26 replies to this topic

[Tordin]

Im surpised by saying this, (a bit of track I know) since Im all for independent developing as much as possible but even I can see PGI needs a bit of help.

Since things take long time with PGI ( an exception would be taking time to ensure quality on that I agree on ) Couldnt a publisher thats faitful/ interested (no, not only interested in the profit outcome) in the Battletech universe, buy them out but at the same time let PGI handle the games developement and ask the publisher for additional experienced staff and such if they struggle?
Then things might get on track and content blossom. More content faster, new engine etc faster, new gameplay features like, working collisions against buildings and mechs that make sense, destructible environment, melee, a much higher cap at max speed, elited or not.

Im not saying PGI are bad at making games, like MWO but no shame in getting some helping hands and such if they stay independent.

https://en.wikipedia...i/Piranha_Games

a staff of 65 might dont seem much, but *cough* Hello games that will release No man sky (which looks just amazing) are just, what 15 persons?

How can they further grow and become really good at MWO and so on? Just time will tell indeed.

ON track. Yes I might actually go for something like ala carte, full access and such. Maybe make an own custom loadout and mech named after you, canon or not? Better be some really good canon mix in backstory though.

Anyway.. I would then hope the advantage of changing engine can be as painless as possible and that they know how to handle it all. Be prepared for the uknown jungle of possible messups.

[kesmai]

$ 13
That is a gram of good weed.
or a decent dab.

pgi this is an easy decision.

-42- smokejays

[Khobai]

Quote

Currently PGI has to pay a....30%? royalty on every dollar earned for using the current engine

nah I remember they negotiated something with crytek because MWO was a big franchise title. at most its 20% royalties but I dont think theyre paying that much at all.

Edited by Khobai, 23 March 2016 - 10:46 AM.

[Chuck Jager]

kesmai, on 23 March 2016 - 10:31 AM, said:

$ 13
That is a gram of good weed.
or a decent dab.

pgi this is an easy decision.

-42- smokejays

If you live in a green state. OR has no jobs. but I know the percentage of THC, CBD and CBN in every gram purchased at places nicer than any liquor store.

[Lyoto Machida]

Alardus, on 23 March 2016 - 07:29 AM, said:

What is with the recent proliferation in the coding/gaming community of calling small slices of something 'a la carte'? It just bugs me to no end and this convention needs to die. Its for food, not programs.

This isn't just limited to the coding/gaming community.

Words and definitions change over time...

[Troutmonkey]

Rhaythe, on 23 March 2016 - 08:02 AM, said:

No.

They won't, because there's nothing to be gained. It doesn't provide anything the game absolutely requires; it won't necessarily even make the game look better. That takes extra assets, extra configuration, extra time. And jumping engines - even for a sequentially newer one - can be a significant strain on resources.

But they really won't do it because it's unmarketable. And everything comes down to finances.

There's plenty to be gained.

Better lighting models, better physics, better particles, optimisations, and what I want - I better UI system.
Outside of what we can see, newer engines also have better back ends for developers. If coding is easier, and doing test builds is faster that can save a lot of developer hours. There's also the numerous "technical limitations" that PGI have quoted over the years to stop the introduction of or remove previous features. Inverse kinematics might work properly with a new engine, as could DFA, collisions and knock downs. Even quadrupeds might be possible.

As someone who's ported something from GameMaker > XNA > Unity I can tell you that a different game engine can add a lot and make life easier at the same time.

Personally I'd like to see MWO move to Unreal because
1. It has amazing graphics engine
2. Very optimized
3. Massive amount of community support

When you're developing you'll often run into problems, and with a popular engine like Unreal somebody somewhere else has to and probably documented a fix. CryEngine is nice looking but it seems the only people who can run it properly are the wizards at CryTek

[Biclor Moban]

Rhaythe, on 23 March 2016 - 08:02 AM, said:

No.

They won't, because there's nothing to be gained. It doesn't provide anything the game absolutely requires; it won't necessarily even make the game look better. That takes extra assets, extra configuration, extra time. And jumping engines - even for a sequentially newer one - can be a significant strain on resources.

But they really won't do it because it's unmarketable. And everything comes down to finances.

Just like in MWO the fastest way for a game to die is to camp.

You know what is unmarketable using old tech. It's not like Apple goes "look at the new iphone it's the same as the old iphone even the OS is the same!".