• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Imagine RO on Unreal 3,0, Wishlist

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
C

Creutz

Grizzled Veteran
Mar 21, 2006
129
0
47
#1
Thought this would be a good topic for you visionarys out there,
I love this game in right know in 2,5. But can`t help to think what if ,RO was on Unreal 3.

IMO RO :s biggest flaw is the 32 multiplayer limit.
New MMORPG, Huxley claims to feature 300 player Real time battles.
Huxley is based on the Unreal 3 Engine.

If you were free to rule and create the next RO
What other features would you implement using Unreal 3 game engine?
if you wish you can put your thoughts here.

Edit. - With wish list meaning no limitations of your imagined RO . Reality does not count when the RO for 3,0 do not exist yet.
> So no wish is unrealizable.
 
Last edited:
#4
- Better and more player models
- Better animations
- Clipping problems (not too annoying but still.... seeing a guy lying prone while only his toe is touching the surface kills immersion)
- Destructible stuff (no more Tigers stuck by small wooden fence)
- More weapons and vehicles (you don't even need U3 for this)

I DO NOT want more players and having more than 40-50 players would either kill the fun or turn RO into something completely different (not necessarilly better). RO is currently all about small unit tactics. 64 player game would require complete rewirite of maps, rethinking of tactics etc etc etc. Then, we seem to have problem filling enough of even 32 player servers guys so lets not bite more than we can swallow. :eek:

32-player maps are playable even if there are only, say, 18 players on a server. 64 player maps would be gigantic, and unplayable unless we have at least 30+ players on a server at any given time.

I am also a member of "realism clan" and having 16 battle ready people is hard enough, I cannot even think of operating a 32-man clan :eek:

BF2 may have 64-players or whatever, but frankly BF2 is the LAST game I'd want RO to "follow".

I say keep the game 32-player (or 48-player perhaps but no more than that). I for one have absolutely no trouble with that.

Oleg
 
Upvote 0
#5
Ok we have the latest unreal engine, so lets pump up the visuals. That goes without saying.

64+ player battles would be cool. It is still classed as a very small engagement.

Multi map campaigns. Where battles could rage too and fro. (not sure if it is possible, but would like to see it). Awards and medals could be handed out after each map. Then the highest scoring players get a chance to upgrade their equipment or get first pick of it on the next map.
 
Upvote 0
#6
Johnny555 said:
Ok we have the latest unreal engine, so lets pump up the visuals. That goes without saying.

64+ player battles would be cool. It is still classed as a very small engagement.

Multi map campaigns. Where battles could rage too and fro. (not sure if it is possible, but would like to see it). Awards and medals could be handed out after each map. Then the highest scoring players get a chance to upgrade their equipment or get first pick of it on the next map.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree on the rewards part. People will tend to abuse every glitch in the game to get the rewards and show-off their "leetness" this also takes away a lot of the "team effort/acomplishments" feeling.
People who know the system of BF:2 probably know what I'm talking about.
 
Upvote 0
#10
Rrralphster said:
I have to disagree on the rewards part. People will tend to abuse every glitch in the game to get the rewards and show-off their "leetness" this also takes away a lot of the "team effort/acomplishments" feeling.
People who know the system of BF:2 probably know what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
I second that. I'm not a big fan of any kind of online stat system (especially not those which are integrated into the game). They usually just discourage teamplay and turn some players into point hunting solo rambos. The system in BF2 sucks, big time.

Some stuff I'd like to see in the U3E version:
- destructive environment
- nifty graphics (but with high low-end compability, I hate constant hardware updating)
- more weapons, vehicles and maps
- more variety to soldier models' external appearances
- maybe some maps with 64 player support, not compulsory though
 
Upvote 0
#12
Looks like this thread got lost... I'll re-post

I'd personally like to see support for more players, if just for a few maps. I'd really love to see a 64 player Red God of War for example. Or even Arad, which at the moment seems too empty if you're on foot. With more people you'd have urban warfare as well as tank battles. It'd also make driving tanks through the towns all the more difficult.

I don't think it would kill the gameplay at all if it was done properly.
 
Upvote 0
#13
Creutz said:
Apologies if this thread is a waste of space , I did try and search.

Thought this would be a good topic for you visionarys out there,
I love this game in right know in 2,5. But can`t help to think what if ,RO was on Unreal 3.

IMO RO :s biggest flaw is the 32 multiplayer limit.
New MMORPGHuxley claims to feature 300 player Real time battles.
Huxley is based on the Unreal 3 Engine.

If you were free to rule and create the next RO
What other features would you implement using Unreal 3 game engine?
if you wish you can put your thoughts here.
Click to expand...

RO SO Map Perekop with 300 people ... nuf said



no one says that people have to build only 64 player maps, but the SUPPORT woud be needed, so transport and tanks will be realy usefull, but there shoud be then of course more maps then the one we have now and servers seperated in tank only, tank-infantry and infantry only eventualy. And if you ask me "most" maps we have coud handle from there layout 64 peoople already, it woud be a bit small though, but for a battle not absolute unrealistic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#14
I have high expectations of the next-generation version of Red Orchestra.
Now Tripwire Interactive can really show what they are made of! :D

I want friggin' 2048x2048 textures if not 4096x4096, with huge normal maps, displacement mapping, parallax mapping, subsurface scattering on the trees, High-Dynamic Range-rendering, etc. :D
Although subsurface scattering and High-Dynamic Range-rendering comes in the box though.

That's only graphics!

I also want physics at the fullest! Destroyable objectives, buildings, ragdolls, projectiles!!!, suspension of physics, all done by NovodeX and/or PhysX.
Although suspension and projectiles would have to be done fully server-sided, though destruction and ragdolls have to be synced.
(I hope vehicle-destruction will also be done by physics :D)

Not to mention we want 64 players, mortars, physics-powered weapon slings, climbing!!!, penetration, screeching shutters and hauling winds with moving lampposts back, enterable buildings!!!, deformable terrain, depth-of-field when IS-ing after years of waiting :D, breathing and holding breath, motion captured animations!!!, gear-shifting, real manual bolting, no friggin' HUD, real forests you can walk through, bouncing grenades with real shrapnel server-sided physics-powered, casings that are client-sided physics-powered and stay longer, EAX 5.0 Advance HD support, TrackIR support, Rich Foley sound system, doppler effects, tanktrack sounds, grass drawed at all distances, better bots, bipod-pivoting, etc, etc.

*NOTE: This isn't actually what I really want... well actually it is :D
But I really just want RO to be good and enjoyable. :)
These are only hints what would really be welcomed. :D
 
Upvote 0
#16
SgtH3nry3 said:
I have high expectations of the next-generation version of Red Orchestra.
Now Tripwire Interactive can really show what they are made of! :D

I want friggin' 2048x2048 textures if not 4096x4096, with huge normal maps, displacement mapping, parallax mapping, subsurface scattering on the trees, High-Dynamic Range-rendering, etc. :D
Although subsurface scattering and High-Dynamic Range-rendering comes in the box though.

That's only graphics!

I also want physics at the fullest! Destroyable objectives, buildings, ragdolls, projectiles!!!, suspension of physics, all done by NovodeX and/or PhysX.
Although suspension and projectiles would have to be done fully server-sided, though destruction and ragdolls have to be synced.
(I hope vehicle-destruction will also be done by physics :D)

Not to mention we want 64 players, mortars, physics-powered weapon slings, climbing!!!, penetration, screeching shutters and hauling winds with moving lampposts back, enterable buildings!!!, deformable terrain, depth-of-field when IS-ing after years of waiting :D, breathing and holding breath, motion captured animations!!!, gear-shifting, real manual bolting, no friggin' HUD, real forests you can walk through, bouncing grenades with real shrapnel server-sided physics-powered, casings that are client-sided physics-powered and stay longer, EAX 5.0 Advance HD support, TrackIR support, Rich Foley sound system, doppler effects, tanktrack sounds, grass drawed at all distances, better bots, bipod-pivoting, etc, etc.

*NOTE: This isn't actually what I really want... well actually it is :D
But I really just want RO to be good and enjoyable. :)
These are only hints what would really be welcomed. :D
Click to expand...


***** how much would those servers cost to run? :D
 
Upvote 0
#17
Nimsky said:
H3nr3y... there there, take your pills... relax... breathe in, breathe out...
Click to expand...
*takes the wrong (cafeine) pill* Thanks Nims! ... :eek: NOES! :D
myzko said:
***** how much would those servers cost to run? :D
Click to expand...
LOL just take your average Quad Dual-Core Xeon 3.2GHz with 16GB of DDR2-800 PC6400 ECC RAM, two PhysX cards, SCSI to prevent CPU bottlenecks, and ... stuff. :D

Nah I think it wouldn't be much of a problem, server CPU's are rapidly growing from 4MB cache to 16MB cache (on Intel's roadmap at least) and multi-core processors.
Gotta make sure you got enough RAM memory and SCSI to prevent your silly (S)ATA disks from taking that 8% of your CPU!

If you can just have a server making use of the PhysX hardware... and being able to have multiple PhysX cards...
Seems that marketing doesn't allow that, and ... we need multi-threading support for dedicated servers FFS.

Btw. it isn't going to be like Unreal Engine 2.* anymore where everything is done through netcodes.
That is one of Unreal Engine 3.0's biggest advantages over it's predecessor.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#18
Rrralphster said:
I have to disagree on the rewards part. People will tend to abuse every glitch in the game to get the rewards and show-off their "leetness" this also takes away a lot of the "team effort/acomplishments" feeling.
People who know the system of BF:2 probably know what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

I know what you are talking about with BF2. I played it to death for a month or so.

With this being a wish list, as in everything being as you wish it to be. Then the perfect abuse free awards system is what I would like.
Don't ask me how to code it. I'd just like it.
 
Upvote 0
#19
-Destructable environments/buildings. No longer are you safe from the tank behind fences and walls (that'd easily make Combined Arms maps insanely intense and rewarding).

-A bit of tweaking of the weapons to yet again sharpen the brink of realism

-Some nice animations and maybe newer options (IE Tossing clips to team-mates, ditching the way ammo splatters when a weapon drops, etc)

-The same things I've always been amazed with from the guys at Tripwire. (IE awesome sounds, good graphics while not being overly demanding)

-Maybe a few different sides, IE Canadians, Americans, Italians, etc, as well as some other maps. Aircraft would also be interesting possibly, and a few more vehicles could be nice.

-More enthusiastic voice commands and wider variety of statements.

Though really only 2-3 I would need to be overly content with their next product.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu