PDA

View Full Version : A "Must Read" for PC Gamers



IcarusXP
05-12-2005, 09:56 PM
These forums are set up to give the Development team product fead back.

It's a marketing tool.

The UBI forums generaly like to keep things positive, but this one is of particular interest because the mods have let this one run without locking it. It's very acidemic, and in my opinion...right on target.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/857101043/m/4051003023

If this link dosn't work, go to the SH3 forums and its right on top.

IcarusXP
05-12-2005, 09:56 PM
These forums are set up to give the Development team product fead back.

It's a marketing tool.

The UBI forums generaly like to keep things positive, but this one is of particular interest because the mods have let this one run without locking it. It's very acidemic, and in my opinion...right on target.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/857101043/m/4051003023

If this link dosn't work, go to the SH3 forums and its right on top.

Lucius_Esox
05-13-2005, 06:19 AM
I played the whole Squad Leader series,, learning it was MUCH harder than doing a degree,,, lol. I have to say this has been a worry of mine. Opening things up to the masses a lot of the times means everyone gets on the same level. By virtue of what most of us are on these boards "gaming" wise that would mean a distinct "dumming" down,,, bummer!

IV_JG51_Razor
05-13-2005, 07:16 AM
How refreshing to read a three page thread about such a potentially volitile subject, without seeing all the name calling, personal attacks, and immature comments. Great read!

I wonder if that generally accepted theory of "....games were so much better (bug free) way back then..." hasn't something to do with the fact that game developers had so few hardware choices to write for back then. I started gaming on a computer back in '88 with an Amiga 500, and have progressed through every itteration of Intel's CPUs since the 386. I can remember when Creative Labs came out with the Sound Blaster! What an inovation. How about the 3D video cards?!! Can you imagine what it must have been like to write the code for a game back when there were only a couple of different combinations of components to worry about?!! Think about what it must be like today. Now they have to worry about two (or more) different brands of CPUs, let alone all the different video and audio cards out there.

As for the generally well accepted rule of thumb that, "...game content was more fun back then...", I wonder if it's not more like, that was almost twenty years ago, and we were all a lot easier to entertain back then. Now we're a more sophisticated group of consumers, a bit more mature, better educated, have a little more disposable income, and a heck of a lot more choices. I sometimes find myself just wishing that, if they would only remake SWOTL with today's graphics, I could die a happy man. Well, I think that if that wish became a reality, I'd probably end up feeling like that guy in the joke about the geannie and the magic lantern.

I think the state of gaming in the world today is just fine, and as long as developers like Oleg Madox are around to contribute to our particular niche of flight simulations, life is good! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aaron_GT
05-13-2005, 01:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"....games were so much better (bug free) way back then..." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bugs are an issue with all software and the complexity of software and the lack of tools sufficient to deal with the complexity is beginning to cause a crisis. We are going to see a move to more modularity in software components (cf. service oriented architectures), hopefully the emergence of better management tools, and possibly use of higher level languages (e.g. SUN's FORTRESS).

IcarusXP
05-14-2005, 08:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"....games were so much better (bug free) way back then..." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bugs are an issue with all software and the complexity of software and the lack of tools sufficient to deal with the complexity is beginning to cause a crisis. We are going to see a move to more modularity in software components (cf. service oriented architectures), hopefully the emergence of better management tools, and possibly use of higher level languages (e.g. SUN's FORTRESS). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think if you look back at the games we used to run on the Atari 2600 and try to compare them with the game we run today it would be like comparing Sun Zu's "Art of War" to a modern War college text book. The basic pricipals are the same but the content is almost polar.

It's not so much the attention to acurate historical detail but actual humman error finding its way into published products. And the reason is simple: The games are getting way to complex for small studios to manage.

So let me summ it up this way. 20 years ago we acepted a stick figure as a cowboy but today we notice the slightest nuance in the performance of a Folkwolf 190a.

Mabey we are whinners.

NervousEnergy
05-15-2005, 08:08 AM
A large part of the key to this is improvements in middleware and the development environment. Getting top performance out of software today is still all about writing as close to the metal (well... silicon) as you can, and that's the most demanding and error-prone way to do it.

The hardware is getting strong enough that we're about to reach a stage where you can still realize extremely good performance and high graphics/physics fidelity using simpler middleware, and that should lead to shorter dev times and fewer bugs. Icarus is right... games are progressing to the point where a AAA title takes dozens (or hundreds for some Japanese RPG's) of programmers and content creators years to produce and a nearly impossible task to completely debug. Once greater levels of abstraction in the development environment are reached this should really start to come down, at least from a programming perspective.

John Carmack of Doom fame has written extensively on this. He sees a time coming (perhaps now, to a degree) where there will only be a few 'engines', or middleware environments, that most devs use, and everyone focuses on content creation. The Doom3 engine or the Unreal Warfare engine aren't quite general purpose enough to create the next Battle of Britain in, but they're probably pretty close. It would look good, but the physics likely wouldn't be detailed enough for flight modeling. RenderWare isn't good enough to make Toy Story yet without a ton of custom tweaking, either.

They're bloody close, though. Especially compared to just 5 years ago.

LEXX_Luthor
05-15-2005, 08:02 PM
Nervous:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Doom3 engine or the Unreal Warfare engine aren't quite general purpose enough to create the next Battle of Britain in, but they're probably pretty close. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Map Size. You need a dedicated flight sim engine.

Still, teh Internet Dogfight could make use of the tiny fps shooter maps. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
05-16-2005, 12:51 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

You don't have to thank any mod for that, as there is no active mod for the SH3-forums. You'll see many more threads on this forum, that are way below this standard. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif