times, and failed to maximize customer loyalty.

I am also asking if there are going to be changes, and when they will happen.

[______________Taelyn]

I have two things to say.

First of all, the problems with running into invisible objects, having the camera get stuck in the corners of some rooms, and the incredible difficulty of leaping across a small gap have to go. These are largely problems with the game engine itself and have nothing to do with the servers really. They're really bugs, it should be possible to move around without these problems.

Second, I wish they'd ****e up combat some. Just adding idle movements like ducking when the enemy fires, or adjusting position slightly between shots would be a great addition. It'd look better without significantly changing the underlying combat model. Heck, anythings better than standing there and blowing each other away at point blank distance.

[Minimalistix]

LOL!

This is an role-playing game! aiming? Play counter-strike then! the graphics is still good at full graphics, they could maybe fix some lag, that I agree with. and second of all.. on Counter-strike, UT2003 etc. there aint 50000 chars on one server! max 30-40 ?

So dont compare this with UT2003, two ALL THE WAY different games, and with that graphic engine, whit that good graphics, it would require a 100000 mzh PC and major RAM.. So re-think your theories before you share the flaming with all of us!

[Gearbox]

Different graphics engines are designed to do different sorts of things. UT and AO are apples and oranges, really.

I'd like to see what the new UT engine would do if it were asked to handle a space the size of Clon****. My guess is that it wouldn't handle it at all.

Take a look at AC2. That's an apples to apples comparison. It's certainly gorgeous, but I don't know if I'd say it's really that far ahead of AO.

[Animosity]

There are not 5000 people playing in a playfield.

There may be 5000 playing AO at the same time.

But, the individual combat areas are quite small. As you run though any area you will notice people appearing and disappearing. This is because you are moving out of one play area into another one. Rarely, except out side of some conjested areas, are there more than 15 dynels (Dynamic elements) in that playing area. This number 15 is far smaller than the 5000 you proport as playing at one time. This work load of 15 is simular to what UT and those other servers are handling.

Now, Having worked in Software business for quite sometime, I dont think I am making outrageous claims or demands.

The workload is split accross multiple physical processors and compturs. There is not one single point of failure out there handling 5000 people at one.

Things can change. We all love this game, that is why we are here, but if they want, they can change even large scale game mechanics and topology. This could include offloading server functions, or increasing them, tweaking bandwidth, changing the engine, changing pretty much everything. What is lacking is Will, Knowledge, confidence and perhaps money. If the head of funcome said that a mystery investor has provided xbillion amount of euros to make a change, the company would do it. The problem is that the designers probably feel perminalty overwhelmed between the desire for stability, content, gameplay, and a raft of other things that I dont want to get into.

I am not blaming anyone for the way it is now, but I am saying that more work is needed on getting our interaction with the environment more smooth, interactive and bug free. I understand that the various maps are huge and require large amounts of work to get bug free, and to get them bug free is a outlandish goal, nothing is perfect in this world. But, I feel, and most people feel when they are honest, that we are playing a game with a broken leg.

It doesnt make much sence to have incredible ranges, if by the second shot the MOB is in hand combat range. It doesnt make sence to have melee weapons with a 4M range - just try it in reality. We all would prefer there to be sniper battles, distance battles, where the MOB frustrates the heck out of you because he wont come out of his hiding place so you can kill him with your support beam. We all would like to be in a safe sniper position knocking off leets because they are under us.

So, FC, my challenge remains. Are you going to improve the movement engine, if so when?

[Bionitrous]

AO was started years and years before the original Unreal Tournament was even released. That's why the graphics are kinda crappy.

And they are kinda crappy. Just got my Radeon 9700 and instead of showing off just how good the graphics are in AO, it show's just how 1990's they are.

However .... updating the graphics engine is theoretically an easier task than finessing gameplay, improving tradeskills, adding guild housing, etc. All the latter are actually 'work'. If they used object-oriented programming when they created their graphics engine (in other words 'thought ahead' about the future of their game), they should be able to ****e it up for those of us who are already able to take advantage of DirectX 9 video cards.

One thing they absolutely have to take care of is implementing collision detection and character position forcing by solid objects. The elevator at the Lush swimming pool is a shameful example of their inadequacies in this area. Two-person vehicles would be possible if they could get this functionality into the game. Likewise, I'm kind of sick of killing a Bronto Mama and being able to 'phase' through her body and jump around inside her character model like it's some kind of grounded airship.

[Atremis]

Oh boy... here we go.

Originally posted by Animosity
Last night I played UT2003. - Nuff said.

Recent FPS games do not use the same type of engine as games like AO, EQ, DAOC, etc. They aren't even remotely similar, aside from using plane geometry to create a 3D world.

Now, for those who dont understand my compact little complaint above, AO has engine that is only slightly better than the original doom, and not much better than the first 3D version of Duke Nukem.

I really, really, really hope you are just making an exaggerated comparison here. Doom and Duke didn't even use true 3D to achieve the effects present there... they use sprite and plane scaling.

For those of you who dont like anchient history, that was over ten years ago. Many great games with more realistic handling have come and gone. Quake, Wolfenstine, UT, serious Sam. WTF is AO doing with such a crappy engine?

AO's engine is not crappy. If you hadn't noticed, AO's engine handles enormous numbers of polygons while maintaining an acceptable frame rate. The reason games like Quake 3, UT, and UT2003 look so good is because those games render areas that are *much* smaller than in AO. Plus factor in that AO's development cycle lasted several years.

why can you not jump from one platform to another one without first going down to the ground. Why do multiple level dungions not work correctly, and i keep falling through the floor? Why am i getting stuck on invisible objects in Stret West bank? Why is it possible to do a super jump of a slightly sloping wall?

Programming issues. I can hardly come up with half a dozen situations in which these kinds of things affected gameplay for me.

Why dont i have to aim?

Gameplay reasons. Again, this is *not* an FPS.

Why did Mech Warrior 1 have a more complex fighting engine 12 years ago?

Because Mech1 was an action game. AO is an RPG.

Why do they just make monsters harder instead of engine improvements?

Because the vast majority of the playerbase wants to see more content, not prettier Real Mean Ruffians.

Why not make a boosted booster pack that includes a $5 licensing fee for getting the quake engine, or the quake2 engine, or another engine that works better?

*sigh*... If you dont understand the technical issues here, please don't comment. Quake and Quake 2 (which, btw, are *not* more advanced than the AO engine) use engines that are suited to small environments. A BSP engine could not handle areas the size of AO's smallest zones. Have you ever played a Quake using a map with extreme view distances? For example, have you ever played the map well6 using the TeamFortress mod? Try standing on the balcony of one fort and look across to the balcony of the other fort. Extreme texture and polygon warping and tearing. Now apply that moderate distance to, say, Omni-1 Ent. It woudn't work at all.

Speaking of UT2003 Has anyone noticed any lag on that game? I didn't. Is AO code linted? Is there much work on optimization of bandwidth? Nice buffs, but have you seen a lightening gun in UT?

The client-server relationship in UT is completely different from that in AO. Not only that, but AO is run on a server farm in a central location. UT servers are distributed across the entire internet and handle only a few dozen connections at a time (if even that; I havent played the full version yet so I don't know what the upper client limit is).

Is there a plan to give us a better engine? how long will we have to wait? I for one would prefer to know that a change is coming, rather than not hearing that. At present I think FC has political and monitary issues to improving the engine, and care more about some developers feelings than creating a smoother engine.

On top of your post being completely moronic and uninformed, you don't even know something that has been posted many times and mentioned in several press releases. The booster pack contains updates to the graphics engine, and Shadowlands is going to do much to overhaul the graphics of the game.

[Centurion3]

yeeeessss, change the engine of an entire game from an tried and true (relativly anyway) engine that works, to an brand new one that isnt suited for this type of game. That wont take long at all, lets rebuild the game from scratch... or not...

[Warfang]

AOs graphics engine is much superior to any other MMOGs out there.. well.. except for SWG :P

[lilnymph]

Originally posted by Animosity
There are not 5000 people playing in a playfield.

There may be 5000 playing AO at the same time.

But, the individual combat areas are quite small. As you run though any area you will notice people appearing and disappearing. This is because you are moving out of one play area into another one. Rarely, except out side of some conjested areas, are there more than 15 dynels (Dynamic elements) in that playing area. This number 15 is far smaller than the 5000 you proport as playing at one time. This work load of 15 is simular to what UT and those other servers are handling.

OK, if all these people who appear aren't in the same playfield as you, how does your map know to show them JUST as they come into your view distance? The server still has to take into account the movements of ALL the players AND NPC's in any zone, some zones the numbers of npc's will be in the thousands. Also the only calculations a FPS games has to do when you shoot is the direction of your travel, your speed, the targets direction and speed, and the direction and speed of the "bullet". a RPG has to do slighly more.

hugs

lilnymph

[Animosity]

But,

Please consider this. AO does not handle large amounts of people in a single area. Please read my posts again, and think about what has been said. AO handles many thousands of small areas with few people in them to give the illusion of large playing areas.

Please attend a meeting where there are hundreds of people before you start commenting on performance. Frame rate suxxor in these situations because of network problems. These should be independant.

You should be careful to attempt to refute arguements with logic that has already been refuted. Example "this is not a FPS its a RPG" please reread my posts, and think about them this time. Now, let me expand to your argument with a question. Are there no RPG's with aiming? do All RPG's play this way? I think we will agree that they don't.

Situations of jumping platforms to platforms and superjumps on walls. Whenever I log, i do it from on top of a building. Because I cannot fly, I do it by superjumping. This is available in any city. Platform to platform, running accross buildings will show the problem. One of the reasons why some people dont see it, is because FC avoids this situation rather than fixing it.

As for the age of AO compaired to UT? (bio) UT2003 still contains much of the code from the original UT. Same is true for all games. They created their objects a long time ago and not thrown them out yet. There is absolutely no reason to do a complete rewrite on any program.

I have no issue with the graphics of AO, they are pretty enough, and realize that if they did stuff that would tax my system, they would alienate 95% of their audience. Its the feel of the game that needs to be improved.

now some could argue that at lvl 75 the subjective feel of the game is low for me because i have not increased my agility enough. Such an argument would be the sign of weakly thought through argument. The game play should be lush at all levels. for example, jumping between the rubble in a neutral training area is not the fun it proports to be.

I will comment on the content / functionality argument. It could be as you say, one thing to think about is that deathmatch FPS games have almost no content, but extreme loyalty. If the engine was improved on AO, the content that was sacrificed may not be missed. Also, a content designer should not be working on the engine. You would not get a gynacologist to do heart surgery. While most of the tools are the same, you need a engine designer to work on an engine. I think this comes back to the money / will issue. If FC felt is was a larger priority, the next person hired would be a engine designer rather than a content person.

Thank you for your opinion that I am uninformed. I have read that there are graphics updates in Shadowlands and Booster pack. Infact there are graphics updates in every patch, things just get better. I am trying to raise the issue of graphics, but of engine, and ingame feel.

I also aware that UT and AO have vastly different network topologies. I enjoy the benefits of a centralized server farm. I do not think that the topology is necessarily the problem here. There are downsides though, and FC has rightly or wrongly made there choice in the matter.

My question to Atre... If they did improve the engine, would you complain? If they did improve the engine, would you say that your gameplay has been destroyed? would you threaten to quit if you heard you would not have to aim, and maintain target on something? Would you be really upset if they introduced areas that you could only get to by jumping? Would you reject it if you and the monsters could take better advantage of ducking behind those indestructable benches and chairs in most missions? would you cry nerf stick if they made walls deformable?

[Atremis]

Originally posted by Animosity

My question to Atre... If they did improve the engine, would you complain? If they did improve the engine, would you say that your gameplay has been destroyed? would you threaten to quit if you heard you would not have to aim, and maintain target on something? Would you be really upset if they introduced areas that you could only get to by jumping? Would you reject it if you and the monsters could take better advantage of ducking behind those indestructable benches and chairs in most missions? would you cry nerf stick if they made walls deformable?

No, of course I wouldn't complain. You seem to think my reply was aimed at suggesting a graphics overhaul would affect the way we play AO. My position is that graphics are ancillary when it comes to RPGs. I've been playing em for nearly 15 years now, including a few really great titles on the Apple II, C64, NES, SNES, etc... Having killer graphics in an RPG is only a recent phenomena because the dedicated RPG fans know that it's the story and character depth that really counts. That aside, AO has excellent graphics. On par with games like UT2003, Morrowind, and other upcoming games? Nah.

Say it with me now, Ani... AO cannot use a BSP engine. The graphics can be updated, but the core engine will likely always remain the same. Even EQ, which is several years old now, still looks by and large like it did upon first release (despite their claims with the Luclin expansion).

[______________Luxxan]

Originally posted by Taelyn
I have two things to say.

First of all, the problems with running into invisible objects, having the camera get stuck in the corners of some rooms, and the incredible difficulty of leaping across a small gap have to go. These are largely problems with the game engine itself and have nothing to do with the servers really. They're really bugs, it should be possible to move around without these problems.

Second, I wish they'd ****e up combat some. Just adding idle movements like ducking when the enemy fires, or adjusting position slightly between shots would be a great addition. It'd look better without significantly changing the underlying combat model. Heck, anythings better than standing there and blowing each other away at point blank distance.

These are two great suggestions. Getting stuck on invisible objects was not always in the game, so that is definitely a bug. The others I would constitute as improvements a lot of people would like to see.

The second suggestion is just great. More model animations bring the game to life. Ducking, dodging, etc would be very, very cool. Or something as simple as your character turning their head and upper body in the direction of whatever object you're selecting. Or making it so MOBs don't have to stand on your head to shoot you.

The rest of this thread is a waste; you cannot compare these game types. Compare it to other MMORPG's if you like, but that's as far as it should go. AO still astounds me with it's graphics. And honestly, the graphical quality has gone down significantly since release simply to stop people from constantly crying about the performance issues.

[lilnymph]

Animosity, how do you want the engine changing? what is wrong with it? Anything to do with combat shouldn't be changed to be nearer a FPS, as this is a completly different type of game. the main problem I have, is the lack of true levels in missions (like the levels they have in some of the static dungeons). Anything to do with moving around, or fighting, shoud NOT be based on how skillfull or dexterous the player is, it should be based on the characters skills. I will agree, however, that the network coding could probably do with an overhaul to try and get rid of some of the lag when lots of people get together.

hugs

lilnymph

[lilnymph]

Originally posted by Taelyn
Second, I wish they'd ****e up combat some. Just adding idle movements like ducking when the enemy fires, or adjusting position slightly between shots would be a great addition. It'd look better without significantly changing the underlying combat model. Heck, anythings better than standing there and blowing each other away at point blank distance.

This would be a excellent change, to see it in action, have a look at neverwinter nights, where you get to see sword fights that look quite real, and are fun to watch

hugs

lilnymph

[Bionitrous]

The only point was that AO's graphics (while admittedly better than EQ or UO or DAoC) are kinda drab and boxy. I can live with it for a while. Hell, I lived with UO for 4 years. But, UO had a 'game' in there at least. Things to do. Not just mindless leveling and killing crap forever.

I could deal with UO's sprite-based system and even preferred it to the 3D client. But AO's graphics aren't that spectacular compared to the two new games, IMHO. And if it's a choice between AO and it's continual decline towards EQ'dom in it's gameplay AND inferior graphics compared to SW:G with its heavy borrowing from UO's core MMORPG concepts, I'll gladly take the latter.

But, if the Booster Pack makes things look better and Shadowlands actually incorporates some 'real' structural elements and not so many obvious flat planes I'll continue to pay my subscription. It's not about money. It's about having fun playing a game. AO had a good game at release and the graphics were far and beyond anything else on the market. IMO, the game value has been degraded since release and the graphics are no longer state of the art.

[MartekO]

Originally posted by Animosity
Last night I played UT2003. - Nuff said.
...
Now, for those who dont understand my compact little complaint above, AO has engine that is only slightly better than the original doom, and not much better than the first 3D version of Duke Nukem

Well I haven't played it yet. Can you tell fill me in on some of these things?

• Does it allow literally THOUSANDS of combinations of "skins" per character? All those different clothes and armors and cloaks and backpacks and weapons?
• Does it allow ANY of the above possible combinations to co-exist at the same time on any level, with no restrictions?
• Can a player change clothing/armor during play to basically anything available in the game?
• Does it allow pretty much ANY character to come in differnet size? Does it allow any existing character to reversably "grow" or "shrink" in varying amounts? (Bracers of growing/shrinking; other buffs/items to do that)
• Does it allow characters to change their "face" during play? (certain agent nanos)
• Does it allow player to morph into completly differnet types of characters during play? (Adv morphs). Does it have full set of player animations for all possible actions while morphed?
• Does it have hundreds or thousands of different weapons and items that can co-exist at any location at any one time; without pre-planning that they will be there?
• Does it have hundreds (perhaps thousands) of different kinds of "mobs" (bots) that can co-exist at any location at the same time, without pre-planning?
• Does it show you the health and "nano" (ammo maybe) of all your teammates in a concise display?
• Does it have changing "weather"? (Storms coming and going, lightning, rain, thunder; etc?)
• Does it have a level "map"? If so, does it vary in quality depending on how "good" you have made it by investing in something to improve it?
• Does it have a chat system with seperate channels for different things, including possibility to set up multiple independent "private" channels at will?
• Does it have hundreds (probably) of different "special particle effects" (such as the nano-casting graphical effects) that can be shown on basically any character at any time? Even in multiple combinations?
• Can different players run at different speeds? Can their speed be altered during play (such as improved runspeed)?
• Does it have "concealment" that can vary in "strength" per player and that can be dynamically altered during play by items or "spells" (nanos)?
• Does it have generatable "disguise" objects (agent holograms) that can be generated during play, and "hidden in" by players?

Just a few things I am curious about that I don't know about it. I don't recall Doom or DN3D having a lot of those capabilities. Since UT2003 is graphically "superior" is it safe to "assume" it can do the above, but even "better" than AO does now?

Cheers,
Martek

[Bionitrous]

I think his point is it 'looks' better. You can't argue with that. We all agree that AO is a richer game than any FPS. It just isn't 'pretty'. You can't blame a guy for wanting the lush and realistic environment he sees in one game to be present in another game he really likes.

I have to admit when I go into a mission, I get the feeling I'm playing the original Doom. I thought that very same thing the other day. The exact same thought. Everything so flat with textures plastered on em. But, that's just missions. Some things are better. The newbie backyards can be a real eye opener for someone who played one of the older MMORPG's. Nice stuff in comparison.

I'm sure we'll get the same feeling we got from AO when we step into one of the new MMORPG's coming out.

But, as stated, the Booster Pack is going to have a graphics overhauls and Shadowlands may offer more improvements yet.

You think he's comparing apples and oranges. He's not. He says one game looks better than another game. That's apples and apples. Whether or not it's feasible is another story.