Rahdo's words - what happened here?

(Zanchile) #501

Bastion FTW! i think its coming to PC soon.

(tokamak) #502

It’s not a matter of which platform takes the lead, if a game is being developed for three platforms any decisions being made are going to be weighed against all three platforms. There are just some core gameplay mechanics that have to be compromised one way or the other. The obvious example is regen health, which is a needed mechanic for the less agile console games and something that is impossible to simply replace with a health bar and it would cause massive balancing issues.

I just can’t agree with that. Developing for multiple platforms is no excuse to deliver a sub-par game for some of them. There’s a benefit in developing for all platforms, there’s a base concept of a game, but that’s no excuse whatsoever to not give each platform a special treatment.

If this doesn’t happen, like it did with Brink then some versions, like the pc versions are nothing but blatant attempts to cash in along the side. SD can parade around with good sales records, but they’ve wasted a lot of good will with the customer. Splash Damage has proven that it is prepared to sell out on their PC popularity and Bethesda has proven that it can release low quality games as well.

They’ve both made withdrawals on their reputation, all for the price of a tiny bit more attention to certain platforms.

(zenstar) #503

Mostly agree. Cross platform is where the money is and it’d be ridiculous for developers not to consider all the platforms that they will be releasing on when doing design and code.

The problem is most of the code won’t be seperate though. Perhaps things like how to play sound and how to initialise graphics might be slightly different but the core code is going to be the same. The Xbox is basically a PC. Just for simple maintenance it’d be a nightmare to have 3 different code bases for 3 platforms.

Zeno Clash has a problem where they developed it on PC and released it. Then they ported it to Xbox (something about engine changes and whatnot) and added some features. Now the PC crowd want those cool features but the code bases are so seperated that they can’t actually add them to the PC version without some major work (and they’re a small company).

This is the future as long as PC gaming and console gaming are popular. The big games will be multi platform and each side will have to sacrifice something to accomodate the other platform. The trick is making the impact of those compromises as small as possible and being able to tweak each environment seperately and easily without the developers jumping out windows whenever a bug is found.

(tokamak) #504

Platforms will only have to compromise if the customers accept those compromises.

(SockDog) #505

I’m not saying it’s the right choice, I’m saying it’s a fact, and one people are quick to forget once someone like Dice say they’re developing primarily on the PC. Unless there is a total separation of design for each platform (and as such a separate development budget) then there is always going to be conflict in the workflow regardless of what your “lead platform” is.

ETQW is a beautiful example of this as SD primarily pounded out a PC exclusive version while others worked on the console versions. The result was games that were similar but played differently depending on the platform. Although it seems in this case the console versions suffered by inheriting more PC attributes than they would have liked.

At it’s core though any developer/publisher who honestly wants to support PC and Consoles needs to recognise that they are different platforms.

[QUOTE=zenstar;359917]The problem is most of the code won’t be seperate though.

This is the future as long as PC gaming and console gaming are popular. The big games will be multi platform and each side will have to sacrifice something to accomodate the other platform. The trick is making the impact of those compromises as small as possible and being able to tweak each environment seperately and easily without the developers jumping out windows whenever a bug is found.[/QUOTE]

But this is the key. While you could argue development is a series of compromises should it really be based on limitations set by another platform? Health Regen, is that something that improved gameplay? Depth? Strategy? Difficulty? or was it a compromise to remove frustrations of controller players being hit more as they located a target? As a PC gamer why does the latter reason matter to me, especially in light of how it “dumbs down” the game.

I guess my point is that where if there isn’t a good compromise a sloppy mush shouldn’t be the fallback option. As Tok put it, to do this only damages your customer’s faith in your ability to adequately develop for that platform. I feel bad that SD doesn’t have the resources to do what it envisions but to be a little brutal they’re hardly ignorant of the differences of each platform.

(tokamak) #506

You can reduce a game to it’s core principles, the engine, the concept, the artwork, the models these seem the most expensive parts of the game anyway. From there on you can develop for different platforms according to their own need.

It’s all about where you start branching off. Brink clearly branched off very late in the process and that’s why the PC got saddled with console features. It indicates a lack of respect for the community and this penny pushing lead to a vastly inferior game.

Multi-platform developing is an opportunity to save on the foundations of the game, not an excuse to neglect on tailoring each version.

(SockDog) #507

[QUOTE=tokamak;359975]You can reduce a game to it’s core principles, the engine, the concept, the artwork, the models these seem the most expensive parts of the game anyway. From there on you can develop for different platforms according to their own need.
…
Multi-platform developing is an opportunity to save on the foundations of the game, not an excuse to neglect on tailoring each version.[/QUOTE]

Exactly my points but why do so many developers ignore it? At least on FPS where differences are night and day. Is it a fact that studios are media heavy with few actual coders to manage multiple code bases? Purely money? I can’t believe it’s a matter of complication, we put people on the moon, surely we can run two teams.

And regardless of the reason even more shocking is the fact that developers and publishers seem oblivious (or happily ignorant) to it. Like it’s a problem with the customer base that they won’t accept a compromise here, a corner cut there, we should be happy with what we get. Talk about turning the business and customer relationship on it’s head.

Again back to Brink. This has pretty much sunk the game on the PC and all the patching and poking in the world isn’t going to make this the breakthrough title it should have been. The best chef in the world doesn’t turn out a half cooked dish with substitute ingredients. They also don’t make all the dishes Vegan friendly because there is one vegan in the restaurant.

Yes I need to go eat dinner. :stroggbanana:

(zenstar) #508

[QUOTE=SockDog;360102]Exactly my points but why do so many developers ignore it? At least on FPS where differences are night and day. Is it a fact that studios are media heavy with few actual coders to manage multiple code bases? Purely money? I can’t believe it’s a matter of complication, we put people on the moon, surely we can run two teams.
[/QUOTE]
Developers are expensive. Maybe not hourly rate, but you need them for a long time and their cost adds up. It’s not cheap to employ a developer for the 2 years it takes to create a game. If SD were a bigger studio they may have been able to assign some (more?) people to look after console specific code, but make no bones about it: developers are not free either.

(SockDog) #509

And neither are games. :slight_smile:

In seriousness, I understand the economics of it but am stunned SD (for example) felt that the PC version of Brink would be successful given all the sacrifices and corners cut. How much cash was flushed because the game wasn’t sustainable? Why put in all the effort now after a majority of the userbase has a nasty taste in its mouth?

(Humate) #510

When you tout yourself as a developer of a ‘triple a title’ to the media, any excuse that claims there werent enough resources only indicates to the contrary. Unless ofcourse all those millions of dollars went into marketing, and not the actual development of the game :wink:

(Ashog) #511

Rahdo, could you specify as good as you can, regarding the legal/secrecy stuff that limits your word, what in fact this huge cost is comprised of? I am far from this business and I am curious what causes such costs in general. Let’s say you have an extra year to make a revamp and some amount of money. You have infrastructure, hardware and people already. Let’s say you hire additional 5 people to help coding UI and other stuff. Wouldn’t be the costs coming only from the salaries, taxes, other benefits and offices renting costs? Does it really go as high as 2.5 mil? Educate me please :slight_smile:

(SockDog) #512

+1 this. Maybe not even in this thread but would love to see it in a blog or something. And no I don’t want to wait until you release the book. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #513

Not an excuse. Never an excuse, you either make a game that’s worthwhile or you don’t make a game at all. Again, multi-platform developing is a nice way to cut costs but right now it’s being used as an excuse to release a sub-par product, how ridiculous is that?

Rahdo asked if we think SD should continue with fixing it and frankly I think it’s best they just let it slide. Partly because you’re only going to please a handful of gamers, the ones that didn’t give up, and partly because SD already demonstrated an unwillingness to give PC gamers anything different than the console ruleset. Clumsy random battles is the philosophy and that’s what you’re going to get, never mind the history of PC gaming pointing towards the opposite.

I’m also not expecting anything from ATI anymore. Same sentiment, why should they ever bother with dying player base?

(BiigDaddyDellta) #514

I agree PC should be allowed more options, simply because the PC is more capable. If guys like me in particular choose to play xbox, and I do, then we miss out on mods and level creation beyond a given level editor (for now anyways). but that doesn’t mean we need to be left behind either, the content that is advertised and supposed to be out by now should indeed be given when intended and/or we shouldn’t be left in the ****ing dark and our only hints being interviewers whom get info before the forums or tihngs randomly popping up on the stats site with no notice.

(Crytiqal) #515

[QUOTE=tokamak;360207]
Rahdo asked if we think SD should continue with fixing it and frankly I think it’s best they just let it slide.[/QUOTE]

I actually thought the same thing…
Do whatever you want with the console versions tho, maybe they are interested, but I’d say the overal sentiment of the PC crowd, is that they don’t care about the game anymore.

(coolstory) #516

[QUOTE=Crytiqal;360333]I actually thought the same thing…
Do whatever you want with the console versions tho, maybe they are interested, but I’d say the overal sentiment of the PC crowd, is that they don’t care about the game anymore.[/QUOTE]

No, I want them to support the PC version cause I like brink even though it has many problems…if you dont like it go away?

(kilL_888) #517

i like brink, too, even though it has many flaws and enrages me sometimes when i play instead of filling me with joy.

but looking at the numbers, only a few hundred people are left playing on the pc.

im glad brink made profit so splash damage can stay in business. so, from a number perspective i must say, take what you learned and move on. looking at the numbers, dlc’s wont be profitable enough to further support the development for brink.

my “heart” though says, keep improving brink. but business is no heart decision. its about keeping in business, paying the rent and stuff.

so, my advice… :wink: take wolf:et, put some better graphics in while maintain good performance both fps and network wise, add parkour and we be happy. oh, and no ww2. we dont like that anymore.

(tokamak) #518

W:ETLIVE would be a smash hit.

(Mustang) #519

If this is on the cards (and I hope it isn’t) then I have just one thing to add
SDK please <<< :stroggtapir:

(TheG4mer) #520

Yeah W:ET with another name would blow the gaming scene!