1066 replies to this topic

[Chuckie]

How are we supposed to wait 40 more days..

It's a cruel torture I tell you..

[Helmer]

Russ Bullock, on 30 January 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

GDC my friends...during and after GDC much more for you !

But that's like 35 days away! Which in Rabid, obsessive Fan Boy days is like 245 days away! (Dog years work the same way I am told)

[renegade mitchell]

Ok all is fine they are posting an ingame footage at GDC. But why not a sample here? Why I ask. seven years back a small team called Perpetual was making STO. They showed nothing but images, for months up to a year, of their progress. Eventually that team went bankrupt, the game became vaperware, and eventually Cryptic took over four years later. I have my reservations, and really hoping this Dev team comes through and makes an awesome MW game that we can all enjoy. But part of me is holding out until I see some ingame footage.

Edited by Renegade Mitchell, 30 January 2012 - 05:16 PM.

[Paul Inouye]

Do you really want me to go there?

[renegade mitchell]

Yes Paul, why I asked, seriously.

[Paul Inouye]

Spoiler

We are releasing all kinds of pretty stuff on and around the dates of GDC. We've stated numerous times that we will not release ANYTHING until we are sure it meets the target we're aiming for in terms of operations and quality. Until then, you'll have to sit on your hat and wait.

[Helmer]

In all seriousness, if they're not ready to show anything... They are not ready.

It could be for any number of reasons, so don't take the lack of screenshots or videos at this point as an ill omen.

Many times developers have exclusivity rights with gaming magazines, websites, etc etc for the "first in game video" or "First actual gameplay screenshots". I'm not saying this is the case , but if they're set on GDC, I doubt they're going to budge just because we are whining



(Unless you ARE going to budge because we are whining, which in that case ... Pllleeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaseee?!? I wont ask for anything ever again until the next thing I ask for?!)


Still wouldn't mind a few more Playtest write ups like the last one! Any word on the Centurion in playtests?

[renegade mitchell]

Paul Inouye, on 30 January 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

Spoiler

We are releasing all kinds of pretty stuff on and around the dates of GDC. We've stated numerous times that we will not release ANYTHING until we are sure it meets the target we're aiming for in terms of operations and quality. Until then, you'll have to sit on your hat and wait.

Haha ok, but still does not answer my question

[renegade mitchell]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

In all seriousness, if they're not ready to show anything... They are not ready.

It could be for any number of reasons, so don't take the lack of screenshots or videos at this point as an ill omen.

Many times developers have exclusivity rights with gaming magazines, websites, etc etc for the "first in game video" or "First actual gameplay screenshots". I'm not saying this is the case , but if they're set on GDC, I doubt they're going to budge just because we are whining



(Unless you ARE going to budge because we are whining, which in that case ... Pllleeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaseee?!? I wont ask for anything ever again until the next thing I ask for?!)


Still wouldn't mind a few more Playtest write ups like the last one! Any word on the Centurion in playtests?

Not ready you say? Over two weeks since they did an online playteast. Back in 2009 they were quick to release ingame footage of MW5 3015. Why the delay here for some sample of ingame footage. Even some didbit?

[Helmer]

The 2009 Trailer was using a different engine.

Who is to say that all of the art assets are in place? Or even high rez versions they want to show the public? They might be working in a build with placeholder visuals because right now its more important to focus on other things, and not making it pretty for playtest.


There's a myriad of reasons. Why ask why at this point. they've already said they are'nt going to right now,and they are not sharing the reasons. Or at least not with us on the boards.

[renegade mitchell]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

The 2009 Trailer was using a different engine.

Who is to say that all of the art assets are in place? Or even high rez versions they want to show the public? They might be working in a build with placeholder visuals because right now its more important to focus on other things, and not making it pretty for playtest.


There's a myriad of reasons. Why ask why at this point. they've already said they are'nt going to right now,and they are not sharing the reasons. Or at least not with us on the boards.

I know the 2009 trailer was from a different engine. Why release that quickly, and not the current game they say they playtested two weeks ago?

All assets in place from what they say, play test was two weeks ago.

[Helmer]

How do you know they "released it quickly"? How long were they working on it? And they released the trailer in order to see about drumming up interest and investors. Read some of the Developers Blogs. http://mwomercs.com/...evelopers-blog/

"All assets in place from what they say, play test was two weeks ago."

Not sure what you are trying to say here. If you're saying that they said All Assets where in place during the playtest, please show me that forum post.

Just because they had a playtest, that does not indicate that the build is in any way ,shape ,or form ready for public viewing.

Edited by Helmer, 30 January 2012 - 06:41 PM.

[renegade mitchell]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 06:36 PM, said:

How do you know they "released it quickly"? How long were they working on it? And they released the trailer in order to see about drumming up interest and investors. Read some of the Developers Blogs. http://mwomercs.com/...evelopers-blog/

"All assets in place from what they say, play test was two weeks ago."

Not sure what you are trying to say here. If you're saying that they said All Assets where in place during the playtest, please show me that forum post.

Just because they had a playtest, that does not indicate that the build is in any way ,shape ,or form for public viewing.

First no mention of any new MW game, then the video. Yeah caught everyone by surprise. Maybe you are right and developement of it took awhile.

PLAY TEST. They have a working model of the game, which means they have ingame footage they could show to us. A small sample, is what I asked from my first post.

[Helmer]

Renegade Mitchell, on 30 January 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

First no mention of any new MW game, then the video. Yeah caught everyone by surprise. Maybe you are right and developement of it took awhile.

PLAY TEST. They have a working model of the game, which means they have ingame footage they could show to us. A small sample, is what I asked from my first post.

AGAIN. Who says its a build ment for public consumption? The art assets could be placeholder. Why would they release video that has low res textures, and perhaps low poly count models? They never said it was fully realized. Just they were playtesting it. Which could mean many things. Perhaps they were testing the speed of combat, combat systems they have in place, particle effects, etc etc. Any number of reasons that what they are playing with is NOT what they want to show publicly.

Why would they spend thousands of man hours, who knows how much money, only to release something that isn't close to the visuals they will be using. And that might not even be the reason. It's conjucture on my part. You might be right. They might have EVERYTHING done, and are simply tweaking a few things.

So why are they not releasing in game footage? I'd love to know your answer, as none of the conjectures and developers posts seem to assuage your insistance.

[renegade mitchell]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

AGAIN. Who says its a build ment for public consumption? The art assets could be placeholder. Why would they release video that has low res textures, and perhaps low poly count models? They never said it was fully realized. Just they were playtesting it. Which could mean many things. Perhaps they were testing the speed of combat, combat systems they have in place, particle effects, etc etc. Any number of reasons that what they are playing with is NOT what they want to show publicly.

Why would they spend thousands of man hours, who knows how much money, only to release something that isn't close to the visuals they will be using. And that might not even be the reason. It's conjucture on my part. You might be right. They might have EVERYTHING done, and are simply tweaking a few things.

So why are they not releasing in game footage? I'd love to know your answer, as none of the conjectures and developers posts seem to assuage your insistance.

The game is on the CRY engine 3. Even with graphics set at minimum, game would look awesome.

Why release it? It has been three months with a projected release date of summer. More then enough time for any ingame footage. Cryptic had videos of theirs, STO, a month sooner.

[Helmer]

Renegade Mitchell, on 30 January 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

The game is on the CRY engine 3. Even with graphics set at minimum, game would look awesome.

Not if the graphics are not all implemented.

And you didn't answer the question.

Edited by Helmer, 30 January 2012 - 07:07 PM.

[Morashtak]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

... The art assets could be placeholder. ...

I heard from my brother's cousin's friend's half-sister that she heard from a "very reliable source" (who might or might not be PGI's janitor's son's teacher's uncle) that the alpha test 'Mechs are all skinned to look like... Hula girls™!

But I'm not one to pass along rumors so you didn't hear that from me.

[renegade mitchell]

Helmer, on 30 January 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

Not if the graphics are not all implemented.

And you didn't answer the question.

How can parts of what they test not built for human consumption? They posted throughout this thread vague maybe, but they say this is a working game. PLAY TESTED. I, as I believe, many others in this community, want to see game footage, otherwise I say vaporware.

Edited by Renegade Mitchell, 30 January 2012 - 07:19 PM.

[renegade mitchell]

Morashtak, on 30 January 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

I heard from my brother's cousin's friend's half-sister that she heard from a "very reliable source" (who might or might not be PGI's janitor's son's teacher's uncle) that the alpha test 'Mechs are all skinned to look like... Hula girls™!

But I'm not one to pass along rumors so you didn't hear that from me.

lol nice one

[Karyudo ds]

Renegade Mitchell, on 30 January 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

How can parts of what they test not built for human consumption?

Easily? Like if the Hunchback was the only model in the game being used as a stand in? Or if all the textures had the 3DS Max genaric spaceship tile texture instead of being even started? Crappy animations that are good enough to test game programming only? The list can go on really. He was suggesting that some things in the playtests may not even be close to final versions. I know a white textureless Hunchback running across the screen wouldn't get me terribly excited.

Quote

They posted throughout this thread vague maybe, but they say this is a working game. PLAT TESTED. I, as I believe, many others in this community, want to see game footage, otherwise I say vaporware.

Call it vaporware all you want. Wont affect the work being done on it if there is or isn't any, and wont really matter to me. You act like they owe you game footage for some reason. They are allowed to release the game without any teaser footage at all if they wanted too. They likely wont but taunting them with "vaporware" isn't likely to affect their schedule.