195 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

i remember when people who could all fit on one screen in 640x480 could make a really good game. it boggles my mind what the triple a studios are doing, the starcraft 2 credits were incredibly long. i suppose its nice that the industry can get so big as to create that many jobs, but i kind of think its missing something. sc2 is the exception not the rule, its a good game that plays well and has good replayability, but a number of aaa games are just garbage for the masses and dont explore any new territory as far as games go.

i think i know what the problem is. when i decided to go to colledge (the benefit of being a graduate is i dont have to spell things write anymore) back in the early 00s, there was no such thing as a game dev class. i was already an experienced modder back then, id made quake maps and hex edited robots into descent. my programming was not strong (i knew a little c/++ and vb but didnt really know how to fully leverage it) but its improved a lot since then. i ended up taking a bunch of useless networking classes, and i was fully aware that i would not want to babysit servers for the rest of my life.

up to that point anyone who was a game developer didnt go to game dev school, they either took an art course, or a computer science course, or something else. they learned general things and adapted them to game dev. being generalists they had to solve specific problems on their own. you were more than likely using your own engine. there were some engines back then that were being leased out. but when you have your own engine, understand its abilities inside and out, and have tailored it to your specific game, you ended up with a much higher quality game. better than the slap together games you see now that you get from people who went to colledge specifically for game dev and wouldnt know how to build a game engine if they had to.

so thats my theory about what went wrong with games, and what makes a good game today. all the great developers dont make games, they make engines, and sell them to dev teams with lesser abilities. unless you can really throw serious capitol at a game, you are almost guaranteed mediocrity. i like the kind of games you get from sparse development teams using in house and even rented engines, usually always a niche genre that would never be touched by a tripple a studio. its a much more free environment to do what you want as opposed to bending to marketing pressures.

f2p games are kind of in the middle. they have big teams and those teams need financial support, but the demand for higher capitol usually make these games a cash siphon first and a good game secondarily. that usually means players on average pay more for less. so its no supprise that these kind of games turn into epic salt mines. mwo being in that boat and being a rent an engine game kind of puts it on shaking footing. seems pgi wants to get out of that model with mw5 and become either an indie studio or try to gain enough market share to become aaa. but i think a studio that wants to put the games first and the buisness second, and can pull it off without going bankrupt are always going to make the better game. i dont see pgi being that studio.

[BLOOD WOLF]

gonna skip most of the garbage.

A developer or somebody who makes a game, needs to understand the fundamentals of how to make one. they need to understand clearly what it is they are trying to make, and build one step at a time. PGI who never made a battlemech game before or any game of this scale complete ran into this with no experience. Its not that they didn't have the necessary experience to make a game in terms of programming or the other bits. Its that they didn't even know what or how to approach it.

Whether you make your own engine or borrow one, is irrelevant to understanding how to make that engine work for your game. PGI is a studio which I have seen grow from 2012 till now understanding what it is to make a battletech product. It may have took them a while to get there but as I have seen with mechcon, the last patch, is that they have a good concept on what they are trying to do, and how to approach it. Albeit they are going to go at the speed they can, It is more than reasonable now that with each patch down the line they have the chance to continue to build on what they have achieved at least in this year.

like I said, most of your post is garbage, Rather than give context into what specifically and getting into the details, your ranted on about a bunch of disjunctive stuff that made no point, and concluded with you not seeing PGI as that studio. So maybe we can discuss one topic at a time and why it is you think the way you do.

[BLOOD WOLF]

To be clear

1 you talked about, how developers back when didn't need to go to school to actually develop games, and a good example is todd howard.

2. you cite the differences between using your own built engine vs borrowing an engine and in effect the quality of the game is affected.

3 why does PGI using someone else engine put it on shaky footing? you cite using Unreal for MW5 but that is also not an engine PGI has made.

4. Why do you think PGI is putting business first and the game second and can you give any relevant examples?

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 26 December 2016 - 05:25 AM.

[Nesutizale]

Lumber..whatever is the Cryengine. Amazon bought the cryengine from Crytech, modified it to work with their network of Servers and released it under a new name.
To my knowledge everything else is still the same old Cryengine...just with a better networking code and maybe a new interface.

[xEdSteelex]

Nesutizale, on 26 December 2016 - 06:16 AM, said:

Lumber..whatever is the Cryengine. Amazon bought the cryengine from Crytech, modified it to work with their network of Servers and released it under a new name.
To my knowledge everything else is still the same old Cryengine...just with a better networking code and maybe a new interface.

This is a good thing, because after following the development of MWO and SC since 2012, it seems to me like the network code in the original Cry Engine was mostly an afterthought and both PGI and RSI had to rework the code extensively to make it work with their games.

[Johnny Z]

Most of these replies are boring and not interesting like mine.

[Zordicron]

LordNothing, on 26 December 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

i remember when people who could all fit on one screen in 640x480 could make a really good game. it boggles my mind what the triple a studios are doing, the starcraft 2 credits were incredibly long. i suppose its nice that the industry can get so big as to create that many jobs, but i kind of think its missing something. sc2 is the exception not the rule, its a good game that plays well and has good replayability, but a number of aaa games are just garbage for the masses and dont explore any new territory as far as games go.

i think i know what the problem is. when i decided to go to colledge (the benefit of being a graduate is i dont have to spell things write anymore) back in the early 00s, there was no such thing as a game dev class. i was already an experienced modder back then, id made quake maps and hex edited robots into descent. my programming was not strong (i knew a little c/++ and vb but didnt really know how to fully leverage it) but its improved a lot since then. i ended up taking a bunch of useless networking classes, and i was fully aware that i would not want to babysit servers for the rest of my life.

up to that point anyone who was a game developer didnt go to game dev school, they either took an art course, or a computer science course, or something else. they learned general things and adapted them to game dev. being generalists they had to solve specific problems on their own. you were more than likely using your own engine. there were some engines back then that were being leased out. but when you have your own engine, understand its abilities inside and out, and have tailored it to your specific game, you ended up with a much higher quality game. better than the slap together games you see now that you get from people who went to colledge specifically for game dev and wouldnt know how to build a game engine if they had to.

so thats my theory about what went wrong with games, and what makes a good game today. all the great developers dont make games, they make engines, and sell them to dev teams with lesser abilities. unless you can really throw serious capitol at a game, you are almost guaranteed mediocrity. i like the kind of games you get from sparse development teams using in house and even rented engines, usually always a niche genre that would never be touched by a tripple a studio. its a much more free environment to do what you want as opposed to bending to marketing pressures.

f2p games are kind of in the middle. they have big teams and those teams need financial support, but the demand for higher capitol usually make these games a cash siphon first and a good game secondarily. that usually means players on average pay more for less. so its no supprise that these kind of games turn into epic salt mines. mwo being in that boat and being a rent an engine game kind of puts it on shaking footing. seems pgi wants to get out of that model with mw5 and become either an indie studio or try to gain enough market share to become aaa. but i think a studio that wants to put the games first and the buisness second, and can pull it off without going bankrupt are always going to make the better game. i dont see pgi being that studio.

More or less, this is correct. I think you make a bit to much sweeping generalizations about the industry, BUT, when people discovered, or maybe realized is a better word, just how much money the industry was turning over it went like most industries do, from smaller private studios/companies to "big business" and "corporate" type of thinking.

Basically, paper club invaded the industry because they saw the money being exchanged and wanted to cash in. oh, by paper club I mean people with degrees in things like marketing and management. Education followed suit naturally, as hey, if people are in the industry making bank, it means there is an apple to dangle in front of people to tell them they can be educated in a way to do it too!!

That's not how it works, it never did. you don't manage a game into existence. What happens in AAA stuff is the amount of overhead blows through the roof and it takes exponentially more money to pay the rediculous salary of whoever is directing the AAA studio and his supporting staff.

That in turn creates an inflation of sorts as well, because when the cost becomes so high, but then in turn becomes the accepted reality, small guys can;t afford the entry costs to get in. So then we see huge outside funding through publishers etc. Crowdfunding was the result of someone trying to figure out a way past that wall, but even that has been exploited by some of the big money interests.

my younger brother actually paid to take courses for a video game program at a local school. What was pitched was he would learn how to build a game. When he got about half way through, he realized the school itself didn't know WTF they were talking about, and had simply hired in a few lead devs of some games that had done well to lecture on design. he did get 2 courses on modeling. no coding was part of their program. The vast majority of it was a couple lead devs telling their lecture halls how they made design decisions. He came to the same conclusion I did after we talked about it: just how many positions are in the industry for "lead developer" really? And so, how was over half of his program of any use whatsoever to someone getting into the industry?

He went there to learn how to code and otherwise build a game, and got lectured on how to visualize a final product. Basically, the education end of this industry is teaching people how to make a painting of a new car and expecting the painter to find the mechanics and engineers to actually make the car on their own afterwards.

It should be no surprise then that costs of an actual solid game are so high. Everyone that wants to "make a game" wants to be the boss. basically, as the old adage goes: too many chiefs, not enough indians. If the industry was honest with itself, it would tell people to learn how to code and not advertise things like "do you play video games? want to learn how to make them?" kind of BS.

[xEdSteelex]

Alan Davion, on 25 December 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

MWO will only be twice the game it is now when it's finally wrested from PGI's lazy and incompetent grasp.

Be careful what you wish for.

[Johnny Z]

Zordicron, on 26 December 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

More or less, this is correct. I think you make a bit to much sweeping generalizations about the industry, BUT, when people discovered, or maybe realized is a better word, just how much money the industry was turning over it went like most industries do, from smaller private studios/companies to "big business" and "corporate" type of thinking.

Basically, paper club invaded the industry because they saw the money being exchanged and wanted to cash in. oh, by paper club I mean people with degrees in things like marketing and management. Education followed suit naturally, as hey, if people are in the industry making bank, it means there is an apple to dangle in front of people to tell them they can be educated in a way to do it too!!

That's not how it works, it never did. you don't manage a game into existence. What happens in AAA stuff is the amount of overhead blows through the roof and it takes exponentially more money to pay the rediculous salary of whoever is directing the AAA studio and his supporting staff.

That in turn creates an inflation of sorts as well, because when the cost becomes so high, but then in turn becomes the accepted reality, small guys can;t afford the entry costs to get in. So then we see huge outside funding through publishers etc. Crowdfunding was the result of someone trying to figure out a way past that wall, but even that has been exploited by some of the big money interests.

my younger brother actually paid to take courses for a video game program at a local school. What was pitched was he would learn how to build a game. When he got about half way through, he realized the school itself didn't know WTF they were talking about, and had simply hired in a few lead devs of some games that had done well to lecture on design. he did get 2 courses on modeling. no coding was part of their program. The vast majority of it was a couple lead devs telling their lecture halls how they made design decisions. He came to the same conclusion I did after we talked about it: just how many positions are in the industry for "lead developer" really? And so, how was over half of his program of any use whatsoever to someone getting into the industry?

He went there to learn how to code and otherwise build a game, and got lectured on how to visualize a final product. Basically, the education end of this industry is teaching people how to make a painting of a new car and expecting the painter to find the mechanics and engineers to actually make the car on their own afterwards.

It should be no surprise then that costs of an actual solid game are so high. Everyone that wants to "make a game" wants to be the boss. basically, as the old adage goes: too many chiefs, not enough indians. If the industry was honest with itself, it would tell people to learn how to code and not advertise things like "do you play video games? want to learn how to make them?" kind of BS.

This is 100% correct and explains a lot of things these days. Ubisoft is hitting this wall face first at high speeds as we speak. Although I think they can do well still.

The saying is "to many chiefs, not enough Indians" and "to many cooks spoil the broth"

This entire subject has hit the construction industry also. Basically there is only one way to learn that and its on the job training. The workers are left to do the job themselves with little to no over sight but given deadlines. Foremen are for the newbies mostly.

I remember fondly when "safety bosses" were first put on the job, like a guy that has never done a days work in his life is going to tell guys how to work who have been raised from birth to work and how to be safe and to care for their own lives. The entire seen only got worse to. On the bright side most of the work was already done.

Oh and I never got hurt at work until there were guys wandering around the job site with no real job.... Seriously. First time I got hurt the wheel came off a scaffold while I was on it and a guy ran up and put the wheel back on while I was still laying on the ground. This is a 100% true story. Luckily I landed like a ninja only broken wrist falling onto concrete. I would really like to go back to that moment and not be in shock like I was just to have a moment with that guy that put the wheel back on. Really.

The kicker to this story is the way the wheel came off, I guess the fitting was slowly loosening while I was on it, visibly so, and if that guy was so quick to run up and put the wheel back on, just AS I hit the ground, then he seen the wheel coming off and could have told me.... Not to mention that scaffold should never have been on the job in the first place. It as for sure removed after the fact.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 December 2016 - 11:33 AM.

[Ratpoison]

LordNothing, on 26 December 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

i remember when people who could all fit on one screen in 640x480 could make a really good game. it boggles my mind what the triple a studios are doing, the starcraft 2 credits were incredibly long. i suppose its nice that the industry can get so big as to create that many jobs, but i kind of think its missing something. sc2 is the exception not the rule, its a good game that plays well and has good replayability, but a number of aaa games are just garbage for the masses and dont explore any new territory as far as games go.

i think i know what the problem is. when i decided to go to colledge (the benefit of being a graduate is i dont have to spell things write anymore) back in the early 00s, there was no such thing as a game dev class. i was already an experienced modder back then, id made quake maps and hex edited robots into descent. my programming was not strong (i knew a little c/++ and vb but didnt really know how to fully leverage it) but its improved a lot since then. i ended up taking a bunch of useless networking classes, and i was fully aware that i would not want to babysit servers for the rest of my life.

up to that point anyone who was a game developer didnt go to game dev school, they either took an art course, or a computer science course, or something else. they learned general things and adapted them to game dev. being generalists they had to solve specific problems on their own. you were more than likely using your own engine. there were some engines back then that were being leased out. but when you have your own engine, understand its abilities inside and out, and have tailored it to your specific game, you ended up with a much higher quality game. better than the slap together games you see now that you get from people who went to colledge specifically for game dev and wouldnt know how to build a game engine if they had to.

so thats my theory about what went wrong with games, and what makes a good game today. all the great developers dont make games, they make engines, and sell them to dev teams with lesser abilities. unless you can really throw serious capitol at a game, you are almost guaranteed mediocrity. i like the kind of games you get from sparse development teams using in house and even rented engines, usually always a niche genre that would never be touched by a tripple a studio. its a much more free environment to do what you want as opposed to bending to marketing pressures.

That's a very classical way of thinking about game design, but the state of the industry and its technology has grown and changed. Game design courses don't teach you how to code because that's what coding classes are for, and the simple fact is that there is no career for the "designer/coder" in the industry anymore. In decades past, development studios could run on very few people, leaders could get where they were with a pitch, and the "designer/coder" had a place to thrive in the industry. These days the opposite is becoming true, as development studios require more resources and more people to make games that will make money. A studio that pays full salaries simply doesn't have the capacity to fund profitable game projects developed by a handful of people outside of mobile games anymore. To make a game that will make money on modern game machines, you need a certain minimum amount of human resources to pull it off, and it's not small enough to leave room for the old "designer/coder"

That is not to say that you shouldn't try doing both if that is what speaks to you, but the only realistic course for you to take is going to be independent development. Coding and game design are talents that run on two different skillsets though, and most often it's still the best idea to leave it to separate people. Even as a completely unfunded independent game developer myself, the coders have been separate from the designers on my projects. Things run much more effectively if the person trying to make a game world function isn't also having to create assets, write dialogue, design world building details, or formulate gameplay mechanics before they can even get started. They do contribute to the design themselves sometimes, but the main point is that the pressure is not on the coder to design. A skilled designer paired with a skilled coder can simply get more done faster than someone who's trying to shoulder both.

And please don't forget that the careers are what college is about in the end. We call it "higher education", but it's less about education and more about career opportunities. Studios offering careers these days are simply not interested in offering "designer/coder" jobs, because if it's not a tiny project, hiring two separate people who specialize in each will be more efficient and cost effective. Careers in design and careers in coding are looking for two separate degrees, you have to pick one if you want a salary. If you don't care about a salary, well then why the hell are you wasting money on college? Online resources to learn these things for free or cheap are available.

As for engines, that also might have been true in years past, but modern game engines are so powerful and versitile, chances are several of them can do everything you will ever need them to for your project. Unless you have a truly unique design and concept that defies the conventional definitions of its genre, you probably are just wasting a huge amount of time and effort on making your own engine from scratch. Many indie projects have killed their own development by trying to write engines they didn't need, don't underestimate just how much that costs. It's a sign of stupidity more often than a sign of quality these days.

The way you used this to bag on PGI is just nonsense conjecture, though.

Edited by Ratpoison, 26 December 2016 - 12:47 PM.

[Unnatural Growth]

BLOOD WOLF, on 26 December 2016 - 04:24 AM, said:

MWO doesn't put the state of their game on their site?

They have starting with the recent patch notes and items added in the game tab, and it goes back to the first ones so you can get a overview of how the game has developed.

whoops, guess you were just confused.

Yeah, right.

Because we never heard "Wait until Mechcon", from PGI, for like the last 6 Fn' months...

Keep sellen' it, Hall Monitor. Did they give you a safety vest and a title to go with that job?

[Unnatural Growth]

And I thought you weren't going to be the forum poster child anymore?

Remember this quote (yours)?....

"...and then like me you learn that best not to even interact too much on the forums. "

Just can't help yourself, can you?

[BLOOD WOLF]

OldOrgandonor, on 26 December 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

Because we never heard "Wait until Mechcon", from PGI, for like the last 6 Fn' months...

What Kind of response is that?

What does Russ saying wait until mechcon have anything to do with the relevant information that they put up, and if it is evidently so that they do in fact put the patch notes, which of course can be found in the game tab. So miss me with the red herring because that has nothing to do with the point.

OldOrgandonor, on 26 December 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

Keep sellen' it, Hall Monitor. Did they give you a safety vest and a title to go with that job?

OldOrgandonor, on 26 December 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

And I thought you weren't going to be the forum poster child anymore?

you're doing such a great job with the childish arguments that you make it hard not to respond.

I said "not interact to much", I can indulge myself with a few trash post every once in awhile.

[TopDawg]

The salt runneth over in this thread.

[LordNothing]

TopDawg, on 26 December 2016 - 07:05 PM, said:

The salt runneth over in this thread.

salt, and booze. i was quite plastered when i wrote that long and rambling post. was downing my bacardi 151 based holiday grog. i was having trouble piloting my mech and hitting things, and the right things. so played a game of forum warrior insrtead. anyway thank the devil for spell chack or that post could have been a mess.

Edited by LordNothing, 26 December 2016 - 11:21 PM.

[Deathlike]

This thread... makes headaches.

A few thoughts.

1) I don't see PGI touching any of this. Essentially, it'll be too hard to integrate fixes and it'll likely break something for some random reason.

2) I don't have any money spent into Star Citizen. I don't hate/love/care about it, and frankly I suspect it'll go one way or another... it'll certainly go big, and likely to go boom. Still, there's a stark difference between PGI and RSI in what has been produced before (not that RSI has produced anything themselves, but rather Chris Roberts track record previously).

3) Setting realistic expectations is way different from what your idealistic expectations are. It's always been a thing in game development. With that said, the old goto statement still holds... "I'll believe it when I see it." Although, I'd still have to play it first before I give a damn. Said things should apply to every game... especially MWO.