What score would it get? I'd love to see a full review of it, but I'd imagine that no one would really want to do that. Instead, why don't we use the UnrealSP rating system, possibly with explanations behind each? I would say that it's up to you as to whether or not you'd want to rate the story and levels alone, or bundle in all the pawns, music, and coding, but please do specify.

I'll probably contribute a small review if this thread gets feedback.

BUILD (50%):
Architecture:
Texturing:
Lighting:
Sound:
Technical Execution:

CAST (50%):
Conceptual Grandness:
Story Construction:
Story Implementation:
Gameplay Awe:
Gameplay Balance:

BUILD (50%): 45%
Architecture: 90%
Texturing: 87%
Lighting: 78%
Sound: 95%
Technical Execution: 100% (they made the f&^5n engine).

CAST (50%): 43%
Conceptual Grandness: 100%
Story Construction: 80%
Story Implementation: 75%
Gameplay Awe: 95%
Gameplay Balance: 80%

Overall: 88%


EEEEEK! I rated it lower than 7Bullets and Shrak!?... (not sure if 7Bullets and Shrak deserve the score they get on the site!)

I'd maybe give Shrak a 84% and 7Bullets an 87% (1% lower than Unreal)

ten/ten
That's basically the random vote I'd give for the entire game and content. I can't stress it enough.

But now, let's go a bit deeper. I'm rating Unreal as a map pack, like any other one released until now; plus: "I'm just an UT Oldskool player who bought the original Unreal game some days ago and I already have experience with stuff such as RTNP, Xidia, StrangeWorld and Invasion. Now I put the map and music files in my UT folder and play"; works on this POV.
It's going to be almost consistent with the USP votes for more simplicity. Numbers with deep meaning here:

BUILD (50%):
Architecture: 6
Texturing: 9
Lighting: 7
Sound: 9
Technical Execution: 9

CAST (50%):
Conceptual Grandness: 8
Story Construction: 7
Story Implementation: 9
Gameplay Awe: 10
Gameplay Balance: 7

Total: 81%

If I'm going to do the text part of the review too, it will probably turn into something hilarious.

This is always something I've refused to do on principle. Unreal sets the benchmark. From my point of view it is essentially sacrosanct. That doesn't mean it would get full marks or has never been beaten by custom content - I just wouldn't want to rate it.

EDIT: RtNP, I would perhaps be more willing to rate.

When I map, my goal is to provide an experience similar to Unreal in quality, not really surpassing it by that much. I like the level of detail in Unreal, I feel like it's something that I can understand and imitate, whereas Prophet's style of mapping is similar to stuff that comes out of the UT2 engine; it's just something that I don't have the skill to compete with. Regarding story, Unreal's was pretty cheesy (though executed very well in the long run), so that's something that I prefer to consider a mistake to learn from.

...Righty-o.

BUILD (50%):
Architecture: 7
Texturing: 9
Lighting: 6
Sound: 9
Technical Execution: 10

CAST (50%):
Conceptual Grandness: 7
Story Construction: 6
Story Implementation: 10
Gameplay Awe: 9
Gameplay Balance: 10

Final score: 83%

The way I see it, the mother games are the litmus test for which the schema is based on. There is a certain professional balance and originality there that community packs just can't quite get to (at least not yet, imo). I don't know if I'd be comfortable making an actual review of Unreal and RTNP based on the USP schema (let alone Unreal 2).

But I can certainly rate it compared to...say, all the other Shooters I've played in my life.




Who me?

^Yes, you. Perhaps it was a bit of a stretch to say that your maps are architecturally up to par with UEngine2 stuff, but I generally set my build goal to match Unreal, giving myself bonus points if it matches your level. Anyway, enough of offtopic, if you want to discuss it further (which I doubt) we can via PM.

I have scores for that too!

BUILD (50%):
Architecture: 5
Texturing: 7
Lighting: 7
Sound: 8
Technical Execution: 6

CAST (50%):
Conceptual Grandness: 6
Story Construction: 3
Story Implementation: 5
Gameplay Awe: 7
Gameplay Balance: 5

59%

I totally agree with this line. There is always something lacking in the community packs which I cannot tell what exactly it is. Maybe it is the professional stuff as they are willing to cut lots of material to make sure that the rest shines. But again, they do so to make more money, while the community releases their packs for free, so I really cannot argue with this. Another issue is that the community modders are willing to push the engine to its extreme (say, very large area), which in one way enhances the gameplay but in the other way hurts the professional grandness. I have never been working in a 1-st tier game company and I wonder how do they do quality control.

To me unreal is just another map pack. Sure, it has a special place in my memory, but so do One day, ONP, Xidia, Tower of Shrakitha, Skaarj Tower etc. I still see no reason not to review it. (With that said, I wouldn't stand to see the review just dumped randomly on the review page. It should be front and center, somewhere really obvious)

Woah,a thread from 2009! Well, since I don't remember it or even being part of the discussion, all I'll add toy previous sentiment is that the site really is about supporting Unreal through singleplayer, as in preserving what the community has made for the game. Not necessarily to critique the game itself. I can't speak for everyone else...but I just personally don't think it's appropriate.

Guess I have been too generous on the story ratings for RTNP.

Feel free to review it by modern standards. I'm sure it would make for an interesting read.

I wonder what Unreal II would get... Well it's single player and the site reports on single player mods for all Unreal games.

Well I like RTNP, so yeah... Scores won't mean anything to me.

Unreal is what spawned this community. It makes little sense to assign a score to it. Obviously we all liked it so much that we signed up here and are still making content for it 14 years after its release