421 replies to this topic

[BLOOD WOLF]

I have not seen that one.

[Sandpit]

The thing that really kills me about stuff like this?

I'm a customer
I play the game
I'm an unhappy customer
I won't spend any money.
When I try to post on stuff like this agreeing with the OP and the thread
Certain people flock to the thread to try and dismiss what myself, and many others, are saying.

The truly ironic part about that?

If those that I'm talking about would just stfu for 2 minutes and stop with their rhetoric, PGI might actually be able to here what they need to do in order to make me want to spend money on this game again (as well as all the other players like me)

Allen Ward, on 16 August 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

Agreed. But this necessity of reallocating constantly is bad management or planning in my opinion.

ding ding ding
exactly

nothing more really needs to be said about it to be honest. You've got a few guys that think they know how to run a business because they can code. Doesn't work like that. Commerce history is littered with failed companies like that. Being good at something like....
coding
or map making
or artwork
etc.
Does NOT mean you know how to run, manage, and lead a company. With PGI? It REALLY shows through at times.

Heeden, on 16 August 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Is that the video? I mean could someone link the recent one that inspired this thread, where they say that even with assets to reuse and more experience it is still costing them 250k per map.

BLOOD WOLF, on 16 August 2014 - 02:46 PM, said:

I have not seen that one.

exactly

Blood, this isn't an attack or anything, but is it possible that english isn't your first language? I ask because sometimes your understanding of things like sarcasm and wanting to take everything said as a literal truth makes it seem like things are getting lost in translation when talking to you at times.


Yes, WT is a wonderful little game by a wonderful little dev team that started development about the same time as MWO did with about the same size dev team, on a smaller budget.

[Ph30nix]

BLOOD WOLF, on 16 August 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

nice little game isn't it.

i dont have the attention span right now (dont want o kill my buzz) can you please bullet point this for me lol

[Sandpit]

Ph30nix, on 16 August 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

i dont have the attention span right now (dont want o kill my buzz) can you please bullet point this for me lol

no, he expects to just post a random 30 minute video as some kind of explanation for something that everyone is supposed to watch.

[BLOOD WOLF]

To an extent I agree. Like I said before it is always an issue with tradeoff and we saw that when the clans came. They did not halt everything but put a vast majority if resources in one objective. In some cases it's good but in the long run it suffers. Same with now, they are driving for CW but when it comes to making maps they don't have the resources to put anything off. Tuff spot their in but If they would just have hired more hands we could have avoided all of this.

In a sense they are not doing anything wrong but they are making it arduous.

Sandpit, on 16 August 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

no, he expects to just post a random 30 minute video as some kind of explanation for something that everyone is supposed to watch.

no, I needed time to finish my post. Give me a minuete, I will find the time

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 16 August 2014 - 02:59 PM.

[Allen Ward]

I met some very good programmers over the years and only very few of them were also good software developers, who could plan and manage a software project, guiding a team of coders towards a settled goal, defending the project from marketers and customers, that constantly tried to deviate the project into new directions. many projects ended in a whole mess (bankruptancy) when there was no development lead and customers or salesmen had direct access to programmers, adding a new feature here, making changes there,...the whole project running out of schedule (which means running out of money). I can't say if PGI has these issues, but I think I can see some similarities in the way they (not) communicate and in the product evolution so far.

[Creovex]

I gotta believe that PGI sees other games using User generated content and the value it provides....

Define the criteria, specs and all requured to make a map work in MWO....and see what you get back. I have no doubts there will be plenty of people who will impress you.

[Jonathan Paine]

Whether maps cost $10,000 or $250,000 I'll pony up a month of premium time every time PGI releases a new map.

Your move, PGI!

[BLOOD WOLF]

Allen Ward, on 16 August 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

I met some very good programmers over the years and only very few of them were also good software developers, who could plan and manage a software project, guiding a team of coders towards a settled goal, defending the project from marketers and customers, that constantly tried to deviate the project into new directions. many projects ended in a whole mess (bankruptancy) when there was no development lead and customers or salesmen had direct access to programmers, adding a new feature here, making changes there,...the whole project running out of schedule (which means running out of money). I can't say if PGI has these issues, but I think I can see some similarities in the way they (not) communicate and in the product evolution so far.

At this point all I can say is We are close to CW. Right, the core of the game. The big promise. What this game should have been. What people have been complaining about this whole time for years now. I don't think the are mismanaging, I say that because since the release of UI 2.0 they have been focused. The clans came out beautifully, Love those mechs. We have had new I.S mechs since then, If it was mismanagement we would be in chaos, not to mention we would not be close to association. Keep in mind we are close to CW. People have already registered their merc corp names. Maybe they did mismanage but at this point I dont think that is the case. I Just think the have the ability to focus on one area at a time.

Not to mention they have to constantly make new mechs, Who knows how many mechs we will have next year.

[Deathlike]

New maps... new map in September (9 months after the release of the previously last map, HPG).

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 16 August 2014 - 03:08 PM, said:

New maps... new map in September (9 months after the release of the previously last map, HPG).

september?
the new map was a MINIMUM of 60 days out about 3 weeks ago. minimum

if we get a map before october I'll be surprised

[Green Mamba]

Sandpit, on 16 August 2014 - 03:10 PM, said:

september?
the new map was a MINIMUM of 60 days out about 3 weeks ago. minimum

if we get a map before october I'll be surprised

Actually I remember them saying they needed just a few finishing touches on the Jungle map back when they stated they were moving everyone to Clan Mech production back in January.I bet they didn't even start on it till recently just more FIBS .

Edited by Green Mamba, 16 August 2014 - 03:20 PM.

[Aim64C]

BLOOD WOLF, on 16 August 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

So let me ask you, yo do know anything about developing a map?

http://gamedevelopme...--gamedev-10166

A lot of people know how to develop maps. A lot of people are learning to develop maps. For free.

For a company - maps are a bit more complicated to produce - but that is because you actually have to set design goals that are often handled by a single person in the cases of mods or small game projects. The map designers need to set a theme for the map, have an idea for what will be needed in terms of unique graphical set pieces, and have rough dimensions.

This process can be as complicated or as simplistic as you want. Some people will argue that you have to take into account things like weapon ranges, the number of expected players, etc - while I argue that you really only need to pay attention to the basics of what the game is. The player should adapt to the environment - otherwise the theme of the map is pointless and not a challenge to their play style.

Another big mistake that is often made is to try and develop the map to be played a certain way. Many of the most popular maps in gaming history (blood gulch) were not designed to be played any particular way and were designed more according to theme as opposed to devolving into hideous amounts of number-cruching and attempts to make everything perfectly balanced. A subset of the game (griffball) can account for those who want 'tournament equality.'

I can tell you right now, though, that the maps for MWO are -way- too small. Even Alpine is about half the size it should be to qualify as the smallest playable map.

Quote

I doubt the map itself cost 250k, but I did some research and the cost can get pretty big. It depends on what you are doing.

We are dropping into a single-elimination solaris tournament with no real interactive map scripting (about as complicated as it gets is Therma's heat-in-lava scripting).

The costs are heavily controlled by outsourcing. If you have to contract out elements of your map creation (which a lot of studios do - to companies like PGI - which is what PGI was doing for the MechWarrior reboot when Smith & Tinker was heading it) - then it becomes more expensive.

The expensive maps are those that are built for single player experiences where you have complicated scripted events and animated destruction. The basics that we see here are pretty much your bottom tier industry costs.

For comparison:



They simulated a whole island nation.

Two of them.

Granted, they 'cheated' and used geo-sat data to model various islands within the series - but even going back to ARMA - the maps were dozens of square kilometers simulated in real time.

Altis is an even larger map...

And to illustrate just how versatile the engine is:

http://www.pcgamer.c...ife-for-arma-3/



This is a whole damned RPG run in a persistent set of servers.

This was all coded for free. No one got paid for creating it, for scripting it, for any unique assets it uses, etc.

[Sandpit]

Green Mamba, on 16 August 2014 - 03:19 PM, said:

Actually I remember them saying they needed just a few finishing touches on the Jungle map back when they stated they were moving everyone to Clan Mech production back in January.I bet they didn't even start on it till recently just more FIBS .

oh no, that's not fibs, that's "how business operates" according to the PGI cheerleaders

Aim64C, on 16 August 2014 - 03:22 PM, said:

http://gamedevelopme...--gamedev-10166

A lot of people know how to develop maps. A lot of people are learning to develop maps. For free.

For a company - maps are a bit more complicated to produce - but that is because you actually have to set design goals that are often handled by a single person in the cases of mods or small game projects. The map designers need to set a theme for the map, have an idea for what will be needed in terms of unique graphical set pieces, and have rough dimensions.

This process can be as complicated or as simplistic as you want. Some people will argue that you have to take into account things like weapon ranges, the number of expected players, etc - while I argue that you really only need to pay attention to the basics of what the game is. The player should adapt to the environment - otherwise the theme of the map is pointless and not a challenge to their play style.

Another big mistake that is often made is to try and develop the map to be played a certain way. Many of the most popular maps in gaming history (blood gulch) were not designed to be played any particular way and were designed more according to theme as opposed to devolving into hideous amounts of number-cruching and attempts to make everything perfectly balanced. A subset of the game (griffball) can account for those who want 'tournament equality.'

I can tell you right now, though, that the maps for MWO are -way- too small. Even Alpine is about half the size it should be to qualify as the smallest playable map.



We are dropping into a single-elimination solaris tournament with no real interactive map scripting (about as complicated as it gets is Therma's heat-in-lava scripting).

The costs are heavily controlled by outsourcing. If you have to contract out elements of your map creation (which a lot of studios do - to companies like PGI - which is what PGI was doing for the MechWarrior reboot when Smith & Tinker was heading it) - then it becomes more expensive.

The expensive maps are those that are built for single player experiences where you have complicated scripted events and animated destruction. The basics that we see here are pretty much your bottom tier industry costs.

For comparison:



They simulated a whole island nation.

Two of them.

Granted, they 'cheated' and used geo-sat data to model various islands within the series - but even going back to ARMA - the maps were dozens of square kilometers simulated in real time.

Altis is an even larger map...

And to illustrate just how versatile the engine is:

http://www.pcgamer.c...ife-for-arma-3/



This is a whole damned RPG run in a persistent set of servers.

This was all coded for free. No one got paid for creating it, for scripting it, for any unique assets it uses, etc.

[Bullseye69]

Sandpit, on 16 August 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

Maybe because I'm a grown adult that has been an avid gamer for more decades than PGI has been in business and in that time I've not only built maps and entire sims, I've also modeled (as in 3D models with maya for games), skinned, and otherwise done everything PGI does with the exception of actual coding.

Maybe because I'm an adult and not a 13 year-old kid that knows you can produce maps for far less?

Maybe because as an adult, I know that after you've got your assets (that's art, textures, etc. Mr. "slpa CoD maps together"), map producing becomes more of a design issue than a resource issue because at that point you can reuse your resources from the previous 10 maps you've built (along with resources form texturing things like mechs so those are already designed and in the game)

Maybe because as an adult, I have literally built sims in Second Life, from scratch, with original textures and artwork, in under a week for, not only under $250,000, but for well under $100 as a HOBBY
in my spare time
with 2 other amateur hobbyists


Maybe because I'm not a complete moron?

I agree with you and the 250,000 figure I hope is not for one map because if it is know wonder the company keeps having sales if you having to finance that kind of bill.

I have used several different terrain editor to creat terrain and it not difficult to do at all. If we have access to there texture they uses in game then we could rapidly create maps some from lore and source books, I do understand that it has to pass there qa and be tested for collision issue and stuck mech things but after 2 years time on the maps we have we still have place that we get stuck on so we really could do to much worse. As far as map design it terrain ther not suppose to be funnel to make people fight in certain areas or ways. Gives us the maps and we can fight the way we want without paths or best access routes.

I would like to see maps with huge distance and terrain features and building 4 time the size we have now, massive city to fight in and underground tunnels use to move freight and heavy haulers so we could fight above or below. How about massive shipyard for dropship with all the hangers for freight to fight in or around. Massive lakes and rivers with high banks and canyons to fight in and over . We maybe the best mech to do the job is not a assault but a fast medium or heavy with goof movement to get in fast instead of having to go around the map the long way like assaults.

[Sandpit]

I like you AIM, you don't say a lot, but when you do?

It's always straightforward, unbiased, intelligent, and sensible.
even if I don't always agree with you

Bullseye69, on 16 August 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

I agree with you and the 250,000 figure I hope is not for one map because if it is know wonder the company keeps having sales if you having to finance that kind of bill.

I have used several different terrain editor to creat terrain and it not difficult to do at all. If we have access to there texture they uses in game then we could rapidly create maps some from lore and source books, I do understand that it has to pass there qa and be tested for collision issue and stuck mech things but after 2 years time on the maps we have we still have place that we get stuck on so we really could do to much worse. As far as map design it terrain ther not suppose to be funnel to make people fight in certain areas or ways. Gives us the maps and we can fight the way we want without paths or best access routes.

I would like to see maps with huge distance and terrain features and building 4 time the size we have now, massive city to fight in and underground tunnels use to move freight and heavy haulers so we could fight above or below. How about massive shipyard for dropship with all the hangers for freight to fight in or around. Massive lakes and rivers with high banks and canyons to fight in and over . We maybe the best mech to do the job is not a assault but a fast medium or heavy with goof movement to get in fast instead of having to go around the map the long way like assaults.

me too sir, me too

[Aim64C]

BLOOD WOLF, on 16 August 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

At this point all I can say is We are close to CW. Right, the core of the game. The big promise. What this game should have been. What people have been complaining about this whole time for years now. I don't think the are mismanaging, I say that because since the release of UI 2.0 they have been focused. The clans came out beautifully, Love those mechs. We have had new I.S mechs since then, If it was mismanagement we would be in chaos, not to mention we would not be close to association. Keep in mind we are close to CW. People have already registered their merc corp names. Maybe they did mismanage but at this point I dont think that is the case. I Just think the have the ability to focus on one area at a time.

Not to mention they have to constantly make new mechs, Who knows how many mechs we will have next year.

Prepare to be disappointed.

UI 2.0 took them like two years to develop, and it is an unmitigated cluster **** of a disaster.

Why do I have to save my mech when selecting it from the "select mech" screen... but the mech-lab is much more effective for quickly selecting which mech in my inventory I wish to use where I do not have to save merely to indicate I wish to use the currently highlighted mech?

[Nemesis Duck]

Richard Garriott of Ultima fame said Chris Roberts had a presence it him and you can see it in that video. It's nothing special, just someone who appears passionate and deeply involved in what they're doing, like you could have instant trust in whatever they're trying to achieve.

What?! Just saying ...

Alreech, on 16 August 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

Why should they do it ?
PGI decided to generate their profit with selling Mechs & Cockpit Items, so putting money in new maps is from a economic point of view wasted money.
Selling maps is a no go, because it divides the playerbase. PGI can't make money from maps like they do it with Mechs and Cockpit Items, so any $ spend on a map is a $ that doesn't generate profit.

I'm not against profit, a company what doesn't generate profit will not least long.

This is a popular explanation but admit, it's too simplistic and insulting if true. Any company that takes that attitude to a unique offering in an economic recession deserves to fail. This is an organism that needs to be fed and nurtured (augmented) to compete against other the other mega beasts (WoT?) of the veldtlands. The competition is low in this climate so survival (the money) is almost guarenteed if the beast can stay healthy.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Aim64C, on 16 August 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

Prepare to be disappointed.

UI 2.0 took them like two years to develop, and it is an unmitigated cluster **** of a disaster.

Why do I have to save my mech when selecting it from the "select mech" screen... but the mech-lab is much more effective for quickly selecting which mech in my inventory I wish to use where I do not have to save merely to indicate I wish to use the currently highlighted mech?

well, The point was not whether UI 2.0 was good or not. I was just looking after it's release. i don't think it took them two years either.

Also, not everyone had a problem with Ui 2.0. For me It was always easy to use. somethings were inconvenient but It has been greatly improved since release. I don't even notice it anymore. Also its purely perspective, People who played before the new UI generally do not like it, those who came into the game after look at it as the previous UI. Of course It can be Vice versa. Everybody adapts to new things in their own way.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 16 August 2014 - 03:57 PM.

[Sandpit]

BLOOD WOLF, on 16 August 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

well, The point was not whether UI 2.0 was good or not. I was just looking after it's release. i don't think it took them two years either.

wow lol

yes, it took them 2 years. The "UI2.0 bottleneck" excuse started back in OB.