183 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Sandpit, on 01 March 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

I was

It was a combination of PGI not being able to get some of this stuff to work without causing major issues elsewhere and some players trying to run MWO on a potato and complaining that performance sucked.

I get that, and I understand it, I still wish I could've played during that time to see this stuff in anything but screen shots and the odd youtub vid....

1453 R, on 01 March 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

While I was as surprised as anybody else over how gung-ho Russ was in the last Town Hall over an engine swap, recall that A.) engine swaps are enormous undertakings that WILL disrupt content generation/release for quite some time (y'know, those things everyone is always saying Piranha needs to release every seventeen minutes or they'll Quit Forever™?)...and B.) Russ was drinking and had been talking for a while.

I'm not saying the man was blasted and talking out his coolant flusher; a new engine could potentially offer the game a lot. But they could also decide it's not worth the incredible levels of hassle it would entail. Remember - it's not just porting the game itself to a new engine, it's also a case of rebuilding all the in-house tools Piranha uses to do development. They may well have to do the latter before the former can even begin, and doing all that would pretty much freeze active game development until the switch was through.

You guys ready to wait on that? Let them have a year to get the engine swapped around and everything settled into place again without hassling their jimmies over "Y U NO MAEK CW BETER?!1!" or "Y U NO SULERIS?1?" or "WARE MY MADCAT TOO?!"

...yeah. I didn't figure you were good for that, either. Asking for patience from this community is sort of like asking for tolerance and forbearance from OH GODWIN NO.

Then I must be a strange one for this community, as I am willing to wait, if it will make for a better experience overall. There is nothing saying that can't keep the current build going and let us have our pew-pew-pew...

[Sandpit]

Metus regem, on 01 March 2016 - 01:11 PM, said:

I get that, and I understand it, I still wish I could've played during that time to see this stuff in anything but screen shots and the odd youtub vid....




Then I must be a strange one for this community, as I am willing to wait, if it will make for a better experience overall. There is nothing saying that can't keep the current build going and let us have our pew-pew-pew...

he's using alot of hyperbole and taking a lot of angst on here out of context.

Waiting for them to get something right is ok.
Being patient is what most o fthe community is good at around here.

Waiting over a year to have ANY development on CW is testing that patience. That's a big difference than what he tried to represent as players acting like "I want it now!"

[Gyrok]

Just so everyone is aware...this was the last time PGI worked with UE to build a game:

[Metus regem]

Gyrok, on 01 March 2016 - 01:18 PM, said:

Just so everyone is aware...this was the last time PGI worked with UE to build a game:

It looks good, but it was a sh*t game.. that being said, I don't think PGI was responsible for the writing of the story board for that game....

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Sandpit, on 01 March 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

I can remember Russ stating that this was a new engine for them and their training and support with it was minimal at best. They spent their budget on a big engine but the package it came with provided with very little in the way of tech support after like the initial training period that came with their package

This is something I've run into before, a major difference between CryTek and Epic in regards to how they treat licensees after signing. CryTek often has a bad habit with smaller studios, in that after signing the license, CryTek more or less drops you like a rock and acts like you don't exist. Epic on the other hand has a long and vibrant track record of supporting damn near everyone who uses Unreal Engine, be they larger development studios, independent studios, or even individual users below the professional level.

Not to put to fine a point on this or anything but CryTek has a reputation with some as being the game engine equivalent more than snake-oil sales style scam artists, and this is one of the reasons why. Granted, those who CryTek tries to stay in bed with don't see them this way, and CryEngine itself isn't to blame - the engine isn't bad, it has it's issues of course but same can be said of Frostbite or Unreal. CE offers some unique possibilities, but as long as the executives at CryTek are flakier than a croissant the overall situation won't improve - as PGI found out the hard way, CryTek could be a lot better about how they treat customers.

EDIT So as not to double post:

Gyrok, on 01 March 2016 - 01:18 PM, said:

Just so everyone is aware...this was the last time PGI worked with UE to build a game:

Okay, please, this is either intentional or accidental misinformation. No offense to you either Gyrok, but PGI didn't make DN:F on their own - the game started development with two other studios and was then finished by Gearbox, who then contracted PGI for the multiplayer side of it. The game was in development for fiteen years and PGI was not responsible for the majority of that game, that's on Gearbox and the original developers, so everyone needs to take that into account in this situation.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 01 March 2016 - 01:37 PM.

[1453 R]

Sandpit, on 01 March 2016 - 01:16 PM, said:

he's using alot of hyperbole and taking a lot of angst on here out of context.

Waiting for them to get something right is ok.
Being patient is what most o fthe community is good at around here.

Waiting over a year to have ANY development on CW is testing that patience. That's a big difference than what he tried to represent as players acting like "I want it now!"

So you'd be willing to put up with a freeze on features development for a year while Piranha transitioned to a new engine?

If so, that makes three people I know of who would - you, me, and Metus. CW players especially do rather have a tendency to try and demand that all other development activities be sidelined in favor of more work on CW. I really don't think they'd take it well if Piranha took a year off of active features development to work on an engine switch. Do you?

[Gyrok]

Sir Roland MXIII, on 01 March 2016 - 01:28 PM, said:

Okay, please, this is either intentional or accidental misinformation. No offense to you either Gyrok, but PGI didn't make DN:F on their own - the game started development with two other studios and was then finished by Gearbox, who then contracted PGI for the multiplayer side of it. The game was in development for fiteen years and PGI was not responsible for the majority of that game, that's on Gearbox and the original developers, so everyone needs to take that into account in this situation.

Regardless of how you want to look at it...PGI got the license to that game, signed off on it, and sent it to the publisher like that on UE.

I am not trying to be brash here...the reality is that the quality of workmanship on a UE engine game from PGI is likely to be below the threshold we have come to expect on CE.

I have zero confidence seeing the UE titles they put out, that a change to UE would benefit this game at all.

[1453 R]

'Scuse me, Gyrok. It is hardly Piranha's fault that DNF blew goats - that one is pretty much on the gaming industry as a whole, with a special nod to Gearbox for somehow screwing up a Duke title despite Borderlands. And as MWO is now Piranha's flagship, and in fact only, title, you can rest assured they'll be able to sink more time and resources into it than they did for DNF's multiplayer.

Besides. To hear the rest of this fuming cesspool say it, they could hardly do worse on UE than they have been on CryEngine, eh?

[GRiPSViGiL]

1453 R, on 01 March 2016 - 01:41 PM, said:

So you'd be willing to put up with a freeze on features development for a year while Piranha transitioned to a new engine?

If so, that makes three people I know of who would - you, me, and Metus. CW players especially do rather have a tendency to try and demand that all other development activities be sidelined in favor of more work on CW. I really don't think they'd take it well if Piranha took a year off of active features development to work on an engine switch. Do you?

Can you blame them, CW players that is? I am not a CW player because frankly it is boring compared to quickplay even with slightly better rewards but other development activities haven't done much to enhance the game at all. Inconsequential additions and fixes that in no way effect gameplay just lends itself to PGI spinning their wheels.

If a year halt of "development" was needed to transition to the upgraded engine I don't think it would be noticed because people just want more mechs with little to no depth of gameplay. It will be a year by the time CW phase 3 hits. So CW players have a case.

Edited by GRiPSViGiL, 01 March 2016 - 02:02 PM.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

1453 R, on 01 March 2016 - 01:41 PM, said:

So you'd be willing to put up with a freeze on features development for a year while Piranha transitioned to a new engine?

If so, that makes three people I know of who would - you, me, and Metus. CW players especially do rather have a tendency to try and demand that all other development activities be sidelined in favor of more work on CW. I really don't think they'd take it well if Piranha took a year off of active features development to work on an engine switch. Do you?

I'm sure that PGI is taking the amount of work for a transition into account, and yes it could potentially be a mountain of work - which in itself is a fairly potent criticism of CE on PGIs part that they're considering it at all. While I would be another one who's fine with development stalling during this period, I agree the vast majority wouldn't - I can think of some games, one of which is currently dying off as we speak, that went too long between game updates for the community to stay with it.

PGI is likely aware of this and taking into account how a transition could be accomplished without putting the brakes on development.

Gyrok, on 01 March 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

Regardless of how you want to look at it...PGI got the license to that game, signed off on it, and sent it to the publisher like that on UE.

How I want to look at DNF has nothing to do with personal opinion so much as fact. To be clear, your overall point is still accurate - PGI claimed to listen to the Nukem fans, asked what they wanted and didn't want, then reversed the two and went that way. Unsurprisingly the fans hated it - a situation painfully echoed with MW:O's early years.

You need to keep in mind though, that Gearbox inherited the game from prior developers, so they worked with what they had. As far as PGIs influence, whatever parts you wish to claim were their responsiblity, IE gameplay, graphics, so-called story, etc., was only theirs if it was part of the multiplayer module.

And yes, trust me, the irony of me finding myself in a position of defending PGI isn't lost on me one bit.

Gyrok, on 01 March 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

I am not trying to be brash here...the reality is that the quality of workmanship on a UE engine game from PGI is likely to be below the threshold we have come to expect on CE.

It depends on how different UE4 is to the UEs PGI had prior experience with, and how much they've forgotten will impact that as well.

Gyrok, on 01 March 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

I have zero confidence seeing the UE titles they put out, that a change to UE would benefit this game at all.

And the same is true of upping the engine to CE4, which also begs the question of how far along CE4 even is at all. UE4 already has games being released on it, last I checked, but discussion here by Russ and the community about the MW:O engine upgrade vs transition was the first I'd heard of a fourth CryEngine.

[Jaegon]

There's practically zero chance they're talking about Unreal here. My guess is that they're thinking of Amazon's Lumberyard perhaps, which is based on Cryengine tech.

To paraphrase Borimir, One does not simply walk into a new engine.

Why would I think this? Well, I was Lead Designer at Epic Games, there for over a decade, Lead Level Designer for Gears of War, and created the Static Mesh environment pipeline used since UT2k3, and co-designed Kismet and the prototyping pipeline used since Gears 1. (Hit me up at @MrLeePerry on twitter anytime!)

Do I have actual inside knowledge of PGI dealings, nope! (I went indie a few years ago to do solo VR games) But I know the amount of technical challenges involved in porting an existing, heavily network and UI based project to another engine... that's "Dude, just go start another project from scratch" territory for sure.

It seems highly likely it would have to be a change to something that is an incremental step from the current tech.

Also, not in any way bagging on Unreal, Crytek, or any tech, they all have their strengths... (hell, I use Unity now!)

Edited by Jaegon, 01 March 2016 - 02:19 PM.

[1453 R]

How long has it been since the regular queue has had a major gameplay update, Grips?

CW folks are always, always, always, alwaysalwaysalwaysalways ALWAYS carping on and on about how their mode isn't deep enough, how it isn't engaging enough, how it doesn't mean enough, and how it isn't rewarding enough, and how the game is going to DIE FOREVER if Piranha doesn't drop everything to completely overhaul CW from the ground up.

Meantime? The Domination mode next month is the first time the regular queue has seen any sort of major new functionality since well before the implementation of CW in the first place. Information Warfare developments, so briefly, tortuously teased at back in The Great Rebalance, has been dropped entirely in favor of Community Warfare 3 - which is, as stated, the third major iteration cycle on CW.

Information Warfare, IW - something the developers originally considered to be a pillar of the game and of equal importance to Community Warfare, got one iteration cycle and was then shelved forever.

The regular/quickplay queue, where ninety percent of the game hangs out according to Russ, has not received any real attention save for the occasional new map since...well, since before I started playing MWO.

And yet CW is a couple of months away at best from its third major iteration cycle moving out the door.

No, CW players do NOT have a godsdamned case. They have been receiving the lion's share of development resources since before the introduction of CW. If those resources have to shift over to an engine transition, then CW folks can wait out that year with the rest of us, and feel what 90% of the MWO playerbase feels like every time Piranha announces a new Commodity Warfare development phase and yet says not a damn word on things like Solaris, quickplay improvements (outside the never-to-be-sufficiently-damned "fix matchmaker!" morons getting their say far too often), or in fact anything relevant whatsoever to the folks who don't do CW.

Your horse of significant vertical dimensions. Vacate it.

Edited by 1453 R, 01 March 2016 - 02:21 PM.

[Goose]

Where is LithTech these days?

[WarHippy]

Jaegon, on 01 March 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

There's practically zero chance they're talking about Unreal here. My guess is that they're thinking of Amazon's Lumberyard perhaps, which is based on Cryengine tech.

To paraphrase Borimir, One does not simply walk into a new engine.

Why would I think this? Well, I was Lead Designer at Epic Games, there for over a decade, Lead Level Designer for Gears of War, and created the Static Mesh environment pipeline used since UT2k3, and co-designed Kismet and the prototyping pipeline used since Gears 1. (Hit me up at @MrLeePerry on twitter anytime!)

Do I have actual inside knowledge of PGI dealings, nope! (I went indie a few years ago to do solo VR games) But I know the amount of technical challenges involved in porting an existing, heavily network and UI based project to another engine... that's "Dude, just go start another project from scratch" territory for sure.

It seems highly likely it would have to be a change to something that is an incremental step from the current tech.

Also, not in any way bagging on Unreal, Crytek, or any tech, they all have their strengths... (hell, I use Unity now!)

I'm sure what you are saying is true, but my understanding is that according to Russ going with an entirely new engine(whatever it may be), or upgrading to this new version of our existing engine that is coming out would be pretty much the same amount of work. I'm not sure how accurate that really could be, but if the work load is the same maybe maybe a complete jump to a different engine is possible rather than just another flavor of what we already have?

[Metus regem]

Goose, on 01 March 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

Where is LithTech these days?

That was an awesome game! I loved SHOGO!

[Mystere]

1453 R, on 01 March 2016 - 02:19 PM, said:

How long has it been since the regular queue has had a major gameplay update, Grips?

CW folks are always, always, always, alwaysalwaysalwaysalways ALWAYS carping on and on about how their mode isn't deep enough, how it isn't engaging enough, how it doesn't mean enough, and how it isn't rewarding enough, and how the game is going to DIE FOREVER if Piranha doesn't drop everything to completely overhaul CW from the ground up.

Here's the rub. The regular queue was originally just a filler that became a "major feature". At the same time, Community Warfare -- one of the core pillars of the game that was supposed to be available 90 days from release -- is still just a skeleton after all this time.

[Jaegon]

It's possible, WarHippy... I mean, full engine changes have been done before, I just can't think of another example that has had so many subsystems, menus, server integrated components, etc...

Honestly it speaks really well of PGI that they think of the project in the long term that they would consider such a thing. There's many companies out there that would simply keep selling some hats and ride it until it dies with as low internal costs as possible.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Jaegon, on 01 March 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

There's practically zero chance they're talking about Unreal here. My guess is that they're thinking of Amazon's Lumberyard perhaps, which is based on Cryengine tech.

To paraphrase Borimir, One does not simply walk into a new engine.

Why would I think this? Well, I was Lead Designer at Epic Games, there for over a decade, Lead Level Designer for Gears of War, and created the Static Mesh environment pipeline used since UT2k3, and co-designed Kismet and the prototyping pipeline used since Gears 1. (Hit me up at @MrLeePerry on twitter anytime!)

Do I have actual inside knowledge of PGI dealings, nope! (I went indie a few years ago to do solo VR games) But I know the amount of technical challenges involved in porting an existing, heavily network and UI based project to another engine... that's "Dude, just go start another project from scratch" territory for sure.

It seems highly likely it would have to be a change to something that is an incremental step from the current tech.

Also, not in any way bagging on Unreal, Crytek, or any tech, they all have their strengths... (hell, I use Unity now!)

Thank you for that perspective. Hadn't heard of Lumberyard before, but then again my ear is to the ground on the hardware side, not software, so no surprise there. I have to admit too, all this talk of MW:O going to a new engine seemed off to me, since I knew they'd have to circular file a lot of work and start over for a new engine. However I think he said something to the effect that they'd lose a lot of work going to CE4, too.

So if I may ask, how possible is it that anything they've done for MW:O using third party software do you think could be used in another engine - not just UE but anything else. As I'm a hardware specialist / enthusiast it's not my domain, so any insight you can offer would be appreciated.

[Shirow]

the new engine would be good for the devs, but would it put any down time for us game wise?

we wouldnt lose anything ingame right?

servers wouldnt go down long?

[1453 R]

Mystere, on 01 March 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

Here's the rub. The regular queue was originally just a filler that became a "major feature". At the same time, Community Warfare -- one of the core pillars of the game that was supposed to be available 90 days from release -- is still just a skeleton after all this time.

Well, as I've told you before Mystere, when you were crusading to get the quickplay queue cut entirely and force everyone into hour-long dropdeck matches in CW...

if they cut the "filler mode" regular queue at this point, I'd pretty much stop playing MWO on the spot. I sincerely doubt I'm the only one. Sheer inertia, at this point, means that the quick, simple, hassle and dropdeck-free regular queue will be staying. For those with only fifteen minutes to run a match, for those who believe the dropdeck-style respawn gamemodes are a poison that should ideally be purged from MWO with fire, for those who don't give a Shatner about the star map and don't want to lock themselves into nothing but Sphere or Clan 'Mechs for the rest of their existence, for those who don't want to sell themselves to some random CW unit like we're in the 1700s again...

For people who just want to play MWO, instead of getting into the enormous grindfest time sink pile of utter ridiculousness that is Commodity Warfare, there is a regular, Quick Play queue. We will retain it. And we will, now and again, desire improvements made to it between gigantic CW overhauls.

EDIT::

Shirow, on 01 March 2016 - 02:38 PM, said:

the new engine would be good for the devs, but would it put any down time for us game wise?

we wouldnt lose anything ingame right?

servers wouldnt go down long?

We wouldn't see any new builds, outside bug fixes or whatever, until the asset migration and switchover was completed, at which point we'd all have to install the game all over again, most likely. After that install, it'd be back to business as usual.

Edited by 1453 R, 01 March 2016 - 02:41 PM.