Author Message

remote







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:15 pm mauve wrote: not just hats and stuff.



On the other hand, if new armor was to be added to the game I might actually have fun with that.

_________________



letterboxd | last.fm | steam On the other hand, if new armor was to be added to the game I might actually have fun with that._________________

Gironika







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Location: Dragon Range Joined: 05 Dec 2006Location: Dragon Range

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 6:34 pm costel wrote: Well, not really. The Co-Op trailer was introduced, that might have been the video you saw. It supposedly has nine remakes of original Syndicate missions, I'll be waiting to verify that when I pick up the game. I spent so much time cutting my teeth on the original it's outrageous. It's looking to be at least synchronized with the original's perspective on corporate personhood and a complete and total lack of concern regarding civilians. You're encouraged to actually kill civilians in the game, so go figure. I'm not too sure how that will factor in.



I want this to be the next FPS that impresses me as much as F.E.A.R did, but I don't know. I figure the single player campaign will slowly have you become a rebel against the corporations, instead of being a lapdog for plutocratic sociopaths. This divergence, will it would displease the shit out of me. But who knows, maybe it will work. Maybe it's not even present.



Asides from all that speculation, nothing concrete.

I'd hope that the game offers you an option to be a slave of a bigshot, maybe even inciting you to tip the scale in favour of one. That'd work better than a "oh no! what did I do! i have to make amends!"-plot, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.

But yeah, I'd love to see more of this, but I'll be happy if the setting of the game turns out to be at least a bit more daring than just showing a mediocre cyberpunk setting (basically a bad copy of bladerunner-atmo) and if it keeps me playing like Deus Ex:HR did.







btw, recent ac5 rating-results posted online made me bat an eyelid, and well, amazon [fakeedit] hold on, only the

_________________

I'd hope that the game offers you an option to be a slave of a bigshot, maybe even inciting you to tip the scale in favour of one. That'd work better than a "oh no! what did I do! i have to make amends!"-plot, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.But yeah, I'd love to see more of this, but I'll be happy if the setting of the game turns out to be at least a bit more daring than just showing a mediocre cyberpunk setting (basically a bad copy of bladerunner-atmo) and if it keeps me playing like Deus Ex:HR did.btw, recent ac5 rating-results posted online made me bat an eyelid, and well, amazon [fakeedit] hold on, only the german amazon-site [/fakeedit] has a shipping date for AC5 that says 2nd march 2012._________________

TXTSWORD







Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:44 pm remote wrote: mauve wrote: not just hats and stuff.



On the other hand, if new armor was to be added to the game I might actually have fun with that.



I guess the problem is I really identified with them saying they didn't want to have people paying for more game and getting access to additional armor and weapons that can be used competitively that people who don't want to pay more don't have access to. I mean I know them adding some DLC wouldn't be anything like Pay-To-Win.. but man I still wouldn't be happy with the decision. (though I would pay and I would like some more stuff. Here's praying for new weapon upgrade paths if they decide to add DLC)



Anyways, yeah I'm finding it unlikely this info is legit.

mauve







Joined: 07 Dec 2006

Joined: 07 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:45 pm



To go on a tangent... Something that comes up with the fighting game scene a lot is the divide between arcade and console. It isn't just the users, it's also how the games are made profitable. An arcade game's success(pre-nesica) is measured by how many cabinets are sold, which is usually representative of how many warm bodies it keeps active at any given time. A game that constantly has a flow of players, even if it's a smaller but more dedicated amount, will end up always having players and do really well in the arcades. Meanwhile a console game's success is based on how many copies it sells, not how much it gets played. It depends on a flow of new players, rather than a smaller, more dedicated pool, to keep their sales up. This means different ways of supporting the developer are needed, and mass appeal will always trump dedication, except in the case of getting said people to invest more into it.



It's why, even if you don't like fancy hats, if you really sink a lot of time into a game you should pick them up anyway because you really want them to make more of that game.



There's no betrayal going on here. Look at it as a reason to use your dedication to support the developer further, to say "we may not be as numerous as FPS-of-the-week buyers but we totally want more of this."



Betrayal is more like "Hey thanks for supporting us guys, we're gonna make a sequel that has nothing to do with the original but will totally be eaten up by the masses!" This is something that has happened to things I have personally liked several times in the past, which hurts, but I don't think From is one of those developers.

_________________

twit I have the opposite view here. I'm really, really glad they're willing to expand their stuff.To go on a tangent... Something that comes up with the fighting game scene a lot is the divide between arcade and console. It isn't just the users, it's also how the games are made profitable. An arcade game's success(pre-nesica) is measured by how many cabinets are sold, which is usually representative of how many warm bodies it keeps active at any given time. A game that constantly has a flow of players, even if it's a smaller but more dedicated amount, will end up always having players and do really well in the arcades. Meanwhile a console game's success is based on how many copies it sells, not how much it gets played. It depends on a flow ofplayers, rather than a smaller, more dedicated pool, to keep their sales up. This means different ways of supporting the developer are needed, and mass appeal will always trump dedication, except in the case of getting said people to invest more into it.It's why, even if you don't like fancy hats, if you really sink a lot of time into a game you should pick them up anyway because you really want them to make more of that game.There's no betrayal going on here. Look at it as a reason to use your dedication to support the developer further, to say "we may not be as numerous as FPS-of-the-week buyers but we totally want more of this."Betrayal is more like "Hey thanks for supporting us guys, we're gonna make a sequel that has nothing to do with the original but will totally be eaten up by the masses!" This is something that has happened to things I have personally liked several times in the past, which hurts, but I don't think From is one of those developers._________________

remote







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:51 pm

_________________



letterboxd | last.fm | steam Yeah, I'm not exactly concerned about a "betrayal" or anything like that � at least not in terms of feeling betrayed as a fan. If anything, I wonder if it's a betrayal of their own ideals, but if they've truly decided it's the best thing for the game because fans have actually been clamoring for more (of which I've heard or seen none, but whatever), then by all means, more power to them. I still have my doubts just because of seemingly contradicting information, but if they actually are doing this I'm 100% confident they'll be classy about it._________________

TXTSWORD







Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:19 pm Well, I DO like fancy hats.



I agree that whatever they do, I'm sure they won't be scumbags or anything it's not like they're trying to rip anyone off - and fuck I think From deserves my money. I really do.



I'm not entirely opposed to it, and I'd definitely buy it as a sort of "guilty pleasure". I would just feel a little bit upset about the fact they specifically said they wouldn't be doing DLC and gave a very good reason as to why. If they went back on that it would be a bit disappointing. But a disappointment that comes with awesome shit - like more Dark Souls shit.

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:19 pm mauve wrote: It's why, even if you don't like fancy hats, if you really sink a lot of time into a game you should pick them up anyway because you really want them to make more of that game.



this is really dumb

geinou







Joined: 07 Apr 2010

Joined: 07 Apr 2010

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:25 pm Capcom released a demo of Asura's Wrath on the japanese PSN and 360 store today. Since the demo also features english language, it should get a release on the US store on the next or one of the next updates as well.



Anyways. Well, I only watched one video of the game, which was the first trailer they showed after they officially announced the game at TGS two years ago (I think). The demo only features two QTE-heavy boss fights (the second one is less QTE-heavy than the first one, though) and certainly feels like a playable anime. They even included those standing pictures with the logo before and after a commercial break, which I think is funny. They even name the levels after episodes (the demo features Episode 5 and 11). The game is crazy and over the top, which is a good thing in my eyes. I really hope that there a regular levels with regular fights though. You know, like fighting your typical enemy-fodder and not just boss fights. Even if it is QTE-heavy, it sure is crazy and over the top, so I'm interested.

mauve







Joined: 07 Dec 2006

Joined: 07 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:30 pm thestage wrote: mauve wrote: It's why, even if you don't like fancy hats, if you really sink a lot of time into a game you should pick them up anyway because you really want them to make more of that game.



this is really dumb

Yeah, it's dumb.



But you know what? In the realm of single-purchase games, developers don't have many ways of appeasing dedicated players over the masses and will end up trying to make things more accessible if they want to continue making things.



If this is can be considered a way of fighting that, so be it. Economics are dominant regardless of any other considerations.

_________________

twit Yeah, it's dumb.But you know what? In the realm of single-purchase games, developers don't have many ways of appeasing dedicated players over the masses and will end up trying to make things more accessible if they want to continue making things.If this is can be considered a way of fighting that, so be it. Economics are dominant regardless of any other considerations._________________

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:35 pm your purchase means nothing one way or another. there is no "message" you could possible send on any level. and if there was one, "buying hats" would send the message "I like buying hats; continue making hats"



gamers have a really weird relationship with developers. I mean, dark souls was probably the most successful japanese developed game of the year not named mario kart. NAMCO BANDAI (they call these shots) is not a fragile puppy for you to protect.



you "appease dedicated players" by making good games for them to play.

remote







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:43 pm



Otherwise, go argue about hats somewhere else, please. It's not exactly a relevant subject in this case.

_________________



letterboxd | last.fm | steam I don't think anybody here even gives a shit about Namco Bandai's involvement in this � buying DLC for Dark Souls would put a little money in From Software's pockets, though, and then maybe they'd make another good game for their dedicated fans to play. Is that horribly naive? I mean, consider how many of the more creative studios have been shut down, game cancellations, etc. It seems fair to assume that things like this are fairly delicate and it might not hurt to support the developers you like, more or less regardless of their publishers. (Though it's also fair to say that From Software are well-established enough that they're not going anywhere at this point, plus I'll bet they're doing better than ever, financially.) I don't see them ever doing something as rinky-dink as selling hats for their games, so this argument is getting a little mucked up... but if they were to deliver a solid DLC package that actually expanded upon what is already possibly my favorite videogame ever in a meaningful way, wouldn't that be worthy of support without any of the sort of cynicism you display, nedge?Otherwise, go argue about hats somewhere else, please. It's not exactly a relevant subject in this case._________________

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:51 pm I don't have anything at all against From making DLC for this game, and I'm buying it if it isn't inexplicably stupid and/or terrible (in fact, I'd even rather they do DLC and lengthy support for this game than make a sequel, because I think they should move on to something else next). That's not the point. It's the defeatist mindset behind the "oh, well I have to buy it because X" that is stupid.

TXTSWORD







Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Joined: 25 Aug 2010

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:04 pm NO THEY SHOULDN'T MOVE ON TO SOMETHING ELSE NEXT OMG

remote







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:51 pm



As much as I would fucking love to see them do another Souls game, I'd also love to see them do something entirely new again.



That is... as long as it isn't anything like Enchanted Arms. What the hell was that?



I would really love to see what they might do with a new King's Field, though I suspect the Souls games have taken their place as the "other" flagship From series alongside Armored Core.



Some sort of Shadow Tower equivalent to departures from the Souls series could also be exciting.

_________________



letterboxd | last.fm | steam Does moving on to something else exclude Armored Core V?As much as I would fucking love to see them do another Souls game, I'd also love to see them do something entirely new again.That is... as long as it isn't anything like Enchanted Arms. What the hell was that?I would really love to see what they might do with a new King's Field, though I suspect the Souls games have taken their place as the "other" flagship From series alongside Armored Core.Some sort of Shadow Tower equivalent to departures from the Souls series could also be exciting._________________

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:27 am remote wrote: Does moving on to something else exclude Armored Core V?



yes. I mean the souls/king's field team.

remote







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:29 am

_________________



letterboxd | last.fm | steam I've wondered about whether there's any crossover between these teams, and if the KF/DS team had anything to do with other games like 3D Dot Game Heroes..._________________

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:31 am I would imagine that From is small enough for fairly significant cross over.

Dark Age Iron Savior







Joined: 06 Dec 2006

Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country king of findersJoined: 06 Dec 2006Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:39 am From didn't developed 3D Dot Game Heroes. They just published it in Japan.



I think From should buy the rest of the Tenchu distribution rights from Activision (for the old games). And then give all their Tenchu rights to Acquire for free. I mean, seriously.

Dark Age Iron Savior







Joined: 06 Dec 2006

Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country king of findersJoined: 06 Dec 2006Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:46 am RIGHTEOUS (technically unconfirmed I guess) X-COM DETAILS STOLEN FROM NEOGAF WHO STOLE THEM FROM GAME INFORMER:



Code: I've got my digital copy. But I don't think there's any way to directly copy and quote the text.



There's apparently a 'Heavy Armed Mobile Cover Platform that serves as a powerful rock on which to anchor any tactical advantage' and you can directly customize the heavy troops armor and weapons individually.



{edit: quoted excerpt below}



What I've read is



�randomly generated missions, terrain. Developer says you'll never play the exact same mission twice outside of a few story missions which feature in-game cinematics

�fog of war is confirmed. area starts off with darkness everywhere, and the average soldier can't see shit

�enemy spawns are randomized

�mobile platform called SHIV; customizable for new chasis

�Sectoids and Mutons confirmed

�The base's screenshot is accurate. It is now a side shot instead of top down. You can also upgrade your base, like the satellite, with alien technology

�There was an example in one scenario where Japan had the laser rifle already developed before the invasion because they felt threatened, so that seems random.

�You have 16 countries in the funding council you need to keep happy. Some provide more money, but others, like Africa, provide more raw resources

�The sniper units have a grappling hook ability to get on top of buildings

�Gunners have a suppressing fire

�you can equip your xcom guys with all kinds of different guns. customization looks like a big deal

�Apparently there's some sort of cinematic view when your guys get killed. They didn't cite VATS or anything, so I doubt it's too in depth

�Unexperienced agents can panic, freak out, etc if something bad happens

�Firaxis designer states that the PC version will have an enhanced interface. He cites Dragon Age: Origins on PC and console as a big inspiration



This is like the first half of the article



Quote: Originally Posted by Gameinformer:

Quote: THE VAST MAJORITY OF XCOM'S CONTENT COMES IN THE FORM OF PROCEDURUALLY GENERATED MISSIONS AND ENCOUNTERS, MEANING THAT EVERY PLAYTHROUGH UNFOLDS DIFFERENTLY

Though they mention there's some story based missions that are not randomly generated and involve in-game cinematics of some kind



Code: �Destructible environments

�In the scenario they showed, one member died. Because of this the other squadmates didn't get an experience bonus

�Without the bonus, the sniper leveled up still. He was able to choose from two abilities. Either Squad Sight(which means he can shoot anything a squadmate can see) and Snap Shot(which lets him shoot after moving. Something snipers aren't normally allowed to do)

�You can't recruit specific classes. You can only recruit rookies and then level them up to become specific classes

�The guys in suits in the screenshots are 'Thin Man' aliens. They're able to leap long distances

�Challenge is stressed a lot

�same quick save/load system though they are considering an iron man type mode where you can't load previous saves

�Firaxis states that they're not rebooting it, they're re imagining it. Using the same core gameplay with modern technology, weapons, audiovisuals, etc.



That's the stuff I saw that was worth noting



holy shit maximum froth





Code: �The sniper units have a grappling hook ability to get on top of buildings



maximummmmmmmmm

Toptube

Anti-cabbage Party Candidate





Joined: 23 Apr 2007



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:34 am remote wrote: boojiboy7 wrote: Teflon wrote: Also playable framerates.



Clearly you have too much faith in PC ports.



Besides, the framerate never drops to unplayable as it is. I can only really speak for the PS3 version, of course.



Dark Souls PS3 has on a couple of times, become a brisk slideshow for 2 seconds or so, while I've been playing. Reportedly, this behavior happens in the 360 version, too. Demon's Souls had framerate issues as well. But I feel like Dark Souls' lows are lower than Demon's Souls. Generally speaking though, it hasn't been enough to really affect my gameplay.



thestage wrote: yeah, that's...awful. I mean how big is the japanese market now? 5% of the US market?



Japan basically matched America's Dark Souls PS3 sales : )

Talbain







Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:09 am

_________________

Regardless, a PC port of Dark Souls would be pretty rockin' awesome. You guys should sign the petition . Since the game's using the Havok Engine, I doubt it would be difficult to port._________________

DJ







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Shaman AnalystJoined: 05 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:20 am



Dark Souls uses the



Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4.

_________________



Havok's not an engine per se, it's middleware that handles physics only. Kinda like Speedtree, which just does trees.Dark Souls uses the PhyreEngine , which still handles PC games though.Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4._________________

Toptube

Anti-cabbage Party Candidate





Joined: 23 Apr 2007



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:34 am I think Dark Souls would do really well on PC.



PC gamers are constantly bitching about how console games are dumbed down, too easy, require no skill.



They would still find something to bitch about though, like how they wouldn't be able to quick save after every 20 seconds of progress. >_>

Toptube

Anti-cabbage Party Candidate





Joined: 23 Apr 2007



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:39 am DJ wrote: Havok's not an engine per se, it's middleware that handles physics only. Kinda like Speedtree, which just does trees.



Dark Souls uses the PhyreEngine, which still handles PC games though.



Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4.



shatter

flower

flow

Journey

Colin Mcrae: Dirt

Last Rebellion

Race Driver: Grid

and some other japanese stuff that might be recognizeable



that's quite an engine!

BotageL







Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Location: *fidget* pretty anime princessJoined: 04 Dec 2006Location: *fidget*

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:41 am



;_;

_________________



http://www.mdgeist.com/ Zettai Zetsumei Toshi 4: Summer Memories;_;_________________

Swimmy







Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:58 am DJ wrote: Havok's not an engine per se, it's middleware that handles physics only. Kinda like Speedtree, which just does trees.



Dark Souls uses the PhyreEngine, which still handles PC games though.



Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4.

Well, my mind is fucked. I'm sure the programmers on this board are saying "yeah, whatever."

_________________

Well, my mind is fucked. I'm sure the programmers on this board are saying "yeah, whatever."_________________

DJ







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Shaman AnalystJoined: 05 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:01 am Swimmy wrote: DJ wrote: Havok's not an engine per se, it's middleware that handles physics only. Kinda like Speedtree, which just does trees.



Dark Souls uses the PhyreEngine, which still handles PC games though.



Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4.

Well, my mind is fucked. I'm sure the programmers on this board are saying "yeah, whatever."



Same engine was used in Splatterhouse as in Fallout: New Vegas, too (Gamebryo Engine).



Also same engine: Mortal Kombat 2010, Lost Odyssey, and Borderlands (Unreal Engine).



Engines are pretty versatile things, it's always weird to see the different ways they can be applied.

_________________



Same engine was used in Splatterhouse as in Fallout: New Vegas, too (Gamebryo Engine).Also same engine: Mortal Kombat 2010, Lost Odyssey, and Borderlands (Unreal Engine).Engines are pretty versatile things, it's always weird to see the different ways they can be applied._________________

Talbain







Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:10 am

_________________

Which is why it strikes me as strange that so many of these games never see the PC platform. Somehow the development cycle (to turn these PS3/360 games into PC games) doesn't seem significant enough for the amount of money you could make by putting these games up on Steam. What's the worry exactly? And before everyone shouts piracy, that's already happening, and I doubt it would be more significant if the games were released on the PC, even if just after the fact. Most people who buy the games are going to continue to buy them, but if you don't release it for the PC, no one from that market buys it. Is it just piracy and I'm way underestimating it (or at least, the publisher's fear of it)?_________________

DJ







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Shaman AnalystJoined: 05 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 8:56 am faaaaaaar more rampant on PC than on either console, so yeah that aspect of it scares some developers off, but it's also a simple cost vs. return thing for PC games.



Simply put: It is not cheap to publish games on a PC when you're a major company. The more complex your game is, the more it winds up costing. There's a lot of "hidden" costs that aren't apparent until you're on the development end instead of the consumer end, and when companies are tallying up how much they stand to make versus how much they're going to have to spend, a PC version of a game that is doing just fine on consoles often ends up being barely worth it money wise, and certainly not worth it man-hours wise.



Note that I'm not saying any of this to be argumentative or defend the lack of PC versions of games, I'm just trying to shed light on how these decisions get made. I'm a PC gamer through and through and if I had a choice I would get every single game I own on PC only, but the fact of the matter is that's never going to happen, straight up.



So okay, my affinity for and preference of PC gaming established, I'm totally gonna play Devil's Advocate here.



Consider: You have a game you wish to publish. Let's say it's a fairly major title (important: Indie titles are a whole different ball of wax and very little of this applies to them). You're going to do Xbox 360 and PS3 and maybe PC if you have the budget. Let's look at how this breaks down:



X amount of your budget is going to the basic stuff. If you're using a license, be it for an engine or an IP or both, part of that goes to licensing fees. Then you've got to pay the developers to actually make the thing, and this is a pretty involved process. You need to submit concepts to Sony and Microsoft and get approval first off, then you've got to hire artists, writers, and several different kinds of coders -- some to build the game, some to animate, some to work on the front end, some to implement the text, some to tweak the engine to get it to do what you want to do, some to do the CGI cutscenes, people to oversee all the teams working on this stuff, etc. You need to have a producer on hand to coordinate. If it's a Japanese game, you need a translation staff both internally for communication and probably a 3rd party company to translate the game. If you're releasing in Europe, you need French, German, Italian, Spanish, and English translations at the very least.



You need to budget all of this more or less in advance. And this is just development.



Once the game is rolling and is looking good development wise, then you need to bring in marketing. You then have to work out how (or if) this is going to be marketed in Japan, Europe, and America, all of which have different requirements both language wise and culturally. Does your company maintain a web presence, twitter feed, etc? You need to coordinate with marketing on what they can say, when they can say it. You're going to need to coordinate with the developers as far as do we show this at E3, what do we show, should we make a specific demo? Gonna need some video capture for marketing purposes as well. This is an entirely different aspect of game development and this also all has to be budgeted in advance.



Let's say all this is rolling along, and you're ready for your game to start the QA process.



So we need to either hire testers, or farm it out to a 3rd party test team. More things need to be organized: How are you setting up functional testing (gameplay bugs like falling through the world, missing textures, balance tweaks, exploits, etc.)? How are you setting up compliance testing (console specific issues like naming conventions, achievement requirements, how the game is packaged, how it installs to the hard drive, which controllers it works with, etc.)? Note that these are entirely different for each console , so we have to coordinate with the developers to implement different things for each console. If you have the phrase "Xbox Live" showing up in the PS3 version of the game, Sony will reject it on the spot for obvious reasons and it'll need to be fixed.



On top of that, the game needs to be built separately for each console. The 360 and the PS3 are both about equally as powerful, but they do things differently. It's possible to get parity between the two but it's not as easy as pressing a button and watching it compile. Bugs inevitably crop up, so now in addition to continuing development we're fixing bugs on two separate builds of the game simultaneously, and fixing a bug in one might break something in the other, or a tired coder might slip the terminology for one build into the other accidentally as mistakes happen. This can delay everything and requires more work.



Changes will inevitably have to be made. Maybe one of your artists in Japan needed a logo or a graphic for a troll or whatever and hit up Google for some reference images, and it turns out they copied it a little too closely. That's a legal issue and will have to be changed. More delays. Maybe a level or an area isn't working out very well, and the decision has to be made to delay the game to fix it, cut it and release it later as DLC, or just remove it entirely. Bear in mind we're still working with marketing to get this thing out on time and we may even have a manufacturing date because these discs have to get pressed at some point and that has to get booked in advance, so now we're under pressure to get this thing out when it's supposed to come out or we're incurring more cost.





I could go on like this for another 10 paragraphs; you get the idea.



All this for two consoles. We're not even counting PC.



If we add PC, here's what else we need:



Added testers for the PC version.

Probably have to hire out a 3rd party to work on the PC interface, as it's radically different than either console interface.

Have to make sure no console-specific stuff winds up in the PC version, unless it's supposed to (i.e. an Xbox controller interface).

Additional submission to Steam and/or additional manufacturing because some people still want disks.

Computers for all the testers of varying kinds. Game needs to be tested on ATi and nVidia cards and multiple chipsets/control schemes/languages.

How are we going to do patches? MS and Sony have built-in pipelines for that; Steam does too but that's an added one and those have to be made separately.

Are we using DRM? Which? In-house or 3rd party? More costs, also probably some bad press.

Yet another build of the game to provide, so now it's 3 versions each time we make a build for test (6 if you're doing debug and non-debug).

Team has to fix all bugs that crop up in the PC version in addition to the other two consoles.

Marketing needs to figure out the PC market as well.

Expect lots of technical support needed as PCs are not anywhere near as plug-and-play as consoles. This is a lot more time/energy/money to get taken care of and inflates the budget and time commitment accordingly.

Marketing has to get involved for sending out copies for review, etc.

Your customer service dept. needs to now be prepped for a stream of PC specific issues in addition to the other two.

Are you releasing simultaneously with the console versions? Better make sure there's parity between all three versions, so that's an increased juggling act right there. Does baking something for the consoles nerf the PC version? Expect to hear about it.

Are you farming out to 3rd party? Better keep them in the loop or they might break/change something that can't be broken/changed, so more management and communication is needed.

Multiply all this by each territory it's releasing on.

Is it online? Are we maintaining servers? Separate servers for all three plus support plus CS plus patching. So multiply again.





So then your game finally comes out, on all three. The breakdown goes like this:



50% of your sales are for the Xbox 360.

35% of your sales are for the PS3.

15% are for PC, which you're selling $10 cheaper. And that's a generous estimate.



Piracy works as follows:

5% of the copies are pirated on the 360, and live functionality doesn't work.

1% are for the PS3, and no online.

33% are pirated on the PC, and someone cracks your DRM in a day and makes unofficial servers that work perfectly. Maybe each pirated copy isn't a lost sale, but you're inundated with hate from the internet for installing DRM in the first place plus everyone bitches about how shitty the PC version is because it wasn't fine-tuned to their $2,000 triple-graphics-card system and it won't run on 6 monitors or support 8.3 channel sound. Trolls will be calling your poor CS faggots over the phone and via e-mail for weeks on end because people are trying to run it on their netbooks with a Saturn pad and it supports neither.



Turns out, if you never made the PC version, you'd be saving everyone involved months of headache, the game would've come out sooner and better-tuned to their respective consoles because there was more time and money to put towards those. Worse, turns out you'd actually make more money because the cost of putting out the PC version wound up being a lot more than you made off of selling it -- all those extra testers and that extra hardware and the extra CS/Translation/3rd Party development costs adds up both in terms of money and in terms of exhaustion from having to coordinate yet another version for global release, and we haven't even gotten into any of the post-release stuff like patches or DLC. The PC fans you're attempting to appease are also far and away the most vocal and picky of the bunch, and are more than happy to tell you how shitty your version of the game is and how dare you consolify it and they're pirating it to teach you a lesson.





This is why when developers read comments on the internet to the effect of "Why is there no PC version? You just press a button and upload that shit on Steam, you'd make so much money for like no extra cost" they will give you a blank 1000-yard stare, at best.



Now, obviously I'm generalizing like a motherfucker here. Some companies have the PC thing built into the pipeline from the get-go or have 3rd party they trust implicitly, and some (Valve, Blizzard) start on the PC and work from there, which is honestly the best way to do it but very very few companies have the setup to work like that without gutting their entire development process and starting over. This is why PC versions that are just ports of the console versions with maybe some graphics options in there are so common. Some developers don't even see the value in that because the cost is so high. Sure, you're earning goodwill (if you do it right, which isn't easy: See above) but the bottom line is a big question mark. Is this going to earn you money, or cost it? A lot of the time, the needle falls on the latter half of that particular success meter, and when consoles are so much easier to target (the hardware never changes!), market for (built in fanbase!), and support (all Xboxes and PS3s work the same way) and they make the lion's share of the money, it's easy to see how this all shakes out.



I'd love it if deluxe PC versions were the norm, but if this post gets anything across I hope it's that making big-budget games is really really really fucking complicated and the developers are only human.



And yet we still get a good amount of them! And I am eternally grateful for that, even if there's that nagging part of me that feels entitled to better. I'm really happy when I get it, but I try to be understanding when I don't. Call it apologetics if you like, but unfortunately it simply is what it is.



At some point I'll write up why I think, despite all this, it's still a good idea to make PC versions and there's definitely money to be made if companies would do it right, because that's something I honestly believe but anyway, there's my in-character explanation on why it is that the PC often gets the shaft.







tl;dr summary for people who understandably didn't read any of that : Making PC versions is a lot harder and more expensive than it seems which is why it doesn't happen as much.

_________________



Well, Piracy ismore rampant on PC than on either console, so yeah that aspect of it scares some developers off, but it's also a simple cost vs. return thing for PC games.Simply put: It is not cheap to publish games on a PC when you're a major company. The more complex your game is, the more it winds up costing. There's a lot of "hidden" costs that aren't apparent until you're on the development end instead of the consumer end, and when companies are tallying up how much they stand to make versus how much they're going to have to spend, a PC version of a game that is doing just fine on consoles often ends up being barely worth it money wise, and certainly not worth it man-hours wise.Note that I'm not saying any of this to be argumentative or defend the lack of PC versions of games, I'm just trying to shed light on how these decisions get made. I'm a PC gamer through and through and if I had a choice I would get every single game I own on PC only, but the fact of the matter is that's never going to happen, straight up.So okay, my affinity for and preference of PC gaming established, I'm totally gonna play Devil's Advocate here.Consider: You have a game you wish to publish. Let's say it's a fairly major title (important:and very little of this applies to them). You're going to do Xbox 360 and PS3 and maybe PC if you have the budget. Let's look at how this breaks down:amount of your budget is going to the basic stuff. If you're using a license, be it for an engine or an IP or both, part of that goes to licensing fees. Then you've got to pay the developers to actually make the thing, and this is a pretty involved process. You need to submit concepts to Sony and Microsoft and get approval first off, then you've got to hire artists, writers, and several different kinds of coders -- some to build the game, some to animate, some to work on the front end, some to implement the text, some to tweak the engine to get it to do what you want to do, some to do the CGI cutscenes, people to oversee all the teams working on this stuff, etc. You need to have a producer on hand to coordinate. If it's a Japanese game, you need a translation staff both internally for communication and probably a 3rd party company to translate the game. If you're releasing in Europe, you need French, German, Italian, Spanish, and English translations at the very least.You need to budgetof this more or less in advance. And this is just development.Once the game is rolling and is looking good development wise, then you need to bring in marketing. You then have to work out how (or if) this is going to be marketed in Japan, Europe, and America, all of which have different requirements both language wise and culturally. Does your company maintain a web presence, twitter feed, etc? You need to coordinate with marketing on what they can say, when they can say it. You're going to need to coordinate with the developers as far as do we show this at E3, what do we show, should we make a specific demo? Gonna need some video capture for marketing purposes as well. This is an entirely different aspect of game development and this also all has to be budgeted in advance.Let's say all this is rolling along, and you're ready for your game to start the QA process.So we need to either hire testers, or farm it out to a 3rd party test team. More things need to be organized: How are you setting up functional testing (gameplay bugs like falling through the world, missing textures, balance tweaks, exploits, etc.)? How are you setting up compliance testing (console specific issues like naming conventions, achievement requirements, how the game is packaged, how it installs to the hard drive, which controllers it works with, etc.)? Note that these are, so we have to coordinate with the developers to implement different things for each console. If you have the phrase "Xbox Live" showing up in the PS3 version of the game, Sony will reject it on the spot for obvious reasons and it'll need to be fixed.On top of that, the game needs to be built separately for each console. The 360 and the PS3 are both about equally as powerful, but they do things differently. It's possible to get parity between the two but it's not as easy as pressing a button and watching it compile. Bugs inevitably crop up, so now in addition to continuing development we're fixing bugs on two separate builds of the game simultaneously, and fixing a bug in one might break something in the other, or a tired coder might slip the terminology for one build into the other accidentally as mistakes happen. This can delay everything and requires more work.Changes will inevitably have to be made. Maybe one of your artists in Japan needed a logo or a graphic for a troll or whatever and hit up Google for some reference images, and it turns out they copied it a little too closely. That's a legal issue and will have to be changed. More delays. Maybe a level or an area isn't working out very well, and the decision has to be made to delay the game to fix it, cut it and release it later as DLC, or just remove it entirely. Bear in mind we're still working with marketing to get this thing out on time and we may even have a manufacturing date because these discs have to get pressed at some point and that has to get booked in advance, so now we're under pressure to get this thing out when it's supposed to come out or we're incurring more cost.I could go on like this for another 10 paragraphs; you get the idea.All this forconsoles. We're not even counting PC.If we add PC, here's what else we need:Added testers for the PC version.Probably have to hire out a 3rd party to work on the PC interface, as it's radically different than either console interface.Have to make sure no console-specific stuff winds up in the PC version, unless it's supposed to (i.e. an Xbox controller interface).Additional submission to Steam and/or additional manufacturing because some people still want disks.Computers for all the testers of varying kinds. Game needs to be tested on ATi and nVidia cards and multiple chipsets/control schemes/languages.How are we going to do patches? MS and Sony have built-in pipelines for that; Steam does too but that's an added one and those have to be made separately.Are we using DRM? Which? In-house or 3rd party? More costs, also probably some bad press.Yet another build of the game to provide, so now it's 3 versions each time we make a build for test (6 if you're doing debug and non-debug).Team has to fix all bugs that crop up in the PC version in addition to the other two consoles.Marketing needs to figure out the PC market as well.Expectof technical support needed as PCs are not anywhere near as plug-and-play as consoles. This is a lot more time/energy/money to get taken care of and inflates the budget and time commitment accordingly.Marketing has to get involved for sending out copies for review, etc.Your customer service dept. needs to now be prepped for a stream of PC specific issues in addition to the other two.Are you releasing simultaneously with the console versions? Better make sure there's parity between all three versions, so that's an increased juggling act right there. Does baking something for the consoles nerf the PC version? Expect to hear about it.Are you farming out to 3rd party? Better keep them in the loop or they might break/change something that can't be broken/changed, so more management and communication is needed.Multiply all this by each territory it's releasing on.Is it online? Are we maintaining servers? Separate servers for all three plus support plus CS plus patching. So multiply again.So then your game finally comes out, on all three. The breakdown goes like this:50% of your sales are for the Xbox 360.35% of your sales are for the PS3.15% are for PC, which you're selling $10 cheaper. And that's a generous estimate.Piracy works as follows:5% of the copies are pirated on the 360, and live functionality doesn't work.1% are for the PS3, and no online.33% are pirated on the PC, and someone cracks your DRM in a day and makes unofficial servers that work perfectly. Maybe each pirated copy isn't a lost sale, but you're inundated with hate from the internet for installing DRM in the first place plus everyone bitches about how shitty the PC version is because it wasn't fine-tuned to their $2,000 triple-graphics-card system and it won't run on 6 monitors or support 8.3 channel sound. Trolls will be calling your poor CS faggots over the phone and via e-mail for weeks on end because people are trying to run it on their netbooks with a Saturn pad and it supports neither.Turns out, if you never made the PC version, you'd be saving everyone involved months of headache, the game would've come out sooner and better-tuned to their respective consoles because there was more time and money to put towards those. Worse, turns out you'd actually makemoney because the cost of putting out the PC version wound up being a lot more than you made off of selling it -- all those extra testers and that extra hardware and the extra CS/Translation/3rd Party development costs adds up both in terms of money and in terms of exhaustion from having to coordinate yet another version for global release, and we haven't even gotten into any of the post-release stuff like patches or DLC. The PC fans you're attempting to appease are also far and away the most vocal and picky of the bunch, and are more than happy to tell you how shitty your version of the game is and how dare you consolify it and they're pirating it to teach you a lesson.This is why when developers read comments on the internet to the effect of "Why is there no PC version? You just press a button and upload that shit on Steam, you'd make so much money for like no extra cost" they will give you a blank 1000-yard stare, at best.Now, obviously I'm generalizing like a motherfucker here. Some companies have the PC thing built into the pipeline from the get-go or have 3rd party they trust implicitly, and some (Valve, Blizzard) start on the PC and work from there, which is honestly the best way to do it but very very few companies have the setup to work like that without gutting their entire development process and starting over. This is why PC versions that are just ports of the console versions with maybe some graphics options in there are so common. Some developers don't even see the value in that because the cost is so high. Sure, you're earning goodwill (if you do it right, which isn't easy: See above) but the bottom line is a big question mark. Is this going to earn you money, or cost it? A lot of the time, the needle falls on the latter half of that particular success meter, and when consoles are so much easier to target (the hardware never changes!), market for (built in fanbase!), and support (all Xboxes and PS3s work the same way) and they make the lion's share of the money, it's easy to see how this all shakes out.I'd love it if deluxe PC versions were the norm, but if this post gets anything across I hope it's that making big-budget games isfucking complicated and the developers are only human.And yet we still get a good amount of them! And I am eternally grateful for that, even if there's that nagging part of me that feels entitled to better. I'm really happy when I get it, but I try to be understanding when I don't. Call it apologetics if you like, but unfortunately it simply is what it is.At some point I'll write up why I think, despite all this, it's still a good idea to make PC versions and there's definitely money to be made if companies would do it right, because that's something I honestly believe but anyway, there's my in-character explanation on why it is that the PC often gets the shaft.: Making PC versions is a lot harder and more expensive than it seems which is why it doesn't happen as much._________________



Last edited by DJ on Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:18 am; edited 1 time in total

thestage

banned





Joined: 27 Sep 2011



Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:18 am upshot: with steam being the defacto PC platform, games have much longer active shelf lives than on consoles. next year on christmas maybe 20k people are buying your game fro $10 a year and a half after it came out. meanwhile, all your console sales were in the first two weeks. the money is nice, but the pub and "brand building" or whatever is pretty useful.

Talbain







Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Joined: 14 Jan 2007

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:42 am



Thanks for the post DJ. Was informative. I've never worked for a big publisher/developer before, so I'm not really familiar with it.

_________________

Yeah, there's a definite upside to the money on PC, as when that rolls in, it will continue to roll-in. Most console sales after the initial 6 months or so are all going to be resales, and thus money not going back to the publishers and developers. There's also brand building and publisher recognition rolled into that. The TotalBiscuit guy did a decent "pros" for selling games on PC here Thanks for the post DJ. Was informative. I've never worked for a big publisher/developer before, so I'm not really familiar with it._________________

Takashi







Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:42 am thestage wrote: upshot: with steam being the defacto PC platform, games have much longer active shelf lives than on consoles. next year on christmas maybe 20k people are buying your game fro $10 a year and a half after it came out. meanwhile, all your console sales were in the first two weeks. the money is nice, but the pub and "brand building" or whatever is pretty useful.

_________________

It's worth noting that Steam "X sales" generate mostly pennies per sale for the developers, what is fine if you have a indie or a budget game, but isn't going to save any of those million dollar AAA+ titles anytime soon. It is, in fact, a brand building exercise rather than anything else (selling the game at 80/90% discount is actually better for this than just giving it away for free)._________________

low-end.net | Whimsy (soon) | Serfdom 2.0

Teflon







Joined: 11 Jan 2007

Joined: 11 Jan 2007

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:45 am Swimmy wrote: DJ wrote: Havok's not an engine per se, it's middleware that handles physics only. Kinda like Speedtree, which just does trees.



Dark Souls uses the PhyreEngine, which still handles PC games though.



Here's a bit of a mindfuck for you: It's the same engine used to run Disgaea 4.

Well, my mind is fucked. I'm sure the programmers on this board are saying "yeah, whatever."



Whoa it's a Sony-developed engine powering a bunch of Windows and Xbox games.



Also PStriple-exclusive, SCEI-published Demon's Souls all blatantly not using it (it was in development before Phyre came around from the looks of things)

Dark Age Iron Savior







Joined: 06 Dec 2006

Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country king of findersJoined: 06 Dec 2006Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:40 pm even more sweet Game Informer X-com details to join the ones I posted above that I'm fairly sure no-one noticed!



Code: �No action points. The game uses a move-and-shoot (or move-and-move) dynamic. They don't want people piddling around counting individual action points. Some will call this a concession to consolitis; others will call it useful streamlining.



�Soldiers can still panic, but not to the point of wiping the squad. Likewise, you'll never get plasma-bombed right out of the carrier. They want to make the game more fair, and those were specifically mentioned.



�The strategic layer is extremely robust. You still need to choose which countries to send missions to, which offers of aid (in exchange for more protection) you'll accept from which countries, which alien technologies you'll research, etc. The back-and-forth between tactical and strategic play remains at the heart of the game.



�Overwatch, duck-and-cover, etc. are all still very much present, tactically.



�You can research vehicles, which take the place of a squaddie. They don't gain XP and when they are destroyed they are lost for good, but they provide serious cover and firepower. One example given is a mobile heavy weapons platform that serves as a good overwatcher for a tactical advance.



�Sectoids and Mutons are in. Cyberdiscs and Thin Men are also mentioned. Evidently psionics are also in.



�Aliens have their own special perk-like abilities as well.

Overall it looks really ****ing fantastic and I am now DAY ONE.



----



The article specifically cites a sniper spending their entire turn to take an aimed shot for Massive Damage. Perhaps it's more accurate to think of the game as having only two action points per turn, for Move-Shoot, or Move-Move, or Aim-Shoot, etc.



Gus, like I said, overwatch is in the game. In, in, in the game. You definitely can set up squaddies who haven't used all their actions in a turn, such that they can do overwatch and shoot the instant something comes into view.



---



Reloading costs an action, so it is a tactical consideration. Ducking into cover is the main positioning mechanic they mention. They also mention supppressive fire as another mechanic -- your heavy weapons guy can lay down a barrage that can paralyze pinned units (e.g. remove their actions). Grenades are in, wounding is in. Generally it doesn't sound like there are fewer tactical options, but rather that the bookkeeping is simplified.



---



(This part was by the author of the GI article)

Apologies if the article was unclear, but the deal is that sniper rifles are unusual in that they take a full turn to shoot. You can unlock a move-shoot perk for snipers at some experience level, but your basic sniper rifle takes a full turn to fire.



Ammo is abstracted. You're assumed to be carrying enough clips to reload as much as you want, but it takes a turn to do so. Suppressive fire is crazy awesome, for instance, but it burns through ammo like a mofo so you're borrowing turns down the road to kick ass now.



Body positions - AIUI you are assumed to be kneeling behind partial cover etc. They didn't go into a ton of detail here. Personally that's a level of control granularity that I'm not concerned about preserving, so long as I have other awesome **** that I can do and creative tactics to explore. Which from what I've seen will not be lacking.



---



So yeah, you only have one base. Building different bases has been removed, but you still buy satellite coverage (the new radar) and build hangars for interception in different countries. Your single base is like way more crazy awesome than any base from the original, though, and presents lots of opportunities for more decision-making in terms of digging deeper as well as what kind of expansion facilities you add on (see the screenshot of the "ant farm" that we put online Monday).





uh, well...bittersweet.



froth reluctantly dampened by streamlining :(

BotageL







Joined: 04 Dec 2006

Location: *fidget* pretty anime princessJoined: 04 Dec 2006Location: *fidget*

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:38 pm

_________________



http://www.mdgeist.com/ I mostly regret the action point change because move-shoot-move is essential to the feel of XCOM and games of similar spirit like Valkyria Chronicles._________________

Mikey







Joined: 11 Dec 2006

Location: endless backlog Joined: 11 Dec 2006Location: endless backlog

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:05 pm I suppose, but Move-Action/Double Move works pretty well for D&D

Dark Age Iron Savior







Joined: 06 Dec 2006

Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country king of findersJoined: 06 Dec 2006Location: Spacecraft, Juanelia Country

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:57 pm



http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/11/the-art-of-xcom-enemy-unknown.aspx



a lot less Amy hype:





(the quotes in this trailer are amazing) a few more X-com screens:a lot less Amy hype:

smartblue







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Ph. D in AwesomeJoined: 05 Dec 2006

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 8:50 pm



SHOCKWAVE [Circle button]: TO PUSH ENEMIES OR TO BREAK FRAGILE OBJECTS



Thanks, trailer for AMY (Video Game)!

_________________

TO LOOK AT THE MANUAL OR CONSULT HELP TEXTS, PRESS [Back button]SHOCKWAVE [Circle button]: TO PUSH ENEMIES OR TO BREAK FRAGILE OBJECTSThanks, trailer for AMY (Video Game)!_________________

Lasakon







Joined: 05 Dec 2006

Location: Oregon Trail Joined: 05 Dec 2006Location: Oregon Trail

Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:35 pm

_________________

_________________

Quick Reply Attach signature

Notify on replies

