DB 2007 - Revisited

beefsack · Post by **beefsack** » 08-01-2007 14:01

been reading all through the topics in general discussion, and suprisingly ut2007 has only popped up a couple of times, and i wanted to guage what sort of position people stand in regards to it

question to db team and players, who is very keen for db with 2007? personally im keen as mustard, have had the db bug since 0.9 and hasnt gone yet after all these years. there are gonna be a LOT of new people with ut2007 too

the reason why im thinking this is cos i just got a new deathball australia site going ( http://ausdb.net/ ), and am trying to guage for myself if its worth going and writing a full frontpage and tournament system in php (if there is a lot of drive for it, ready for the next incarnation possibly in a year or so), or just leaving it as a forum (serving the current community).

what do people think?

Post by **The_One** » 08-01-2007 14:07

I'd prefer a stand-alone version but one for UT2007 would be the next best thing. Can't see either actually happening.

Post by **DavidM** » 08-01-2007 15:24

my opinion: news....there is a question like that on the interview <3

mephistophel · Post by **mephistophel** » 08-01-2007 16:45

All that says is: it's either going to be redundant when 2007 comes out; improvements will still be made in ut2k4 ignoring 2007; you'll find a new engine for it.

:chin:

DoMmeh`` · Post by **DoMmeh``** » 08-01-2007 17:50

i think it would bring lots of more players 2 but i can totally understand davids point not wanting to just give money to epic.

i think a stand alone version ( i dont know what it takes to make it that but i can imagine...) wud be the great breakthrough if its not going down in only costs and the price would mayb be unpayable

beefsack · Post by **beefsack** » 09-01-2007 01:46

asif worry about the graphics, just bring over current assets, just having a massive boost of players like what happened when ut2004 came out would be awesome

the code would be the problem though, i hear there is little in common between 2004 and 2007

Twigstir · Post by **Twigstir** » 09-01-2007 03:04

Porting deathball into UT2007 would likely bring a large influx of players. For a period of time. However, it would be doomed to much the same fate as before. It's clear from the recent DavidM interview that, deathball is certain to fall far short of it's potential.

"just bring over the current assets" would be a very dumb move.
When you get that large influx of players, you need enough assets to keep those players over the long haul.

beefsack · Post by **beefsack** » 09-01-2007 03:36

graphics dont keep players for the long run, making a new ball, gun or goal mesh wont keep players there, the gameplay does

DoMmeh`` · Post by **DoMmeh``** » 09-01-2007 20:32

amen !

at least i think half of people ( or mayb less yes w/e at least new players) are playing at very low or low graphics. doesnt mean u shudnt change graphics for those who play with high ones. hm whatever no idea, but twigstir is right that DB is doomed to die out as the interview shows

waYne

A_POTATEO · Post by **A_POTATEO** » 09-01-2007 21:37

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO i want there to be a db 2007!!! i just started playing this and i cant see me not getting ut2k7 so i want to keep playing this and play ut2k4.

Twigstir · Post by **Twigstir** » 09-01-2007 22:26

"the current set of assets" already failed once. Obviously, players desire more than what is currently available. Failing to understand that, is why deathball will never reach it's full potential.

The reason deathball failed is "the current set of assets". Obviously deathball's gameplay isn't enough to keep players over the long haul.

Thinking graphics and themes don't matter, is just as foolish as thinking they could make a game all by themselfs.

Post by **The_One** » 09-01-2007 23:22

Don't pretend you know why Deathball failed to be as successful as some had hoped. You obviously do not.

Post by **DavidM** » 09-01-2007 23:37

a game design truth is basically:
graphics make you play
gameplay keeps you playing

Post by **The_One** » 09-01-2007 23:43

Not always of course. Word of mouth can go a long way too (for smaller titles at least).

Post by **DavidM** » 10-01-2007 00:13

the rule applies without word of mouth.

well you know....'basically'
blah <3