Aggressor

Haha, freaking kudos, man!

Modelling and textures of the statue are amazing, but the problem is, all this isn't standing out because of the complete lack of lighting contrast. It's a shame really.

Go to (where XXX is your Windows account name) G:\Documents and Settings\XXX\My Documents\My Games\Unreal Tournament 3 Demo\UTGame\Config\ open up UTEngine.ini and set DepthOfField and Bloom to False. DOF makes the biggest difference. Also, I have to agree with Hourences (once more ), that level design needs work, especially lighting. I found some aspects that really puzzled me, such as "detail normal maps" or something, which are completely unnecessary, but on the other hand there's not enough specular/reflection effects on textures (especially floor), making the world look too static. I booted up ETQW again just for comparison and my god QW freaking rapes UT3 as far as lighting is concerned. Oh, anyone managed to find the editor yet or something?

Yeah, sure. I love how people jump to conclusions just to sound bombastic. I don't really understand what you mean - that Stalker is running on a modified Source? Have you even played it? BTW, there's a book I forgot the title of (GPU Gems 2 or something) that thoroughly explains Xray's way of rendering. It's nothing like Quake-based engines.

That was Crytek, Tom.

No, it was not. [omgspoilers]You need to shoot the shit out of monolith guys around, till portal opens. Step in and repeat the process ... around 20 times. Strange. I think it's a bug, since my friend also had it - you don't get the Guide quest after you loot Ghost. Hmm, I somewhat disagree, though it's debatable and depends on what kind of game you're making. Yes, conventional game development practice says that you need to put challenges before the player, but in a nature to make them fun to overcome - not too easy, and not too hard. Everything should flow fluidly in a way so as the player would have an illusion of accomplishment, eventhough we held his hand most of the time. This belief stems from the axiom that fun is the quintessence of computer game. Everything is subject to fun; if playing your game is not fun, then the product is deemed a failure. But is this necessarily correct? Warren Spector had an opinion article half a year back in Escapist Magazine (can't be arsed to find it ) where he stated that games will be viewed as purely entertainment tool, inferior to art and lacking recognition, until we start to make games which have more to their internal value than pure fun. Games which carry political and social connotation, games that are played not with mere enjoyment in mind. Games which will even irritate players to hell to achieve their goal of presenting a particular idea. Anyway, we seem to differ even in the very basic notions of what a correct decision-making structure in the game should look like. To some, any backtracking is a nuisance and they want to steam ahead to the end. To others, carefully examining all the nooks and contemplating hidden meanings is the proper way. Because of this it's impossible to devise universal postulates of the game flow. This is why we have very different games on the market. I look forward to seeing even more radical approaches in the future, though the reliance on big publisher's capital is a huge problem here.

Well, there's no reason for that actually.

It's not confusing as in bad imho, just not following existing western conventions. I say western, because you have some more open games like this coming from developers originating from the eastern Europe & Russia (Hammer&Sickle comes to mind). I say it's remarkable. Finally we got a game that doesn't hold your hand on every corner and demands from you some exploration and common sense. You get the end you deserve. If you want quick ending (= quick wish grant ), it's there. If you invest more into the game, you get better endings. Imho it's the only fair thing. It may be confusing, but only because we're so used to existing game design practices. And since I'm pretty sick of them, it's cool to see something new. I don't really agree that Strelok questline isn't in the main flow - it's the plot start, since you find yourself with a task of killing him. It's just that the game somehow tricked you into thinking that getting to wishgranter is your goal. Also, completing quests for duty or freedom nets you remarkable equipment, such as VSS Vintorez and the best suit in the game. I agree that many things are missing in this game, such as vehicles and a lot of equipment, maybe longer quest lines. But it's a good start. Pity it took them six years to do it.

Yes. There are seven ways the game can end. Five short ends, and two longer. Follow Strelok questline to get to them.