Slashdot Mirror


Tribes Franchise Quietly Strangled

Gavin Manley writes "Back in October last year, the third game in the Tribes series of first person shooters was released, published by Vivendi Universal Games (VUG). After many years of waiting and frustration, VU once again disappoints, not only by missing their market for the game again but by simply cancelling support for the game." From the article: "Now not only does this have consequences for Tribes fans, but fans of other franchises need to be worried. SWAT 4 in particular. The next SWAT game is also being produced by Irrational Games (no doubt on an equally dismal budget) and published by our good friends at VUG."

105 comments

  1. It's all been downhill.. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

    Let's face it.. Tribes 1 was awesome. Tribes 2, better but kind of "eh". Tribes 3.. terrible.

    You make a crappy game, no one's going to buy it, and no one's going to care when support is pulled.

    Just my two cents..

    --
    Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    1. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Winckle · · Score: 1

      Very true, I seem to remmeber a very amusing penny arcade, very simialr to that post, it was about tribes 3, and featured three frames. In the first frame there was a man squeezing a stone crying out that there was "no blood in this stone!". The second frame contained a well, with the caption "there's no water in this well". the final frame contained a horse and a man with a flogigng stick and the speech "I just love beating this dead horse". I cannot remember the name and therefore connot provide a URL and I would greatly apprceiate someone else posting the URL

    2. Re:It's all been downhill.. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      tribes 3 wasn't that bad as.

      but I can't see why would you NEED support with tribes 3, I had zero issues with it(I don't think network play is dependandt on them either so...).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tribes 3 isn't a crappy game. The single-player part is a lot of fun, and the multiplayer is good as well. I don't know why people seem to just love to bash it all the time. It's not Tribes 1, ok? It wasn't supposed to be Tribes 1. Get over it.

    4. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but then Tycho played the actual game and liked it. http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php3?date=2004-09 -08

    5. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. It was the other way around.
      2. It's not funny when you describe it with words.
      3. It wasn't funny in first place.

    6. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The level of support a publisher provides is strictly a business decision, because they're a big corporation with shareholders to account to. Developers, of course, just want to have a great game.

      To avoid this, some small independent developers (Irrational Games, Bioware, Valve, etc) are trying to move towards self-publishing. This lets them not only retain more control over their products, but also fund the games that they want to make rather than the games that fit a slot in a marketing spreadsheet. This means more quirky, intelligent, and innovative games like Freedom Force, System Shock 2, etc.

      If you feel strongly about the self-publishing model and the potential it holds for supporting creativity and community in future games, please consider buying from these developers.

      To learn more, check out these articles about Irrational's adventures in self-publishing, and if Freedom Force versus the Third Reich sounds like the kind of game you'd enjoy, feel free to order it directly from Irrational Games.

      Articles:
      "Adventures in Self-Publishing"
      Bioware-Irrational self-publishing collaboration article

      Ordering FFvTTR directly from the developer:
      The Freedom Force Online Store :

    7. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By "better" you mean "UE errors every where, shitty patching scheme(naming scheme 343242-304873.exe and no 'update from any version'), the patch utility needing a patch, patches not fixing the UE errors and in some cases making things worse for everyone, developers getting caned after release, hardly any fixes after developers getting caned, no bot vehicle support, and being a bloated memory hog" don't you?

      Then if that is what you mean, I would say I agree.

    8. Re:It's all been downhill.. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      Better in the sense of gameplay/graphics/sound. Of course it had it's issues, but at least it was more of a continuation of the "Tribes" gameplay than Tribes 3 was.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
    9. Re:It's all been downhill.. by British · · Score: 1

      Did you try driving the ATV thing? Every time I drove it, it jerked around like crazy. Not so much motion, as it teleported.

      Anyone else I saw driving it, it moved normally.

      T3 just seemed really slow paced compared to T2.

    10. Re:It's all been downhill.. by violently_ill · · Score: 1

      i've been a hardcore tribes fan since the beginning, and in my opinion tribes 3 is the best tribes yet, as well as one of the most underappreciated games of all time. everybody hears that sales have been crappy and assume that it sucks, but that's not the case at all. tribes 3 definitely is a departure from earlier tribes games, but most of the changes are for the better.

      --learning to ski is much simpler and more refined.
      --the single player game gives noobs a chance to practice their skills before they get thrown into the multiplayer melee.
      --the grappler kicks all kinds of ass.
      --the number of deployables is strictly limited (no more turret spamming)
      --mines only detonate when enemies step on them
      --in general, the whole game has been streamlined and stripped of all the baggage in tribes 2.

      i strongly encourage all of you to check it out. you can pick it up for $30 or less at your local store.

    11. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is too bad, I bought tribes2 because my friends spoke well of the first one.

      That was the last time I will ever buy another sierra title right when it is release, and without an unbiased review.

      I would say it could have been a good game, but with the way things turned out(i.e. UE errors) it wasn't for me and a lot of other people with similar problems.

    12. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      IMHO, Tribes 2 was shit before the "Classic Patch". For those who are unaware, this patch returned the gameplay elements from the original Tribes to Tribes 2.

      I didn't buy Tribes 2 until after they released the patch. A buddy of mine had it and I tried it, thought it was poop so I never bought it. After the Classic Patch, another friend showed me and it was like the magic was back.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    13. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      above poster works for VU.

    14. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tribes 3 isn't a crappy game. The single-player part is a lot of fun, and the multiplayer is good as well. I don't know why people seem to just love to bash it all the time. It's not Tribes 1, ok? It wasn't supposed to be Tribes 1.

      And thus the reason the game sucks. At least T2 was designed well and kept the scale of the game intact. TV tried dumping Tribes into boxed maps and removing a lot of in game features. That sucks and should be simple to understand.

    15. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Donald+Ferrone · · Score: 0

      People preached the wonders of "Halo" to me constantly, telling me what a wonderful game it was several years after Tribes 2's release, and "Halo" just couldn't make the "fun" or "feature" cut that Tribes 2 had. I dildo my ass and suck my dad's dick. Tribes 2 was a great title that was ahead of its time.

      --
      Donald Ferrone, Ph.D
      Professor of computer science
      http://www.geocities.com/donald_ferrone/
    16. Re:It's all been downhill.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, I liked Tribes 2's sophistication.

    17. Re:It's all been downhill.. by TelJanin · · Score: 1
  2. It was fun till... by gothzilla · · Score: 1

    Tribes 1 was fun until every server became one of those infinite ammo, shoot a billion rounds a second, every bullet explodes kind of games. I had a blast playing when you had to actually aim and it was actually kind of hard to kill people. I stopped playing when every time you fired you created a small nuclear war. Never even bought tribes 2.

    If there still are servers on Tribes 1 that maintain original game play, or even use just a few of the cool addons (not nuclear chain gun ones) let me know.

    1. Re:It was fun till... by KeeperS · · Score: 1

      Just make sure that the server you join is playing "base" and nothing else, and you should be okay. If Tribes 1 is anything like it was a year or two ago, it's not hard to find a base server. Just be aware that the only people still playing Tribes are probably going to completely stomp you. After playing the game for years on end, their Tribes 1 skills have been honed to perfection.

  3. This is a shame. by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Seeing a series die out like this is never good, especially when it's been one that was as good as the Tribes games were.

    Here, it seems worse because they'd actually made at least one big gesture to the community before. Releasing Tribes and Tribes 2 for free may have been for publicity more than anything else, but it was a great decision regardless, and one that bought them some respect from me.

    Shame they've just lost that.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
    1. Re:This is a shame. by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      I always saw Tribes as more or less the same as Unreal Tournament 2004. If we already have too many WWII fps, we have equally as many futuristic marines fps.

    2. Re:This is a shame. by LazyBoy · · Score: 1

      Tribes Vengance was very much like UT2004.
      Tribes 2, however, was fairly unique, IMO

      --

      If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.

  4. In Response To This News... by jmole · · Score: 5, Funny

    * Presses 'V' *
    * Presses 'G' *
    * Presses 'S' *

    jmole: Shazbot!

    1. Re:In Response To This News... by Jeff85 · · Score: 1

      V-G-D-V-G-S I don't -- Shazbot!

      --
      Fetch Text URL - Firefox Extension
    2. Re:In Response To This News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      V-V-V! V-V-V! V-V-V!

      For God's sakes, someone help me! I got the flag, and the rest of you are standing on that goddamned hill, sniping enemy turrets. What's wrong with you? Yeeeaaaaaugh!

  5. They never listened to their base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The true hard core fans of Tribes 1 were very vocal in what they wanted and asked for it in simple terms. Take Tribes 1 and build on it, making the sequels almost the same but with better graphics and new maps. Instead the developers made completely different games each time. Why? The original game was fun beyond all belief. I fail to understand why you take something that is proven to be enjoyable by all and change it, hoping that people will like something else when you've already got them hooked.

    It was right for support to be pulled on this as most of the fan base for Tribes had left long ago. Let this be a warning to any other game studio that thinks it would be a bright idea to package a "different game" as a sequel to another game with the same name. You will kill your fan base. Tribes could have been a very strong title to this day had they simply followed the example that ID put forward with Quake I/III or the Doom series.

    "Keep it simple stupid" and "If it ain't broke don't fix it."

    1. Re:They never listened to their base by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Let this be a warning to any other game studio that thinks it would be a bright idea to package a "different game" as a sequel to another game with the same name. You will kill your fan base.

      Yeah, especially you, Nintendo! Zelda and Mario could have been so popular but no, you had to make Super Mario Bros. 2 and Link's Adventure!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:They never listened to their base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lesson, of course, is that if you do take a different game and make it into a sequel, and your fans complain that it's too different, you can salvage things by returning to the style of the original with the subsequent sequels.

    3. Re:They never listened to their base by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      The Highlander Effect.

      Well documented. :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    4. Re:They never listened to their base by Schnapple · · Score: 1
      Tribes could have been a very strong title to this day had they simply followed the example that ID put forward with Quake I/III or the Doom series.
      An interesting choice of examples. However, are you saying Quake III: Arena was "almost the same" as Quake? The three Quake games couldn't be more unalike. The first one was a mishmash FPS with no plot, the second had the Strogg plot, and the third was multiplayer only with no plot. Hell, all people did with Quake II was bitch that it wasn't enough like Quake.

      And DOOM 3? You're right in that it's "almost the same game with but with better graphics and new maps". And people shit on it. A lot. I loved it, personally. I'm like that - I can have multiple good games in my life. But all people did was complain that it had the same 1993 game mechanics as DOOM, only with better graphics.

      Ultimately though Tribes will go down as a pseudo-sports FPS game and as EA learned with Madden - the only way to keep the masses happy is to come out with basically the same game over and over, just improved graphically.

    5. Re:They never listened to their base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultimately though Tribes will go down as a pseudo-sports FPS game and as EA learned with Madden - the only way to keep the masses happy is to come out with basically the same game over and over, just improved graphically.

      They couldnt even get that right. Basically thats what most tribes players have wanted all along. Today I'd say they would want a T2 classic game revamped graphics, the baility to handle 20+ players without the server lagging to crap (Unreal and TV netcode stink). Most important the suttle feel of the physics should be taken seriously. Tribes physics and movement are unlike any other game and the spaciousness of scale. TV eliminated so much of that trying to move Tribes down to a smaller deathmatch style game. Its ok, but too different to really be considered Tribes. Aditionally it doesnt help when they release the server and MP unfinished.

  6. Not the first time... by NetDanzr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    VUG aren't the first to cancel support for a game. I still remember the disastrous Might and Magic IX, which was released as an incredibly buggy POS. The publisher, 3DO, has promptly released a patch that increased the gameplay from 30 minutes to 2 hours before encountering the first game killing bug. They then officially abandoned support for the game, while continuing to sell it for $29.99. It ended up being just another drop in the bucket that sunk the company at the end. Let's hope VUG feels the pinch from mmaking money of unsupported software as well...

    1. Re:Not the first time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tribes 3 can't really be compared to MMIX. It doesn't have any showstopping bugs, or any really serious ones even. I played through the single-player game without a problem, and haven't really had any problems online either. I would have liked to see a patch to fix up some little things and maybe boost online performance a bit, and I don't like VUG's decision to cancel the patch one bit, but let's keep a little perspective on this one.

  7. aah by j0nb0y · · Score: 4, Insightful

    aah, nothing quite like seeing a good game series destroyed by a publisher that cares about nothing but profit. Everyone remember the tribes 2 fiasco? It went something like this:

    Dynamix: Tribes 2 isn't ready, we need to delay it.
    Vivendi: Release the game now.
    Dynamix: It's not ready.
    Vivendi: We don't care, release the game now.
    Dynamix: Okay.

    Vivendi: This game sucks. No ones buying it, and those who did are returning it.
    Dynamix: We told you the game wasn't ready.
    Vivendi: You're fired.

    Aah, what a brilliant and refreshing management strategy. Is anyone really surprised that tribes 3 was a dismal failure?

    --
    If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
    1. Re:aah by theVP · · Score: 1

      This seems to be spreading awefully fast. Even my two-bit company's administration has an attitude like this.

      Here's a good example that people still talk about today: Bungie, Microsoft, and Halo 2:

      Bungie: Halo 2 is really starting to pick up on progress, and we're starting to implement things that we didn't even have on the drawing board last year. Give us some more time, and we'll deliver one hell of a game.
      Microsoft: Release the game now.
      Bungie: But its not even ready.
      Microsoft: We need something to boost our Xbox sales for Christmas season, release the game now.
      Bungie: Fine

      Now, the second part of the Vivendi/Dynamix scenario hasn't occured with Microsoft/Bungie, nor do I think it will, because unlike Tribes 2, Halo 2 sold like hotcakes (I love that word...hotcakes), but look at what Bungie is doing now...they're working on downloadable content, aka, patches and levels that probably could have been avoided and have been put in the original game. Not only that, they're already considering a Halo 3, before Xbox 2 has even issued a release date, making it a probable game for the Xbox instead. Why? Because despite how incredibly good the game is (its all I play after work now), it STILL isn't living up to what it could have been, and it could have been even MORE successful had Microsoft given them a little more time.

      It all amounts to development teams running into the same problems that actors/writers/musicians/directors/screenwriters run into nowadays- publisher bullshit. The publisher makes the calls, and they only care about profit. They don't care about what they're doing to what they're selling, and they don't care about what their attitude is doing to the market as a whole (People are starting to really sod off on their gaming time these days, due to a lack of good games on the market).

      Somehow, some way, game devolpment has to find a way to separate them from their publishers, same as any other artist. I personally see that as the real problem. However, I get kind of depressed when I discover that I don't have a solution. Any thoughts?

      --
      "No one is more miserable than the person who wills everything and can do nothing." -Emperor Claudius 10 BC - AD 54
    2. Re:aah by Schnapple · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You got it wrong.

      Dynamix: Tribes 2 isn't ready, we need to delay it.
      Vivendi: Release the game now.
      Dynamix: It's not ready.
      Vivendi: When will it be ready?
      Dynamix: Six months from now.
      Vivendi: You said that six months ago. And six months before that. And six months before that. We've missed two Christmas seasons now and sunk umpteen million dollars into this game. You told us it would be our next Half-Life. We told you that was great since those fuckers from Valve won't even return our phone calls. Now would you please finish the function you're working on and give us the fucking thing? You can keep working, we'll call it a patch. Oh, and please for your sake hope that you get that patch right the first time.

      (later)

      Vivendi: This game sucks. No ones buying it, and those who did are returning it.
      Dynamix: We told you the game wasn't ready.
      Vivendi: And WE told YOU that the game was supposed to be ready over a year and a half ago when you said it would be. No one's buying the game since you guys can't even patch, let alone code. Oh, and great idea taking a game which people were seriously hardcore about and changing or removing everything they liked. Did any of you ever even test this thing on XP? And don't give me the excuse of "the lead programmers left". Now we're going to be lucky to break even on this, we didn't sell any copies of Half-Life: Titanium Edition and the stockholders want someone's heads. You're fired.

    3. Re:aah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Developers tell publishers something will take six months when it will really take two years, because publishers don't want to hear that to make a good game it will take two years, and they will go with another developer who will lie to them, or put out a crappy product which doesn't sell anyway.

    4. Re:aah by Schnapple · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Many developers won't take that risk so that's why a lot of games are so mediocre. It is a risk though, so the developer that puts out Everquest gets paid big when the game works out and Dynamix gets fired when Tribes 2 fizzles. The flip side of innovation is when people don't want it (see Shenmue)

  8. What the hell is up with VUG? by game+kid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I believe they've delayed Half-Life 2 and another game before that, and went to court for not paying Valve royalties for its cyber cafe games, and now this...they sure have some serious issues. Makes me glad I have SDKs I can build some small games with to pass time, 'cause these guys don't want to pay for, release or support their games without a lot of reluctance. That's what I see.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    1. Re:What the hell is up with VUG? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *cough**cough*I can smell the mods' *cough*crack a mile away*cough**hack**suffocates*

  9. SWAT 4 demo by Nelson+Minar · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No need to guess whether SWAT 4 will be a problem: the demo has been out for a month. It looks great to me.

    1. Re:SWAT 4 demo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It looks great, but the game play is ehhh. There are a number of elements that simply got dropped from SWAT3, including:

      - being able to move while leaning. This makes it extremely frustrating to throw a grenade or mirror for threats.

      - Suspects or hostages who have surrendered will remain in that state forever. This bad ass who killed two cops surrenders, and lays a MAC-10 down right by his knee? He'll never get up, even once your entire element leaves the room.

      - hostages are incredibly resistant. You end up having to taser or beanbag every single one before they will surrender. And these are the average joe citizens who are being rescued!

      - Officer AI is suspect. They will not do anything beyond simple room clearing without being told. They no longer collect weapons or handcuff, so now you have to run around like Mom telling them what to do. Worse, if they have a less-than-lethal weapon, they simply will not fire it unless directly ordered each time.

      I really hope the game comes out in better shape than the demo, but this article has me pretty worried. Irrational has other things to do besides work on SWAT, which isn't even their franchise, and VUG evidently has no customer loyalty after the sale.

  10. Emminent Domain for IP by TelevisioSledgicus · · Score: 0, Interesting

    This is a good example of why there should be some laws allowing the public to seize IP from companies to prevent it's abuse.

    Once an IP holder fails in providing proper support and care for any given intellectual property, a class action style suit should be able to be brought, and if enough public sentiment is behind it, move the IP and all associate assets into the public domain.

    Others might argue the Star Wars IP might be another excellent example of IP not given the proper care.

    However, I'm sure if all of the Tribes assests were added to the public domain we'd still have an excellent "product" out there, probably running across multiple platforms (linux, OS X, Win32) as well.

    Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled whining.

    1. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by snorklewacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a good example of why there should be some laws allowing the public to seize IP from companies to prevent it's abuse.

      jesus spin-fuck christ ... it's not the cure to AIDS, it's a game. It's their property.

      Hey, I don't think you're making the best use of your house. I think I'll take it from you.

      --
      I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
    2. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by PedanticSpellingTrol · · Score: 1
      Man, I hope you don't live in Connecticut
      The city of New London, Conn., is seeking to expropriate the property of the residents of Fort Trumbull, a struggling neighborhood, for an urban redevelopment project that would build a hotel, offices and other features in the waterfront area. Most of the neighbors sold their houses voluntarily, but a few refused, including an elderly woman who has lived in her house her entire life. So the city, acting through a private, nonprofit corporation, asserted the power of eminent domain to force them to sell. The Constitution's Fifth Amendment requires the government to pay "just compensation" for any seizures of private property, and it requires that such "takings" be for "public use." The Fort Trumbull residents argue that their land is being taken not for public benefit but for the use of businesses that will pay more taxes than they do.
    3. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, in America people don't own property, only the holy Corporations do. We should all be thankful they don't just take us all and grind us up for fertilizer!

    4. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a dumbshit. Stealing someone's physical property is a little bit different than forcing abandoned IP into the public domain.

      Why not force IP holders to use it or lose it?

      When copyright first was implemented in this country, it gave you 14 years, plus one 14 year extension. After that, it went back to the public. 28 years is more than long enough to protect the inventor's right to profit from their creation...after that, the public should benefit.

      There is precedence for this in trademark law. If a company stops defending their trademark, or no longer uses it in commerce...it is up for grabs. This is how id got the Castle Wolfenstein 3d trademark...the Castle Wolfenstein trademark had been abandoned.

      There are hundreds or thousands of movies that are deteriorating in Hollywood because the ownership is unclear, or unwilling to spend any money to restore it. Why shouldn't those films go to the public instead of being destroyed?

    5. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      You gotta let em know! It's people! Soylent Green is people! You gotta let em know!

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    6. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      it's a game. It's their property.

      No, its NOBODY's property, the government just lets someone pretend like it's theirs for a limited time.

      How would you like it if you and I signed a contract to sell you my house, then I bulldozed it? When you copyright something (which is everything you create now), you're entering into a social contract with the country: This is yours for over a hundred years, then it becomes everyone's. By destroying your work after you enjoy your protection and before it enters the public domain, you break that contract.

    7. Re:Emminent Domain for IP by mink · · Score: 1

      Marketing just came up with new Soylent Clear: Clearly More Soylent, Clearly Less People!

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  11. A Lament by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Okay, anybody who has read my past posts on Tribes knows that I'm about as close as they come to a slavering fanboy when it comes to Tribes. Tribes is the very definition of What A Game Should Be in my book, and I love it in the same way other people love opera, collectible figurines, and reality television. Tribes is what gaming should be. That said, I'm about to propose something that's sure to piss pretty much everybody off:

    Tribes, on balance, was made measurably worse by the community.

    I'm not just talking about griefers, lamers and TKers; that's universal and understandable. I'm also talking about server admins and modders. There were some fantastic mods floating about out there--well thought-out, balanced mods that made the game substantially different, better and/or cooler. There were also some decent but decidedly less-thought out mods out there, mods which nerfed heavies/snipers/pilots/etc, mods which made weapons entirely too deadly, mods which presented poorly planned, poorly executed maps, mods that futzed with physics in a way that was amusing for five minutes then tedious--you've played 'em. What's more, there were junior modders who'd take a good mod and add their own little melange of spices, spawning 'renegades' variants and the like.

    All well and good, but once this got underway, it became a serious challenge to find a decent game to join. The vast majority of servers would be running some mod or other--and if you didn't know the mod, you'd get your ass handed to you on a silver platter for several hours until you learned all the various idiosyncrasies therein. Other servers required client-side downloads--a real annoyance when all you want to do is hop on a game and play. It was not uncommon to find only two or three servers running a "standard" game--and these servers would generally either be packed to capacity or dead empty.

    I know it's not cool to rail on the community, but I honestly think that it played a real role in making the game less playable overall. Yes, there are tons of other factors in play--for example, Dynamix/VU could have shelled out for a couple dozen dedicated base servers. Yes, I could have S'ed the FU and run my own server (which I did for some time back in the day, by the way--admittedly with my own half-baked mod...) Yes, a number of clans did original, stunning, amazing work worthy of mountains of praise. But when it comes right down to it, I really think that Tribes as a game was hurt more than it was helped by the community at large.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:A Lament by Derkec · · Score: 1

      I absolutely agree. I'm not in the super fanboy camp, but Tribes 2 is the best fps type game I've ever played. There was just something unique in the combination of hectic play and calm - dare I serene? - cruising that made for a good balance. The games also required some thought. After the peak of the game, when I tried to return to it for a quick game or two it was nearly impossible to find a decent server.

      Anyway, my hopes for Tribes 3 was that it would place more emphasis on team play and maybe even have each team devote a player strictly to a command and control role. That didn't exactly materialize and I never really got sucked in by it.

    2. Re:A Lament by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were some fantastic mods floating about out there--well thought-out, balanced mods that made the game substantially different, better and/or coolerBut when it comes right down to it, I really think that Tribes as a game was hurt more than it was helped by the community at large

      Killed by its success, you should probably say -- if there was no community, no one would have played it.

    3. Re:A Lament by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well there is some truth the community had a say in the making and failure of TV. Specifically some of the so called we are holier than though Tribes 1 vet folks from the days of old that completely missed out by completly ignoring all the great things Tribes 2 brought to the game.

      You know the hubris kids and folks like 5150 who had a lot in influencing the game design. Irrational was merely listening. Tribes 2 truly became a great Tribes game. Tribes 2 classic is probaly the best base Tribes game around combining the fast paced e-sport type gameplay the Tribes 1 old school fanatics loved, and the strategic elemnts brought into the game through T2. There are projects in the works to bring a Tribes like game in the mix without any VU involvment.

    4. Re:A Lament by Sigma+7 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Okay, anybody who has read my past posts on Tribes knows that I'm about as close as they come to a slavering fanboy when it comes to Tribes. Tribes is the very definition of What A Game Should Be in my book, and I love it in the same way other people love opera, collectible figurines, and reality television. Tribes is what gaming should be. That said, I'm about to propose something that's sure to piss pretty much everybody off:

      Tribes, on balance, was made measurably worse by the community.
      I couldn't agree more. The first time I played tribes, it was a spawn install to play on avery local LAN - but there were not enough players to support proper gameplay (only 3.) Thus, I went to online play to see what it was like.

      The first server I went into had a mod that kicked players out of the inventory selector within 8 seconds. The reason was to get the player to use favourites - which couldn't be set up unless you were at an inventory terminal. The problem doesn't exist in Tribes 2, but such mods can easily nail a community of new players (which is required for any game.)

      This just goes to show why a multiplayer game needs to include a filter in the browser to exclude certain gametypes, mods or servers. The more easily junk can be filtered out, the stronger the community can be (as long as the users don't do something stupid like filter out a bot modification that's configured to balance the teams.)

    5. Re:A Lament by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you could bring up the inventory screen without actually occupying a station by pressing 'i'. I can't remember if Tribes 1 had a gametype filter, but you could sort the list by gametype.

  12. Explain or troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tribes 3.. terrible.

    Saying that without explaining why you think that is - well - trollish.

  13. Still confused by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I still don't get why game developers feel like they need publishers in this day and age of ubiquitous Internet connections and BitTorrent file distribution. What the industry needs is some nonstandard (read: non-publisher) sources of capital, so that developers can make and sell games under their own judgment without being burdened by marketroid PHB know-it-alls pulling their strings. Combine this with a sales model that utilizes the Internet to get games (legally) from the developer to the consumer, and publishers suddenly become obsolete.

    1. Re:Still confused by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1
      Because unless you've got mad wealth, mad marketing skills or mad clout, there's absolutely no way you're gonna be able to get your game "out there" as well as a publisher can.

      Rags-to-riches Internet stories like Counter-Strike do exist, but it's simply bad business to assume that the same will happen to your game. If you're anything more than a hobbyist, odds are you'll gain more than you'll lose by getting a publisher.

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    2. Re:Still confused by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How the hell do you think developpers manage to cover their development costs prior to selling their finished games? Software development is just like everything else, you need an investor first so you can manage to bring your idea to a (hopefully lucrative) reality.

    3. Re:Still confused by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Quoth my previous post:

      What the industry needs is some nonstandard (read: non-publisher) sources of capital

    4. Re:Still confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think its obvious theres a huge market for the game. I think its even more obvious the publisher in charge of the game design and production is completely out of touch with the market for Tribes, and therefore assumes it doesnt sell.

  14. Because retail is still king. by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    Hence developers need publishers. Specifically publishers who have blanket deals with retailers to move the merchandise.

    The majority of purchases are at retail stores. The online distribution market isn't mature enough as there are few issues that have to be overcome.

    1. Not all customers for a game have broadband access.

    2. Some games are still too large to download in a timely manner even with broadband.

    3. Too many people expect a discount when using a downloaded version while completely ignoring the fact that it does cost the seller money for the bandwidth used.

    4. Most people still want something they can touch.

    5. Many games would receive no notice if it were not for publishers.

    All those things and more stand in the way.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Because retail is still king. by ckline · · Score: 1

      I still don't get why game developers feel like they need publishers in this day and age of ubiquitous Internet connections and BitTorrent file distribution

      Developers wouldn't use publishers if it didn't cost so much to make a game. A typical AAA title coming out in the next couple years will have a budget of anywhere from $5million to as much as $20million or more. No small independent developer has that kind of cash sitting around. Typically, all the money a developer gets from their previous titles is spent making those titles; 99% of developers never see any royalties.

      Because retail is still king Hence developers need publishers.

      Actually, you don't need a publisher to get your games on the shelves at retail, you just need a distributor. Of course, most publishers are also distributors.

      For Freedom Force versus The Third Reich, we funded the development ourselves, and are self-publishing online, and are using VUG only for distribution onto retail shelves.

      [Disclaimer: I work for Irrational Games, but the statements above represent my own opinions and do not in any way represent the opinions of Irrational Games or its constituents]

    2. Re:Because retail is still king. by badasscat · · Score: 1

      The majority of purchases are at retail stores. The online distribution market isn't mature enough as there are few issues that have to be overcome.

      I don't even think this is the biggest issue. You want to know what happens when a developer is given free reign to develop a game at their own pace with no strings attached?

      Duke Nukem Forever. That's what happens.

      Developers are never satisfied with their games. They very often are not even in a position to impose the structure and project management required to actually deliver a final product. They see their job as making the best game possible, however long it takes, however much it costs, and if new technology arises in the meantime, then let's incorporate that too... even if it means starting over from scratch.

      This is not all bad, because that's the creative mind at work. But there needs to be a counterbalance to that. Ultimately, there needs to be an actual product, and that's where the publisher comes in. It's the publisher that (generally) sets the milestones, the timelines, the budgets. It's the publisher that does the project management, that guides a game from conception to completion. These are necessary things and, while a lot of developers may not like them, without that external structural force we'd have a whole industry of Duke Nukem Forevers (in fact, the PC game industry has been drifting further and further in that direction as it is... as publishers like VU lose interest and focus on PC gaming), and ultimately, we'd have a whole industry of bankrupt game developers.

      The publisher will never be obsolete, because it's the publisher with the greatest financial interest (they are making an investment and expect a return on that investment), and therefore the greatest interest in actually seeing a product come to market. Developers, once they have enough money to make a game and support themselves for a few years, are often (though not always) less interested in delivering a playable product than they are in the process of creation. These are two opposing forces that need each other to function properly.

      If you ask me, the underlying problem we have right now is that publishers have been slowly losing their enthusiasm for PC games in general over the past 10 years. The problem is not the existence of publishers in the first place.

    3. Re:Because retail is still king. by Tobias.Davis · · Score: 1

      I don't know what you're talking about, I got duke nukem forever last year Oh wait..

    4. Re:Because retail is still king. by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      DNF's problem is just poor leadership at the developer level. I agree that if there really is no project management, then there's a great risk of coming up with nothing but vapor.

      However, a competent project manager employed by the developer should be able to define milestones for his project regardless of whether they have a separate publisher to satisfy or not. With those milestones in the hands of the developer, rather than the publisher, they can be dependent upon meeting goals instead of ship dates. As long as those target goals aren't too ambitious at the outset and don't continually change, there should be no problem.

  15. This is news? by cortana · · Score: 1

    Tribes died when Sierra canned Tribes 2. This is news? :)

  16. well by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 1

    VUG are just doing what they should as a business, it is not profitable to provide support for a game that doesn't get played by enough people.

    It's a shame to see such a potentially great franchise go down in such a bad way

  17. The Warcraft effect by supabeast! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe the folks at Vivendi are experiencing the same problem that EA identified earlier in the week - World of Warcraft is so damned popular that it wrecked everyone else's holiday sales, and is continuing to hold the interest of gamers, who continue to not buy new games. VU is certainly no stranger to this problem - Starcraft and Half-Life (Well, Countrstrike anyway), both VU distributed titles, have been biting into sales for years. Everquest has also been noted as a title that eats away at the market for years.

    Perhaps the reason VU is pushing WoW so hard, both in the US and internationally, while cutting funds to other games, is that the execs have realized that VUs most successful games will continue to cannibalize other game sales, so it's better to just push on with a guaranteed cash cow.

    1. Re:The Warcraft effect by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well. depends where you live.

      in europe it's still pretty damn hard to find a copy of WoW. what you can't buy can't hurt sales of other games.

      vivendi unversal has seriously fucked up the supply of the game around here - and it will hurt them too(I would have bought the game if I could 4 weeks ago. now I'm starting to feel like not buying it even if it was for sale.. unless they come up with some SERIOUS content additions. and no, just promising them doesn't count).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:The Warcraft effect by rhizome · · Score: 1

      I have a slightly different take. While WoW and the phenomenon of the MMORPGs may be absorbing a chunk of Tribes' userland, for me the reason I don't pay attention anymore is Unreal Tournament 2004. I bought Tribes 2 the day it came out based on my good experiences with the first Starsiege:Tribes in, oh, 1998-1999 or so. Tribes 2 sucked so bad. I felt ripped off for the first time (okay, I may be a slight gaming newbie) and vowed never to give them any more money. Seriously, if the game sucks enough for me to give up after 2 days, that's it for me.

      I had played and loved the original Unreal Tournament, but I learned my lesson from Tribes2, so I read reviews of Unreal Tournament 2003 when *that* came out. Pure shit, by my reading. What was I going to do? A little sideline off into Serious Sam territory, spending the next few months getting through both of those (great f'in games, btw). Then what? I got into driving games, spending the next 6mos or so on various Need For Speed chapters, buying a wheel and pedals along the way. Good fun! So now, it was almost time for Unreal Tournament 2004 to come out. I read some first-week reviews, it was much more well received than UT2k3, so I bought it. Excellent game, as many people know.

      That was a year ago. I'm still waiting for a good new chapter of the Need For Speeds (or a Rally game) to get my driving fix, but I've been playing quite a bit of UT2k4 in the meantime. Then I see this story, making me realize that I didn't even *know* a new Tribes was coming out. Tribes1 got me into online FPS (beyond Doom/Wolf ages ago) hardcore, but for some reason I wasn't able to sustain my attention past a bad chapter like I did with UT. That's how bad they screwed up.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    3. Re:The Warcraft effect by imr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Meanwhile, they could have seen that what makes valve and blizzard special is not their games, which are nice but are not the most inventive, but the quality of said games at release time AND the life long support they seem to have afterwards. The dedication to quality some have contrasts heavilly whith the dedication others have to crap on the collective toes of their customers, to the point that blizzard CAN start a game again from scratch when others just released it unfinished and scrap support when "sales are disapointing".

      I despise diablo, i find and found starcraft outdated and unoriginal, i found half life quite dull, action wise since i didnt bite the xfile story, BUT i would buy any game of those 2 compagnies without thinking twice BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WILL BE A PATCH for any issue, even 4 YEARS LATER. Same for ID, same for Epics.

      And I don't want to ear anything about support costing too much or anything.
      Tribes2 linux port was rock stable under linux years before vivendy coughed a little cash to have another patch for windows users. They did it because they had the intend to keep the franchise alive, but they already had lost their customers in the interval.
      So doing things right rom the beginning to the end is what is really missing with those publishers. Now that internet is here, ea, vu, atari and the rest are outdated and useless.

      BTW, if I'm not mistaking, the author of the tribes2 linux port is now working at blizzard and is the sdl author. There is no coincidence.

    4. Re:The Warcraft effect by Swift(void) · · Score: 1

      VU fucked up supply all over the world for each release, and it has barely affected them. I know here in australia if you didnt have a preorder, it took weeks to find a copy.

    5. Re:The Warcraft effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you're like my complete opposite. Tribes 2 is my favorite FPS of all time and Unreal Tournament was my least favorite (although I haven't played any of the 2kX games).

    6. Re:The Warcraft effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand a lot of folks where upset with Tribes 2 when it was first launched. It was plagued with bugs, went through numerous insane patches and the speed was seriously nerfed down from the first.

      The sad part about this, is that tribes 2 was actually very well designed. The vehicles, in game features everything was well done. Today its a superior game over Tribes 1. Tribes 2 classic is fun as hell with all the speed.

      Its sad they nerfed the speed and dealt with all the bugs on release. If that didnt happen the game would have been very succesful. Problem is that some diehard T1 folks just dont realize this anymore. Many of them are the reason for TV's watered down nature core focus on skiing and small maps.

  18. Re:You could always run your own server. by vertinox · · Score: 1

    I was always a big fan of Tribes 1 and didn't mind the mods, but one thing that comes to mind even though it wasn't really Tribes itself.

    When Counter-Strike came out I was pissy because there weren't enough good servers out there and I was pissed off that one map was taken out of official rotation.

    So I went down to a local ISP and started my own game server. This was back in the days when you had thousands mom and pop local ISP's around the nation. They has decent connection and the server was always packed and I had a good time being the admin.

    Now a days you can rent your own servers etc etc or if you are lucky enough to happen to have a 1.5 mb down and up DSL connection you can do it for free.

    So yes the community on a whole will still suck but when you have the ability to create your own server and carve out your little niche. This isn't like an MMORPG where you have no control over the situation. It just takes a little effort and DYI.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  19. The concept already exists by bersl2 · · Score: 1

    It's called "public domain." (But you probably already knew that.)

    Oh, but that's right, it won't release to the public domain for approximately another 150 years. Fuck WIPO!

  20. Tribes 2 playerbase balkanized by gumpish · · Score: 1

    Yep - too many mods.

    Sucks too - there's nothing like being part of a bomber crew, or jumping out of a havoc with 4 other heavies and pwning the enemy gens / ff gens. Or lobbing tank mortars onto the vpad from a mile away with the help of a scout with a targetting laser.

    Tribes 2 had more opportunities for more kinds of teamwork than any other game to date, but with a billion flavors of the game and no official servers, the player base just got too fragmented to find games or tribes to join.

  21. Sad end to a long theater play of Tragedy by KingBahamut · · Score: 1

    Tribes as a whole has been a series of games that I have followed for a long time. Most of my Clan member are Tribes fanatics, where Im the founder of said group. I remember the day when Sierra let Dynamix team go. Things changed , and then the concepts of what the game was supposed to be changed. No more Full bomber team. No more full Carrier of heavies raining down mortars on the Katabatic base. No more Full tank squads. The Pod was a sorrowful comparison to the Shrike.

    Sorrowfully, the promise that it would ever get better never materialized. The Engine was sold to Garage Games, and the final patch to the game was somewhat of a joke. There are still Base players out there that play Classic Base , Clans like Rebel Dawgs , Gigawa and LadyDeth the founders ( www.rebeldawgs.com ). But the community there is so largely fragmented its sometimes hard to get any validity out of it. I give the clan credit where credit is due. They do well.

    Then Sierra Released T:V. The promise of an exciting single player game (that fell horribly short and the plotline was a joke), and fantastic multiplayer game (based on unreal engine, who can go wrong with that, I mean seriously). Well the game play was OK, I was hyped, Id been a Tribes fan for a long time. Most of the older GWoS Team members that had been inactive for so long had come out of the woodwork to play it. The Team play sucked, it in no way comparted to Tribes 2. There was one patch, and that was it. The game play was ok, The single player was a joke, the dynamic just wasnt there.

    And I wasnt the only one that felt that way, Numerous clans had come on to play T:V , and there are some that walked away faster than I have considered doing.

    Just another clear sign that VUG is largely incapable of supporting a game to the level that it should. I really feel sorry for SWAT Fans. I really do.

    KB.
    http://clan.gwos.org

    --
    "God of Rock, thank you for this chance to kick ass. "
  22. RE:Tribes Franchise Quietly Strangled by Dorsai42 · · Score: 1

    Despite all its warts, I honestly love Tribes 2 and am starting to get into T:V.

    This isn't all that much of a surprise, VUG has done a variety of nasty things to the Tribes Community before. For example, recently they locked out all T2 users by flagging that there was an upgrade, but not actually posting a file for the updater to download. That caused the T2 client to go into an infinite loop. Fortunately, the community provided a command line work around. There have been about half a dozen BS stunts like this.

    The best thing that could happen is for VUG's sites be get /.'ed.

    --
    If you forget about the future, the future will forget about you.
  23. Any alternative servers? by LazyBoy · · Score: 1

    Pickings are slim for Tribes 2 servers nowadays. I keep hoping I'll find out about some alternative server lists somewhere....

    --

    If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.

  24. SWAT question... by BTWR · · Score: 1

    Is it still tangentially a spin-off of the Police Quest series? Is it still Darrel F. Gates? Those games ruled back in the day...

    1. Re:SWAT question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. It's somewhat similar to Rainbow Six, in that it is a tactical first-person shooter. However, Rainbow 6 requires a long, boring session of planning your attack. Or you just say screw it, and go with no plan.

      SWAT3 has a very innovative system for controling your entire team in the field...for example, you could focus on a door, and order the team to breach the door, throw in a flashbang, then clear the room...all with a couple keystrokes. It gave the gameplay a very dynamic feel, and got you playing sooner.

      SWAT4's demo was mixed at best. The demo was made 6 months ago, and there are a lot of elements they didn't include, such as snipers, so it still remains to see how the entire game plays.

  25. Where's Irrational in all of this? by superultra · · Score: 1

    Irrational, the devs of Tribes Vengence, are one of my favorite companies. Ken Levine is one smart cookie.

    But it seemed that all of the sudden, they went from doing Freedom Force to juggling two more games that seemed little more than outsourcing. Judging by reviews and demos, it seems that neither Swat or Tribes are horrible, merely above average.

    So I wonder if Irrational didn't just need some extra cash infusion to be able to self-publish Freedom Force: 3rd Reich, or hire more people for the upcomiing Bio Shock (unofficial sequel to System Shock II)? Or whether Sierra/VU publishing FF did not include somewhere in the deal some on-the-fly development on some festering properties if only to keep the body warm

    1. Re:Where's Irrational in all of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They hired Irrational mostly because it was felt they could inject the game with a great SP, which they did do to a certain degreee.

      The porblem is that IG and VU underestimated the importance of the mulitplayer game in Tribes. They really messed up on one of the most important aspects of the game.

  26. They Got What They Deserved by Ka+D'Argo · · Score: 1
    Tribes 2 was horrible. It flat out sucked. I can't blame the dev's for it but game stopping bugs like the infamous Unhandled Exceptions really wore it down, fast. There were more patches for Tribes 2 trying to fix shit than there was for Tribes 1, and in 1/10th the time (how many patches were there in the first 6 months?).

    As for T:V, well personally I think the community got what it deserved. When Irrational and such was trying to get feed back, it always boiled down to Tribes 1 fans wanting this and Tribes 2 fans wanting that. I played T:V it's just as buggy and floaty feeling as Tribes 2. Sure its faster than original Tribes 2 but it never came close to the break neck speed we were use too in Tribes.

    It's time for the Tribes franchise to just die off. They were good games overall, but the lack of support and piss poor communities were its downfall. And yes I think the communities were utter shit, Counter Strike has more maturity out of its millions of 12 year old wallhacking players than the Tribes community had and has.

    --
    Aw Frell this
  27. Late Post by BrookHarty · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm an avid tribes player, Tribes1/2 and some TV. The biggest problem is Sierra and Vivendi are horrible about support and management of smaller companies. They are the modern day land barons, they are buying every game franchise they can get their hands on, and killing off any competition they can.

    If you follow the forums for most game support you will see the developers are kept in the dark, until they are let go. This is a common trend with them. This is nothing new, they have been doing it for years. Its extremely cheap to hire 2 developers to write patches for a year, but of course, patching isnt included in the budget, so its chopped at first VP's sight.

    Its sad, as Tribes was my favorite game, I watched the server count for "Base" the normal game dwindle to a couple that was always full of extremely die hard players. I even collected every sound pack I could and merged them into 1 sound pack, over 800 megs of .wav files, so you could listen to everyones special soundpack. Was on Tribalwar and Tribes planet daily reading and posting int he forums, havnt done that in over 3 years.

    Tribescon was my first gamecon I went too, came in 2nd and 1st at the first 2 tribes cons. Even keep 2 signed boxes of tribes on my desk, for the 5 years I played tribes, I played almost daily. (And yes, went to work, school, and had family time..)

    Simple, fun, and for a long time, no aimbots. It was on par with counterstrike in pure enjoyment and simple gameplay. Tactical operations, not sci-fi mega weapons. Smooth gameplay, and great maps.

    Glad its free, I have both the freely released versions sitting on my HD, think I'll play this weekend. I urge you guys to download and play it, while the graphics of T1 isnt the greatest, it is a pure enjoyable game. T2 was the early engine that Garage games used to launch its business. And wow, how that engine has progressed. I was reading the changelog on the Developers build, the vegetation, and rendering is simple awesome.

    BTW, heres whats on my desk at work, -minus the empty cups of coffee. ;) Signed Tribes Boxes

  28. VUG show what they think of their customers - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most insulting thing to the people in the tribes community was how they strung along everybody who stuck with T:V for a few months with constant hints that there would be a patch, until the 90 day return period for the game expired, when a number of people on the inside knew months earlier that there wasn't going to be one at all.

    There you have it, VUG demonstrate to burgeoning corporate cut-throats how to fuck over a customerbase.

  29. Tribes 2 became better than Tribes 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Part of the whole downturn with Tribes did start when Tribes 2 was released. It was plagued with bugs and many other issues. After the final patches and variants like T2 classic it actually proved to be a far superior game to T1.

    Years later everyone gets excited about the 3rd Tribes game. Could this be the one, and instead we get a watered down muck of a game called Tribes Vengeance.

    and by the way, CS community is no more mature than the Tribes community. The idiot teenage angst is abundunt in both games. CS firtunately still has the orignal developers (Valve) to depend on. Tribes is like an abandoned ophaned being used, abused and copied in many ways through games such as Halo.

  30. Tribes Still Lives... Sort of by FozzieCDN · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought that I would point out that most of the Tribes developers have moved onto GarageGames and the independent game development scene with the Torque Game Engine.

    If you haven't checked out GarageGames or the indie games tha they develop and publish then I highly recommend that you do. There are a variety of great games available to suit anyone's needs (from your puzzle games, to your more traditional FPS ones) and they run a bunch of different OSes such as Windows, OSX and Linux. I think you would be shocked at what has been done.

  31. "It's their property" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is?

    Congress shall have the right to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

    This doesn't sound like any kind of property I'm familiar with.

  32. Tribes is not dead yet by Xenolith · · Score: 1

    First there is the Legends game based off of the Torque engine. This game is very Tribes-like.

    http://hosted.tribalwar.com/legends/

    Then there is Renwerx, which will virtually redo Legends in the near future. They are looking for help.

    http://renwerx.com/

    --

    Journal
  33. Re:Tribes Franchise Quietly Strangled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best thing that could happen is for VUG's sites be get /.'ed.

    Actually the best thing that could happen is that the Concorde is put back into service and all those motherfuckers who run Vivendi decide to take a long well earned vacation beginning with a flight on the Concorde and it catches fire and all the Vivendi motherfuckers die in a huge firey crash.

  34. T:V is my favorite MP FPS ever by MuNansen · · Score: 1

    No other game has required such a combination of skill, reaction speed, and hand-eye coordination. I've played BF1942, Planetside, Halo, BFV, T2, CS:S, and many others, many of them at the competitive level, and nothing came as close to the old thrill of competitive sports as T:V. The companies involved in making the game made three big mistakes: 1 - Releasing the game the same time as Half Life 2 and Doom 3. There's no way it could compete. 2 - No marketing at all. As a result, only the existing Tribes community was interested, and they are quite frankly the most embarassingly spoiled and childish game community I've ever seen. And that's saying a lot, seeing how I've played just about every MMORPG out there. 3 - Even though they only marketed to the existing community, which is only interested in the multiplayer, they spent at least half their resources on the singleplayer game. The singleplayer portion of the game wasn't bad, but it was definitely a waste of time. That amount of resources could've been spent to create a near-perfect multiplayer experience. I maintain, though, that the resulting game is the most intensively-skillful multiplayer experience to date. So intensive that half the veteran Tribes community could not even handle the new Grappler abilities. All the skill of the older Tribes plus a Spiderman-like Grappler leads to the most amazing mobility seen in a game. (And think about it, a society that has developed jetpacks and frictionless boots not having a Grappler or some other option for controlling movement while "skiing" doesn't make sense. The argument that the Grappler some how REDUCED the skill involved...just seems stupid to me. You've still gotta be as good at skiing and jetting as before, PLUS now the Grappling). The point is that the usual poisonous attitude internet flameboys take towards EVERYTHING ruined a very good game. It's so un-cool on the internet to actually like something that EVERYTHING gets thrown under the tires. For god's sake, 90% of the internet comments about HL2 are even negative, and that's not even including comments about Steam. I didn't put much weight in internet opinion before, but now I've even seen the tangible damage it can do, and I'm sick of it. Since someone has always said it better, I'll end with a quote: "Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you - YOU'RE COOL - fuck you, I'm out." - Scarface, Half Baked

    1. Re:T:V is my favorite MP FPS ever by MuNansen · · Score: 1

      Sorry about formatting. Forgot to select "Old Text."

    2. Re:T:V is my favorite MP FPS ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think 90% of the hate regarding HF2 is in regards to Steam, not the game.

      TV was okay, but its game design wasnt quite on par with the first two and the physics sucked arse. Secondly who in the hell would even consider making a Tribes game where the engine can not provide fully immersive maps (no hard enclosed box) that was one of the unique charms about Tribes and the Darkstar/Torque engine. Also, TV completely messed up the SCALE of the game and removed many in game features.

  35. Just like the music industry by AnotherScratchMonkey · · Score: 1
    The objections here to a no-publisher model are surprising given the general SlashDot antagonism to the MPAA and RIAA and the publishers they represent. Game developers can work just like music and movie artists, mostly for the love of the work, and distributing under an indy label where they reap most of any profits. Moreover, they can follow the open source model and make frequent ongoing releases of beta material instead of waiting for just the right time in the game marketplace.

    To see a relevant example, take a look at the Legends project, which uses the successor to the engine used for Tribes 2 to develop a new game. Legends is nowhere near retail quality, but that's mostly for lack of artists, which they now have (contributed from the Renegades project). Gamers have the ability to join the project and make this game what they truly want, just as open source users can extend an open source product to meet their own needs. Got a gaming itch that no retail game satisfies? Come scratch it by becoming a developer!

  36. Screw Tribes... Whatever. We've got Halo 2! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares about some game I've never heard of. After Halo 2, no other game matters. Except for Halo 3!! : )

    1. Re:Screw Tribes... Whatever. We've got Halo 2! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To everybody who read this and thought "Yeah!", I was kidding. Your brain should be exploding shortly.

    2. Re:Screw Tribes... Whatever. We've got Halo 2! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya! Halo 2 is teh best. game. EVAR!

    3. Re:Screw Tribes... Whatever. We've got Halo 2! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol, Halo came into fruition because of Tribes.

  37. Tribes is what Tribes fanboys 'aint by Lexor · · Score: 1

    Tribes is a great online game because it blends action with strategy.

    Tribes was also one of the first online FPS games with useful vehicles.

    Tribes also had classes and deployables before these things were fashionable.

    Unfortunately, the all-too-common Tribes fan variant, otherwise known as the TribalWhore, went half-cocked kicking and screaming for everything but these fundamentals.

    Perhaps you've heard the calls for jetpacks and skiing ? This 'aint Duke Nuke'em Forever set in the Rockies. Folks who thought these were the foundations of Tribes got exactly what they wanted with the last game in the franchise.

    Unfortunately for the rest of us, the franchise now all but dead. Luckily there's no patent on vehicles, deployables, strategy... or jetpacks and skiing for that matter.

    --
    Regards, Lex
  38. I have to reply by Bigthecat · · Score: 1
    Knowing that this story is at the bottom of the Games front page, I just feel the need to reply nonetheless. To me, Starsiege: Tribes filled a massive void that could probably never be filled again. Keeping it short, Tribes 2 tried, however the many performance issues, patches and the death of Dynamix stunted the growth of the game considerably.

    I guess I somehow thought that the Tribes series would always be there, however this latest incarnation has proven the opposite: Take a look at the amount of servers for Tribes 1 (Over 200), then Tribes 2 (over 150) then T:V (Under 50) and you see how much it has failed. To think, there are over 200 servers for a game that came out in 1998, that isn't Half-Life!

    Unfortunately, I have nothing to say that is insightful or that hasn't been mentioned in some way before that would help this game survive. People voted with their wallet with Tribes: Vengeance, and in my opinion any chance of there being a Tribes 4 (Or Starsiege: Tribes 2) washed away with the lack of this patch being released. Truly a sad day.