Right then you miserable sods

delanvital · July 17, 2008, 03:44:55 PM

Quote from: OldBloke;237904No BF2. We have moved on and the last thing we want is a clamour for its reintroduction because 'it was such a blast at the LAN'.

I am struggling... but will keep my trap shut

Quote from: Armitage;237925What about a RTS, I know there were a few played last time. May be it would give that section a boost.

Quote from: Dr Sadako;237931http://www.starcraft2.com/

If it is released before the LAN.

I agree with Mats, this is a much awaited and will attract attention. As with BF2 with FPS games, better make sure one RTS only?

Armitage · July 17, 2008, 03:47:49 PM

Quote from: Dr Sadako;237931http://www.starcraft2.com/

If it is released before the LAN.

Release Date: 30 Oct 2008 a bit close. what would be the fall back

delanvital · July 17, 2008, 03:52:39 PM

Quote from: Armitage;238090Release Date: 30 Oct 2008 a bit close. what would be the fall back

Is company of heroes too old? :g:

Armitage · July 17, 2008, 04:16:31 PM

Not old to me. but i don't have any RTS at the moment. we just need to find a game that most people have already.

Dr Sadako · July 17, 2008, 05:05:47 PM

Quote from: Armitage;238090Release Date: 30 Oct 2008 a bit close. what would be the fall back

On the official website no mention of a release date. Where did you get this one?

Armitage · July 17, 2008, 05:14:22 PM

amazon

Penfold · July 17, 2008, 05:26:06 PM

If it's the 30th October then it's far too late.

Dr Sadako · July 17, 2008, 05:45:46 PM

Well, how about the old Starcraft then? Maybe that could be something for everyone. You can buy it cheap. It runs on every machine. You really need to play Starcraft+expansion to enjoy Starcraft II.

Armitage · July 17, 2008, 05:50:47 PM

Starcraft looks a bit too long in the tooth IMHO

Dr Sadako · July 17, 2008, 06:00:50 PM

World in Conflict
Warcraft III
?

sheepy · July 17, 2008, 11:01:07 PM

imo RTS is ran by those wanting to play it, ghosty and his m8s were runnign on last lan that i got in on but it wasnt very good.

BF2 is the past, lets not revisit it.

im going to get COD4 and try it ASAP.
CS:S imo should have the usual 2 tourneys team knockout and degal

Penfold · August 01, 2008, 09:59:21 AM

So we have the givens:

CS:S - (two comps - 5/66 vs 5/6, and Deagle)
COD4 - (1/2 room vs 1/2 room)
LFS comp (bespoke will be fitted in on the Saturday as per usual).

These are the ones for BA3 to run and I would suggest that these are the 'official' games.

I'm happy to have another game be it RTS or whatever (so long as it's not bloody Soldat

but it's going to need to be cheap / popular / free / 'demo' available or else we just don't get the numbers to make it viable imho and just ends up fragmenting the game play.

We know people are reluctant to spend out on games (which is why TF2 flopped last LAN). I would be reticent about going with anything that people have to make the effort to go out and buy.

PEN

sheepy · August 01, 2008, 10:45:15 AM

sounds about right dude

Whitey · August 01, 2008, 12:47:39 PM

Quote from: Penfold;239546COD4 - (1/2 room vs 1/2 room)

I would have thought we would want limited team sizes for COD4 (between 6 and 8 in a team). Having 20 v 20 works ok for BF2 but COD is more in line with CS and too many people would make it difficult to play in a tactical way.

Dr Sadako · August 01, 2008, 12:57:53 PM

Quote from: Whitey;239574I would have thought we would want limited team sizes for COD4 (between 6 and 8 in a team). Having 20 v 20 works ok for BF2 but COD is more in line with CS and too many people would make it difficult to play in a tactical way.

I don't think we are "forced" to have a ranked server at the LAN and thus we could play some of the custom maps that are out there that hold more than 20 players. If we only play standard maps then I completely agree with you.