General Discussions

 
^ Back to top
3 PagesPrevious page123Next page
 

Dust/Project Nova OOPSY

Author
LulKlz
#21 Posted: 2017.01.10 05:06
If they decide to go PS4 I'll be mad all over again. CCP said they would release on PC. So I had to make a decision, go ahead and upgrade to PS4 or get PC. The sole reason I decided to become a master racer was just for NOVA.

Dustkillz and chill

Ancient Exiles.
#22 Posted: 2017.01.10 05:34
LOL KILLZ wrote:
If they decide to go PS4 I'll be mad all over again. CCP said they would release on PC. So I had to make a decision, go ahead and upgrade to PS4 or get PC. The sole reason I decided to become a master racer was just for NOVA.


At least you have strategy games :P

Join the DUST STEAM GROUP

100+ members and growing!

Nos Nothi
#23 Posted: 2017.01.10 05:36
LOL KILLZ wrote:
If they decide to go PS4 I'll be mad all over again. CCP said they would release on PC. So I had to make a decision, go ahead and upgrade to PS4 or get PC. The sole reason I decided to become a master racer was just for NOVA.

I think you will be fine. I mean, PCs are more flexible, and you can upgrade and go VR if need be. Anything you can play on the PS4, you can most likely play on PC.

The only thing you will lose is simplicity, and the ability to competitively use a controller in an FPS.

Former CEO of the Land of the BIind.

Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.

Penumbra or something
#24 Posted: 2017.01.10 06:11
Also remember No Man's Sky, people:
>Months of delays
>Sony pushed Hello Games to release it as a "minimum viable product"
>Because it was the "minimum viable product" it was terrible, got **** on by everyone, and gained an extremely bad reputation.
>Months later the game is in decent shape, but nobody cares because its reputation was already demolished.

I would rather not see Nova get murdered the same way. I know a good portion of it was Hello Games's fault, but part of the blame was Sony's.
Rogue Clones
Yulai Federation
#25 Posted: 2017.01.10 09:46  |  Edited by: Alena Asakura
Glass Bowtie wrote:

EVE has already said no to an FPS. They tried it and didn't like it. And Dust was suppose to have a meaningful impact on Tranquility. Hell, the dream was Dust would have a MAJOR impact on Tranquility, and EVE was still not interested.

To be completely clear, EvE never actually tried it. They said they didn't want it before they even tried it. Yes, some did, like me, and stopped fairly early on because it just didn't make sense to me in those early days. But most never even looked at Dust. Many didn't even have a PS3 to do so.

I don't think it's helpful to make such broad statements. It gives a completely different perspective to look at the real reason EvE didn't want a FPS, which was they never wanted one in the first place, didn't want anyone "wasting" resources implementing ANYTHING that supported it. The only part of Incarna (the release that brought in the link to Dust) that had anything to do with EvE was Captain's Quarters, the first step in Walking In Stations, which the EvE community hated.

EvE didn't want a FPS because they never wanted a FPS, not because they tried it and didn't like it. Had the whole thing been handled better by CCP, the EvE community would not have been the target aurdience in the first place.

As for Dust having a major impact on Tranquility, that would definitely have been a major reason EvE DIDN'T want it.
Night Theifs
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#26 Posted: 2017.01.10 17:06
Alena Asakura wrote:
Glass Bowtie wrote:

EVE has already said no to an FPS. They tried it and didn't like it. And Dust was suppose to have a meaningful impact on Tranquility. Hell, the dream was Dust would have a MAJOR impact on Tranquility, and EVE was still not interested.

To be completely clear, EvE never actually tried it. They said they didn't want it before they even tried it. Yes, some did, like me, and stopped fairly early on because it just didn't make sense to me in those early days. But most never even looked at Dust. Many didn't even have a PS3 to do so.

I don't think it's helpful to make such broad statements. It gives a completely different perspective to look at the real reason EvE didn't want a FPS, which was they never wanted one in the first place, didn't want anyone "wasting" resources implementing ANYTHING that supported it. The only part of Incarna (the release that brought in the link to Dust) that had anything to do with EvE was Captain's Quarters, the first step in Walking In Stations, which the EvE community hated.

EvE didn't want a FPS because they never wanted a FPS, not because they tried it and didn't like it. Had the whole thing been handled better by CCP, the EvE community would not have been the target aurdience in the first place.

As for Dust having a major impact on Tranquility, that would definitely have been a major reason EvE DIDN'T want it.

Certain vocal memebers of the EVE Forum Community which makes up a TINY fraction of the actual player community went on tirades because "MUH EVE DOLLARS" were being spent on something other than EVE, which is a stupid and childish issue to raise and just shows how much of no-life wastes of organs they are.

/end rage

I hardly ever ran into an actual player in the game in all my time of playing Dust and EVE at the same time, doing OBs for FW and PC, and just chatting in Local that actually didn't like the idea of Dust 514. Most of them just didn't like playing FPS or didn't own a console. It was more that they were apathetic than anything else.

I actually talked to many people that didn't know the influence Dust 514 had on EVE, and found the idea exciting after I explained it to them. On many occasions people in the Gallente Militia channel would get psyched and go fit up a Catalyst to try out an OB for themselves.

Don't believe the EVE Forums. ESPECIALLY not anything you read on General Discussion.

Amidst the blue skies

A link from past to future

The sheltering wings of the protector

Rosen Association
#27 Posted: 2017.01.10 17:17
Talos Vagheitan wrote:
LOL KILLZ wrote:
If they decide to go PS4 I'll be mad all over again. CCP said they would release on PC. So I had to make a decision, go ahead and upgrade to PS4 or get PC. The sole reason I decided to become a master racer was just for NOVA.


At least you have strategy games :P



Yes, and the rest of the largest game library in history.
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
#28 Posted: 2017.01.10 23:49
Alena Asakura wrote:
Glass Bowtie wrote:

EVE has already said no to an FPS. They tried it and didn't like it. And Dust was suppose to have a meaningful impact on Tranquility. Hell, the dream was Dust would have a MAJOR impact on Tranquility, and EVE was still not interested.

To be completely clear, EvE never actually tried it. They said they didn't want it before they even tried it. Yes, some did, like me, and stopped fairly early on because it just didn't make sense to me in those early days. But most never even looked at Dust. Many didn't even have a PS3 to do so.

I don't think it's helpful to make such broad statements. It gives a completely different perspective to look at the real reason EvE didn't want a FPS, which was they never wanted one in the first place, didn't want anyone "wasting" resources implementing ANYTHING that supported it. The only part of Incarna (the release that brought in the link to Dust) that had anything to do with EvE was Captain's Quarters, the first step in Walking In Stations, which the EvE community hated.

EvE didn't want a FPS because they never wanted a FPS, not because they tried it and didn't like it. Had the whole thing been handled better by CCP, the EvE community would not have been the target aurdience in the first place.

As for Dust having a major impact on Tranquility, that would definitely have been a major reason EvE DIDN'T want it.


Other than me not clarifying the fact that not every single person who played EVE tried Dust, we are saying the same thing.

And @Mobius, while I can acknowledge there was some support for Dust in EVE, I don't think it would be a stretch to flip the first bit of your post around to say "certain vocal members of the EVE community which makes up a tiny fraction of the actual player community did support the idea of Dust". People may have liked the concept, but as you said they were mostly apathetic as they weren't into FPSs, didn't have consoles, or maybe just didn't want to take time away from their EVE gaming. There is nothing wrong with any of that, but that doesn't equal support. I obviously cannot say what would have happened had we received a good amount of even spiritual support from EVE, but I think it's fair to say things would have been much different. The move to PC was going to happen in any scenario, but I think things would have been much different. Also, if Capsuleers were getting more info about Dust from you as opposed to CCP I think that could be considered a problem from a business standpoint.

Let me say, I'm not claiming anything like "EVE gave Dust the thumbs down so CCP cut off its head". I think we can agree that EVE as a community could have done more for us here, but they were in no way obligated to. Also, I played a bit of EVE. It started off as a way to streamline OB requests, but I got into it for a couple months until my laptop died. I can totally understand the infatuation with Tranquility and the feeling of "I'm doing this for the next few years, and I don't really care much either way about other games".

My problem with EVE is personal. Once Dusts death certificate was publicly signed and rubbed into our faces in 2014, that's when the EVE folks suddenly came out of the woodwork here. There was a lot of drumming up of support for CCP, a lot of people who "had been here from the beginning", yet had been completely silent until the quick, vague announcement of a new something that was going to do some stuff different, and it was going to come out sometime (that's not even Nova, that's Legion. I guess we can always say Dust was wildly more successful than Legion at least lol). We needed that support long before FF14.

I know you are far more likely to find dedicated, tightnit communities on PC. I would completely agree that a good bulk of the console community is trash. But you know what, we had a dedicated community here dammit, an original community of people who loved the game, financially supported the game, who logged in every day and or night to smash our faces into a brick wall in shithole battles because deep down we loved it. Hell, I'm still here. After all that sh*t I'm still here, and I'm still just as fired up as 2 years ago, because I loved the game. We, the Dust community, needed the "support" we saw after FF14 and beyond long before we got it. Again, this is my personal issue with EVE, and you can boil it down into a neutral TL:DR as "EVE support came far too late".

But all of that emotional stuff aside my point keeps getting hammered home, deeper and deeper. What kind of game is CCP making, and who are they making it for? It's not for EVE, and it's not for the former console community. It won't be tied to EVE, and I think it's more likely to say ever as opposed to soon. It will most likely be made to be able to run on lower end systems, even consoles, yet as a bare bones FPS on PC the one and only thing it would have going for it at the moment is graphics, making a theoretical port a big waste of time for everyone involved. Dust was obviously exclusively PvP (except for the battles with no one on the opposing team, which were actually pretty fun), though there was a large (and acceptable) cry for PvE. Nova at this point seems to be a bit up in the air on exactly what it is, and what the mix of PvP to PvE will be.

It just seems to me CCP has been stumbling through this whole FPS debacle half asleep, apathetic if you will. I'd really have to agree with the side of EVE that says this is all wasting resources that would be much better off directed towards EVE, for no gains what so ever for anyone.
Rosen Association
#29 Posted: 2017.01.10 23:54
Glass Bowtie wrote:




It just seems to me CCP has been stumbling through this whole FPS debacle half asleep, apathetic if you will. I'd really have to agree with the side of EVE that says this is all wasting resources that would be much better off directed towards EVE, for no gains what so ever for anyone.



This is pretty much CCP's development process in a nutshell. It really isn't any different for EvE itself.
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
#30 Posted: 2017.01.11 00:18
I just wish we still had something to show for all the madness.

Instead I have PTSD, night sweats and I have to keep my PS3 hooked up to a kidney dialysis machine or it will shutdown for good.

If I look really hard I can still see the health bar and ammo count still burned into my plasma tv.
0uter.Heaven
#31 Posted: 2017.01.11 01:09
Anyone who uses the words PS4 or XB1 as a suggestion for nova should be hanged, drawn and quartered because you've been hit upside the head with a stupid bat so hard you are just not going to recover.

PS5, XB?(Next gen) or PC are the only correct answers to what platforms Nova should be put on.

EVE Trial 250k Bonus SP

Viktor's most hated words in Dust: "Vet" & "Retired"

Rogue Clones
Yulai Federation
#32 Posted: 2017.01.11 06:59  |  Edited by: Alena Asakura
Mobius Wyvern wrote:

Certain vocal memebers of the EVE Forum Community which makes up a TINY fraction of the actual player community went on tirades because "MUH EVE DOLLARS" were being spent on something other than EVE, which is a stupid and childish issue to raise and just shows how much of no-life wastes of organs they are.

/end rage

I hardly ever ran into an actual player in the game in all my time of playing Dust and EVE at the same time, doing OBs for FW and PC, and just chatting in Local that actually didn't like the idea of Dust 514. Most of them just didn't like playing FPS or didn't own a console. It was more that they were apathetic than anything else.

I actually talked to many people that didn't know the influence Dust 514 had on EVE, and found the idea exciting after I explained it to them. On many occasions people in the Gallente Militia channel would get psyched and go fit up a Catalyst to try out an OB for themselves.

Don't believe the EVE Forums. ESPECIALLY not anything you read on General Discussion.

Likewise I never talked to anyone in EvE that was actively doing anything to support or play Dust. I did talk to plenty that always wanted to try it. They just never did. When I reappeared in EvE after the plug was pulled on Dust, they asked where I was and I said I had been playing Dust. A lot of them said they wanted to play Dust, and when I told them they couldn't anymore because they'd pulled the plug, they almost uniformly said they wished they'd tried it. But none of them did.

The more vocal ones at the time when Dust first started, referred to things like Walking in Stations as examples of things they didn't want, because it represented to them the fact that "EvE developers" had been working on something they didn't want. EvE players as a whole either didn't want it at the time, or later, many wanted to try it but basicly never did. Only a very few like yourself and myself, actually tried it, loved it, got hooked and were dismayed when they closed it down. Apathy or vitriol were the reasons that EvE players didn't try Dust. But the end result is they DIDN'T try it. Had they, perhaps there would have been more support for keeping the game going.
Nos Nothi
#33 Posted: 2017.01.11 08:25
Mobius Wyvern wrote:

Don't believe the EVE Forums. ESPECIALLY not anything you read on General Discussion.

I like the unintended implication that our GD section is somehow trustworthy.

Former CEO of the Land of the BIind.

Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.

#34 Posted: 2017.01.11 15:21
One Eyed King wrote:
Mobius Wyvern wrote:

Don't believe the EVE Forums. ESPECIALLY not anything you read on General Discussion.

I like the unintended implication that our GD section is somehow trustworthy.



not sure that was unintended ;) most days, I cannot tolerate the replies over at the EvE-Online general forums. OMG those people are d!cks. Some kat asks a question or offers criticism of some aspect of EvE, then it becomes 10 pages of who can find the most minute comment (and sometimes just a word) to tear apart out of context with the intent of just mocking the OP before they really bother to read it. All while trying so very desperately to be cool and condescending.

EvE GD posters are something special.

kitten bacon taco (nom)

Night Theifs
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#35 Posted: 2017.01.11 15:45
byte modal wrote:
One Eyed King wrote:
Mobius Wyvern wrote:

Don't believe the EVE Forums. ESPECIALLY not anything you read on General Discussion.

I like the unintended implication that our GD section is somehow trustworthy.



not sure that was unintended ;) most days, I cannot tolerate the replies over at the EvE-Online general forums. OMG those people are d!cks. Some kat asks a question or offers criticism of some aspect of EvE, then it becomes 10 pages of who can find the most minute comment (and sometimes just a word) to tear apart out of context with the intent of just mocking the OP before they really bother to read it. All while trying so very desperately to be cool and condescending.

EvE GD posters are something special.

Yeah, GD here has some shitposters, but that's because they do it for fun.

EVE GD is just 90% shitposts that are completely serious.

Amidst the blue skies

A link from past to future

The sheltering wings of the protector

#36 Posted: 2017.01.11 15:52
IMO, they take themselves far too serious for their own good. I've only read a small percent of posters over the years that are legitimately being smart asses for fun. Most of what I see are overconfident little shats that only want to argue for the sake of assuming they already know everything.

Cry

kitten bacon taco (nom)

Maphia Clan Corporation
#37 Posted: 2017.01.11 16:26  |  Edited by: xxwhitedevilxx M
One Eyed King wrote:
I disagree, and I only play on PS consoles.

First, PC is CCP's forte.

Second, developing the game on PC gives them more freedom than developing for the PS4. CCP doesn't need to go through Sony for anything. They could not have pulled off the demo they did as quickly and easily had it been developed on the PS4. They also couldn't use test servers for Dust when coming up with changes, and look how that turned out. Development on the PC allows for test servers to try out changes beforehand, and working out kinks before releases and patches hit the player base.

I do hope that Nova eventually releases for a console, but I think that the best way for that to happen and give the best chances for long term success is to first develop on the PC.


There are + and - to be honest. I'm sure if current gen consoles were a little bit more powerful we wouln't even be talking about PC games for some simple reasons.

PC, we all know by now, are not equal in performance. None of them. Every PC has its own CPU, its own GPU its own RAM, Motherboard etc,and can throw out very different performances running the very same game. Now, imagine, you have to produce a videogame and you cover every possible position in a team: would you rather know exactly what's the max polycount target, what's the exact texel density, how many draw calls in order to sqeeze the hardware you have? I'd say of course I'd prefer to know beforehand what's possible and what's not, and that's exactly the main point in developing for consoles: you have your hardware and you push it to its best. On PCs, instead, you usually don't do it: you usually try to guess what will be the "average" PC build, scale it down a bit in its core "heavy" features, and then pump it up with visual fx for people who have better builds.

So, no. It's not easier. The fact that (and it was true) it was easier to develop for PC rather that consoles was only valid for PS3 (not even xbox 360) due to its "very strange" architecture (based on what developers said).

I might repeat myself but I really want to stress that seriously, if Ps4 was some kind of GTX 970 build, we wouldn't be here arguing on what's better between PC and Consoles. Having to deal with SONY and Microsoft instead of being free to publish your game whenever, wherever you want would have just been a lesser inconvenience, but nothing more.

take time or take aurums (╯#-_-)╯~~~╧═╧ [FSTNM SCDNM] #PortDust514

Rosen Association
#38 Posted: 2017.01.11 17:59  |  Edited by: Buster Friently
xxwhitedevilxx M wrote:
One Eyed King wrote:
I disagree, and I only play on PS consoles.

First, PC is CCP's forte.

Second, developing the game on PC gives them more freedom than developing for the PS4. CCP doesn't need to go through Sony for anything. They could not have pulled off the demo they did as quickly and easily had it been developed on the PS4. They also couldn't use test servers for Dust when coming up with changes, and look how that turned out. Development on the PC allows for test servers to try out changes beforehand, and working out kinks before releases and patches hit the player base.

I do hope that Nova eventually releases for a console, but I think that the best way for that to happen and give the best chances for long term success is to first develop on the PC.


There are + and - to be honest. I'm sure if current gen consoles were a little bit more powerful we wouln't even be talking about PC games for some simple reasons.

PC, we all know by now, are not equal in performance. None of them. Every PC has its own CPU, its own GPU its own RAM, Motherboard etc,and can throw out very different performances running the very same game. Now, imagine, you have to produce a videogame and you cover every possible position in a team: would you rather know exactly what's the max polycount target, what's the exact texel density, how many draw calls in order to sqeeze the hardware you have? I'd say of course I'd prefer to know beforehand what's possible and what's not, and that's exactly the main point in developing for consoles: you have your hardware and you push it to its best. On PCs, instead, you usually don't do it: you usually try to guess what will be the "average" PC build, scale it down a bit in its core "heavy" features, and then pump it up with visual fx for people who have better builds.

So, no. It's not easier. The fact that (and it was true) it was easier to develop for PC rather that consoles was only valid for PS3 (not even xbox 360) due to its "very strange" architecture (based on what developers said).

I might repeat myself but I really want to stress that seriously, if Ps4 was some kind of GTX 970 build, we wouldn't be here arguing on what's better between PC and Consoles. Having to deal with SONY and Microsoft instead of being free to publish your game whenever, wherever you want would have just been a lesser inconvenience, but nothing more.


First off, there's way more to dealing with Microsoft or Sony than a "simple inconvenience". Keep in mind that both of those companies require that any hosted game run on their servers, in their ecosystem according to their rules, not CCP's. This is massive issue and reason enough to avoid it even if consoles were somehow on the same performance level that PCs are. Obviously consoles aren't at the same performance levels of PCs either, so that's a second issue.

The biggest reason to avoid consoles in the future, for CCP, is to avoid being held hostage by the walled gardens of providers like Sony and Microsoft.

There are also more subtle issues when dealing with consoles that somewhat defeats the idea that it may be easier to develop for consoles. It's true that when developing for PC, you have to consider a wide variety of hardware performance levels, but all of these differences are handled by standard APIs and libraries. Therefore, a developer doesn't have to account for different target architectures, for the most part, aside from providing a lot of options to the end users to tune graphics levels and other settings. On the other hand, when dealing with the console world, any updates to a game in the walled garden of Microsoft or Sony has to go through those company's Q&A as well as CCP's own Q&A. Microsoft, at least, also dictates how many updates can be delivered in a given time period and how much data can be delivered.

Once again, it's no mere "minor inconvenience" it's a different environment completely. CCP will do well to simply avoid consoles completely in the future. If they want to try to capture new market revenue, mobile it the way they will probably go since VR isn't really taking off at the moment.
Rogue Clones
Yulai Federation
#39 Posted: 2017.01.11 18:37
xxwhitedevilxx M wrote:
One Eyed King wrote:
I disagree, and I only play on PS consoles.

First, PC is CCP's forte.

Second, developing the game on PC gives them more freedom than developing for the PS4. CCP doesn't need to go through Sony for anything. They could not have pulled off the demo they did as quickly and easily had it been developed on the PS4. They also couldn't use test servers for Dust when coming up with changes, and look how that turned out. Development on the PC allows for test servers to try out changes beforehand, and working out kinks before releases and patches hit the player base.

I do hope that Nova eventually releases for a console, but I think that the best way for that to happen and give the best chances for long term success is to first develop on the PC.


There are + and - to be honest. I'm sure if current gen consoles were a little bit more powerful we wouln't even be talking about PC games for some simple reasons.

PC, we all know by now, are not equal in performance. None of them. Every PC has its own CPU, its own GPU its own RAM, Motherboard etc,and can throw out very different performances running the very same game. Now, imagine, you have to produce a videogame and you cover every possible position in a team: would you rather know exactly what's the max polycount target, what's the exact texel density, how many draw calls in order to sqeeze the hardware you have? I'd say of course I'd prefer to know beforehand what's possible and what's not, and that's exactly the main point in developing for consoles: you have your hardware and you push it to its best. On PCs, instead, you usually don't do it: you usually try to guess what will be the "average" PC build, scale it down a bit in its core "heavy" features, and then pump it up with visual fx for people who have better builds.

So, no. It's not easier. The fact that (and it was true) it was easier to develop for PC rather that consoles was only valid for PS3 (not even xbox 360) due to its "very strange" architecture (based on what developers said).

I might repeat myself but I really want to stress that seriously, if Ps4 was some kind of GTX 970 build, we wouldn't be here arguing on what's better between PC and Consoles. Having to deal with SONY and Microsoft instead of being free to publish your game whenever, wherever you want would have just been a lesser inconvenience, but nothing more.

The "very strange" architecture was hardly ever really used properly. Most usually just developed on some other platform then used emulation to cram it into the PS3. The architecture we're talking about, by the way, was the "Cell Broadband Engine" which was actually more of a small neural net than a multiprocessor. Of course, that functionality was far too obscure for most, so they just treated it as an 8-core processor. Very sad, because that same chip was apparently being used in supercomputers where the neural net capability allowed it to vastly improve on a simple multiprocessor.

I liked the fact that every core on the chip knew what every other core on the chip was doing. So each core didn't just do its own job, it could be programmed to be "aware" of the other cores and react. I believe there were very few games that ever used this, and all of them were developed specificly for the PS3 - the ultimate exclusive as those games could never then be ported to a "normal" platform. The PS3 was its own worst enemy - the very architecture which made its processor generations ahead of everything else made it so hard to program for that virtually noone did it. I would have loved to see games that were developed exclusively for PS3 using this functionality. I don't believe Dust ever used it, as it's obvious that the performance was clunky, where it should have been lightning fast. Now we'll never know, of course. The PS3 and what it could have done will be lost to antiquity.
Maphia Clan Corporation
#40 Posted: 2017.01.11 19:08
Buster Friently wrote:

First off, there's way more to dealing with Microsoft or Sony than a "simple inconvenience". Keep in mind that both of those companies require that any hosted game run on their servers, in their ecosystem according to their rules, not CCP's. This is massive issue and reason enough to avoid it even if consoles were somehow on the same performance level that PCs are. Obviously consoles aren't at the same performance levels of PCs either, so that's a second issue.

The biggest reason to avoid consoles in the future, for CCP, is to avoid being held hostage by the walled gardens of providers like Sony and Microsoft.

There are also more subtle issues when dealing with consoles that somewhat defeats the idea that it may be easier to develop for consoles. It's true that when developing for PC, you have to consider a wide variety of hardware performance levels, but all of these differences are handled by standard APIs and libraries. Therefore, a developer doesn't have to account for different target architectures, for the most part, aside from providing a lot of options to the end users to tune graphics levels and other settings.

On the other hand, when dealing with the console world, any updates to a game in the walled garden of Microsoft or Sony has to go through those company's Q&A as well as CCP's own Q&A. Microsoft, at least, also dictates how many updates can be delivered in a given time period and how much data can be delivered.

Once again, it's no mere "minor inconvenience" it's a different environment completely. CCP will do well to simply avoid consoles completely in the future. If they want to try to capture new market revenue, mobile it the way they will probably go since VR isn't really taking off at the moment.



On the first point, well, just no. PSN/Xbox Live don't "force" you to use their servers. Their servers are only required for autentication purposes, and with obvious reasons. So, yeah, no need to say "damn PSN" when Tranquillity was down Roll. The only real point I see here is that if PSN/Live are down you cannot play.

API and libraries:

it's not that PS4/Xbox doesn't have any! Actually, they both have custom/semi-custom API and libraries and Sony's closely resemble Vulkan (in-depth from slide 32 on http://develop.scee.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ParisGC2013Final.pdf). And by the way, APIs won't help you if your shaders are too complex (just think like Parallax Occlusion Mapping on a terrain shader/material with no optimization) for a specific machine or if your drawcalls are too high.
In case you want hundreds and even thousands of the more or less same object on screen, lets say, pebbles or small rocks, you will probably want to instance those objects and HLOD the hell out of it. It has nothing to do with machine specifics, but more with design/optimization choices. The whole point here is that if your boundaries are uncertain, you won't risk breaking the game on half the PC builds simply because you went too far with a shader (and yes, I'm exaggerating, but you got the point). APIs won't help you if you want your game assets to be both med poly and on Xbox360. I mean, you could, but then you would expect incredibly "empty" rooms.

QA:

Well, yes. But as we console paesants have seen here, Sony QA usually just makes sure that your PS4 doesn't blow up while playing your game. It's not the kind of QA you would expect, for example, at CCP. And they reduced the time the whole process takes to a week or so, so it's not even the epic amount of time the community usually think of. But if a week is too much, then you're completely right.

The point I didn't see in your post, anyway,might be the main reason why (often minor) developers avoid consoles imo: costs. It is a pretty big and potentially risky investment, and you'd have to pay everytime you want to push out a patch. That's why I started my post saying that console development is both a plus and a minus. You must carefully plan your marketing and players expectations in order to not lose money from your game.

take time or take aurums (╯#-_-)╯~~~╧═╧ [FSTNM SCDNM] #PortDust514

3 PagesPrevious page123Next page
Forum Jump