Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Curiosity ..

245678

Comments

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018
    Arillix said:
    @Tiamat64,

    Oh, you mean this game play?



    Or this one?



    One more for good measure.



    Way to be intentionally blind.


    It's not intentional blindness. The blindness is because those videos are so awful that my eyes began screaming at me to make it stop.
    IceAgeMaxBaconMrMelGibson
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    Arillix said:
    @Tiamat64,

    Oh, you mean this game play?



    Or this one?



    One more for good measure.



    Way to be intentionally blind.


    Really ? 

    From @Tiamat64 ..list :

    1) Lag - Check

    2) There are clipping and fall through world issues everywhere, the game logic is not running reliable (like spawning or accessing ships ... or landing ships ) - Didn't see "fall" , but the rest - Check

    3) The Economy is not implemented and there is no content - Check

    4) The flight mechanic is simply unfun (no real tactics possible) and unbalanced - Check

    5) The Enemy ship AI is very dull, there are no Enemy AI NPC - Partially Check

    6) MultiplayerShips are not implemented yet (as in different stations like scanning, repairing etc) - Check

    So ..

    Way to be intentionally blind.

    MaxBaconpantaro

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited January 2018
    Way to be intentionally blind.
    Way to be intentionally blind indeed. 
    (check for the issues and dismiss all the rest)

    No wonder there's such a huge reality gap between the backers and you guys... but let me guess how you justify such extreme hyperbole: "The backers are blind, cultists and delusional", right?
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • ArillixArillix Member UncommonPosts: 88
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    Arillix said:
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
    When you have a budget of 176 mil $ , and after 5 years you release this shit , then I am sorry , but you are a blind fan of which , because of you this genre is going down , by supporting shitty companies.

    MaxBacon said:
    Way to be intentionally blind.
    ... but let me guess how you justify such extreme hyperbole: "The backers are blind, cultists and delusional", right?
    Bingo ! Because no normal gamer in his right mind, will support this project. 

    The problem with guys like you is , even if they get to 300 mil $ and they are in the same stage, you will keep supporting them, and that, MaxBacon , is the definiton of "blind, cultists and delusional" fans.
    pantaroMaxBacon

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited January 2018
    IceAge said:
    Bingo ! Because no normal gamer in his right mind, will support this project. 

    The problem with guys like you is , even if they get to 300 mil $ and they are in the same stage, you will keep supporting them, and that, MaxBacon , is the definiton of "blind, cultists and delusional" fans.
    Okay then.

    Cultist delusional fan that supports SC because of mental problems has no further argument. :/
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • ArillixArillix Member UncommonPosts: 88
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    MaxBacon said:
    IceAge said:
    Bingo ! Because no normal gamer in his right mind, will support this project. 

    The problem with guys like you is , even if they get to 300 mil $ and they are in the same stage, you will keep supporting them, and that, MaxBacon , is the definiton of "blind, cultists and delusional" fans.
    Okay then.

    Cultist delusional fan that supports SC because of mental problems has no further argument.
    delusion is a mistaken belief that is held with strong conviction even when presented with superior evidence to the contrary.

    Now of course, one ( you in this case ) might say that his "evidences" are superior. 

    Domain33XMaxBacon

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    edited January 2018
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    MaxBacon

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    IceAge said:
    delusion is a mistaken belief that is held with strong conviction even when presented with superior evidence to the contrary.

    Now of course, one ( you in this case ) might say that his "evidences" are superior. 

    I don't need definitions, you already made your stand and type of argumentation clear. 

    What makes discussion with you a waste of words, keep having fun hating SC others will have fun playing it, and it so shall be.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    and can you produce one from someone who was making TWO tripple A games at the same time? 

    I would like to see your list though.
    Cotic
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    and can you produce one from someone who was making TWO tripple A games at the same time? 

    I would like to see your list though.
    Wait what? Who's "(was) making" x 2 x3 AAA games at the same time?! Robert ? Robert Baratheon maybe , because your Robert didn't make any game as of now, let alone two.

    But ok, Blizzard ? EA? Ubisoft? ...are you serious ? 

    EDIT : He...made Wing Commander , but still, we are talking about actual Robert right ? Who's in charge of SC and Square 42 or something .. yes? And your point was/is , that he's currently ..making both at the same time, yes? And that no other company is/was working/releasing 2 triple AAA games at the same time .. yes? If yes, read above.
    pantaroDarkpigeon

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • CoticCotic Member UncommonPosts: 268
    edited January 2018
    MaxBacon said:
    Cotic said:
    And yet, atmospheric planets were supposedly arriving before the end of 2016. One year later and we still do not have them nor have we seen anything more about them. Something is holding things up.

    Is there a number of total planets for the game? I wonder how long it takes to produce a planet, put all the interesting bits on it, sort out the missions etcetera? It can't be a quick process.

    It will always be quicker than you creating the entire technology and mechanic that will allow you to create 1 planet. You will not need to re-create tech and mechanic for every planet you will do as it is obvious, hence you are looking at way less work.

    Aside from how much of that templated process will be automated of course. You see a game like Elite does not spend time on crafting every mission, outpost, planet, etc... they created "templates" and let the algorithmic nature of things do the rest; SC will also do that, but partially (enforcing it artist-driven).

    Definitely. But they are much more hands on with their planet creating, from the tileset work to the scoping out of scenic areas to place wrecks, to blending said wrecks into the habitat, the environmental aging of the wrecks, differentiating them etcetera, it must add up to quite a lot more man hours especially over a whole planet.

    The procedural generation mission will probably be quite straightforward but the special NPC missions will be quite a bit more involved and require far more rigorous testing, especially for a multiplayer scenario.

    I am just curious how long they take, it does not seem like a case of bish, bash, bosh even with optimized pipelines, toolsets etcetera.

    @Arillix
    Thanks for the video.

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    IceAge said:
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    and can you produce one from someone who was making TWO tripple A games at the same time? 

    I would like to see your list though.
    Wait what? Who's "(was) making" x 2 x3 AAA games at the same time?! Robert ? Robert Baratheon maybe , because your Robert didn't make any game as of now, let alone two.

    But ok, Blizzard ? EA? Ubisoft? ...are you serious ? 

    EDIT : He...made Wing Commander , but still, we are talking about actual Robert right ? Who's in charge of SC and Square 42 or something .. yes? And your point was/is , that he's currently ..making both at the same time, yes? And that no other company is/was working/releasing 2 triple AAA games at the same time .. yes? If yes, read above.
    your choice, i really don't mind who. Lists of AAA games that were made concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost. I am genuinely interested in a comparison. could be fun, we could all learn something!
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    and can you produce one from someone who was making TWO tripple A games at the same time? 

    I would like to see your list though.
    Wait what? Who's "(was) making" x 2 x3 AAA games at the same time?! Robert ? Robert Baratheon maybe , because your Robert didn't make any game as of now, let alone two.

    But ok, Blizzard ? EA? Ubisoft? ...are you serious ? 

    EDIT : He...made Wing Commander , but still, we are talking about actual Robert right ? Who's in charge of SC and Square 42 or something .. yes? And your point was/is , that he's currently ..making both at the same time, yes? And that no other company is/was working/releasing 2 triple AAA games at the same time .. yes? If yes, read above.
    your choice, i really don't mind who. Lists of AAA games that were made concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost. I am genuinely interested in a comparison. could be fun, we could all learn something!
    Wow you are so ignorant. But ok ..

    First of, let's be clear here on one very specific point : Robert didn't finished SC nor Square 42 in 5 years ok? Keep that in mind. He only finished 20% from SC , let alone release two games in 5 years.

    Ok , now , back to your point :

    Damn! I already wrote about Square Enix & Bungie a bit and wanted to also write about , Ubisoft , Bethesda , and some more others but to much time ( and I already lost some time writing to ignorants like you ) to just look up for specific games development start, release date, budged, etc. So , you .. do that ok? 

    The following companies have released at least 2 triple AAA games with a dev circle of around 5 years. : Square Enix , Bungie , Ubisoft, Bethesda, EA . And I am very sure that their development cost ( please read that loud and clear and do not also include marketing costs, which is a very different thing ) , where no wear near almost 200$ mil . 

    Now, you will come and say "but show me". The info are there and I even gave you very specific hints. Enjoy.

    PS: The actually fair question would of been "Lists of AAA games that were made - just around 20% - concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost" .



    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    IceAge said:
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Orinori said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    @IceAge,

    So you would do better is what you are saying.
    Prove it.
    when can we expect your game then?
    I can't prove anything since I don't have 176 mil $ and I didn't released any games ( sadly ) .

    But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. 

    Let me know if you want me to post the said games here.
    and can you produce one from someone who was making TWO tripple A games at the same time? 

    I would like to see your list though.
    Wait what? Who's "(was) making" x 2 x3 AAA games at the same time?! Robert ? Robert Baratheon maybe , because your Robert didn't make any game as of now, let alone two.

    But ok, Blizzard ? EA? Ubisoft? ...are you serious ? 

    EDIT : He...made Wing Commander , but still, we are talking about actual Robert right ? Who's in charge of SC and Square 42 or something .. yes? And your point was/is , that he's currently ..making both at the same time, yes? And that no other company is/was working/releasing 2 triple AAA games at the same time .. yes? If yes, read above.
    your choice, i really don't mind who. Lists of AAA games that were made concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost. I am genuinely interested in a comparison. could be fun, we could all learn something!
    Wow you are so ignorant. But ok ..

    First of, let's be clear here on one very specific point : Robert didn't finished SC nor Square 42 in 5 years ok? Keep that in mind. He only finished 20% from SC , let alone release two games in 5 years.

    Ok , now , back to your point :

    Damn! I already wrote about Square Enix & Bungie a bit and wanted to also write about , Ubisoft , Bethesda , and some more others but to much time ( and I already lost some time writing to ignorants like you ) to just look up for specific games development start, release date, budged, etc. So , you .. do that ok? 

    The following companies have released at least 2 triple AAA games with a dev circle of around 5 years. : Square Enix , Bungie , Ubisoft, Bethesda, EA . And I am very sure that their development cost ( please read that loud and clear and do not also include marketing costs, which is a very different thing ) , where no wear near almost 200$ mil . 

    Now, you will come and say "but show me". The info are there and I even gave you very specific hints. Enjoy.

    PS: The actually fair question would of been "Lists of AAA games that were made - just around 20% - concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost" .



    What were all the insults for? i had a genuine question and was interested? 

    "PS: The actually fair question would of been "Lists of AAA games that were made - just around 20% - concurrently by the same studio over the span of 5 years each and their cost" ."

    I was responding to this claim "But I can prove it by comparing to other companies which they released games with ( a lot ) less $ then what SC has and with a time-frame of 5 or so years. "

    "Now, you will come and say "but show me". The info are there and I even gave you very specific hints. Enjoy." 

    why not just list them. You don't have to, it wasn't meant to be a trick question. I was curious and interested, you said you would provide a list, I was already capable of doing my own list :/
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
    When you have a budget of 176 mil $ , and after 5 years you release this shit , then I am sorry , but you are a blind fan of which , because of you this genre is going down , by supporting shitty companies.

    MaxBacon said:
    <snip>
    1. Just because they have raised $176M (or whatever) doesn't mean they have spent $176M. CiG believe that they have enough money to finish the game and there are those who say it is going to take "many" years - and if that is the case then maybe they haven't spent anything like $176M.

    2. A problem all Kickstarter games have - all - is not knowing how much money they will raise. If a company knew what it would raise - and had it available on day 1 - then they would probably do things differently. Kickstarters can't do that though. Just the way it is.

    3. I tend not to agree that the "genre" - whichever genre you are talking about - is going downhill. The big publishers are not doing much though. Many - most - of the promising developments are coming from crowdfunded - or part crowdfunded - development. A big part of that reason is because there are people who "believe" in a type of game. I have my doubts that they will all succeed but I wish them all well and don't, imo, bash them.

    Could a game like Vanguard - say - have turned out differently if crowdfunding had been around back then? It had its ardent believers even after it had an absolutely horrendous launch - a launch forced on Sigil because they ran out of money. Obviously - following the logic of some posters - they should never have released the game and carried on working until it was free of issues ..... I agree as a general rule and when a big well funded company releases an unfinished mess absolutely so. Sigil though had no choice.

    And here CiG have "no choice". All the doubters would be up in arms if they held back - there is no game yada yada yada. So its out. The question is will it improve. And - to date - things have been improving. Features have been added. Will they get there in the end - no idea - but I wish them well.
    EponyxDamor
  • CoticCotic Member UncommonPosts: 268
    gervaise1 said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
    When you have a budget of 176 mil $ , and after 5 years you release this shit , then I am sorry , but you are a blind fan of which , because of you this genre is going down , by supporting shitty companies.

    MaxBacon said:
    <snip>
    1. Just because they have raised $176M (or whatever) doesn't mean they have spent $176M. CiG believe that they have enough money to finish the game and there are those who say it is going to take "many" years - and if that is the case then maybe they haven't spent anything like $176M.

    2. A problem all Kickstarter games have - all - is not knowing how much money they will raise. If a company knew what it would raise - and had it available on day 1 - then they would probably do things differently. Kickstarters can't do that though. Just the way it is.

    3. I tend not to agree that the "genre" - whichever genre you are talking about - is going downhill. The big publishers are not doing much though. Many - most - of the promising developments are coming from crowdfunded - or part crowdfunded - development. A big part of that reason is because there are people who "believe" in a type of game. I have my doubts that they will all succeed but I wish them all well and don't, imo, bash them.

    Could a game like Vanguard - say - have turned out differently if crowdfunding had been around back then? It had its ardent believers even after it had an absolutely horrendous launch - a launch forced on Sigil because they ran out of money. Obviously - following the logic of some posters - they should never have released the game and carried on working until it was free of issues ..... I agree as a general rule and when a big well funded company releases an unfinished mess absolutely so. Sigil though had no choice.

    And here CiG have "no choice". All the doubters would be up in arms if they held back - there is no game yada yada yada. So its out. The question is will it improve. And - to date - things have been improving. Features have been added. Will they get there in the end - no idea - but I wish them well.
    On point 1. Can it not be roughly estimated based on Foundry 42's account submissions and the number of staff per year released by CIG.

    I have also seen mention of $120,000 per employee per year as an decent figure agreed on by numerous studio heads.

    This image shows CIG's headcount over the years 

    so 10 * $120,000 in 2012 + 48 * $120,000 in 2013 and so on for a total of $155 million which then excludes additional expenses such as contractors, property refit/equipping, Hollywood cast, renting of Imaginarium for mocap work, so on and so forth.
    They must have burnt through quite a bit of that money at this stage although if it was a problem we would see it through layoffs etcetera.
    ErillionMrMelGibson
  • kikoodutroa8kikoodutroa8 Member RarePosts: 560
    Has any of you bought a tank yet?
    IceAge
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    edited January 2018
    gervaise1 said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
    When you have a budget of 176 mil $ , and after 5 years you release this shit , then I am sorry , but you are a blind fan of which , because of you this genre is going down , by supporting shitty companies.

    MaxBacon said:
    <snip>
    1. Just because they have raised $176M (or whatever) doesn't mean they have spent $176M. CiG believe that they have enough money to finish the game and there are those who say it is going to take "many" years - and if that is the case then maybe they haven't spent anything like $176M.

    2. A problem all Kickstarter games have - all - is not knowing how much money they will raise. If a company knew what it would raise - and had it available on day 1 - then they would probably do things differently. Kickstarters can't do that though. Just the way it is.

    3. I tend not to agree that the "genre" - whichever genre you are talking about - is going downhill. The big publishers are not doing much though. Many - most - of the promising developments are coming from crowdfunded - or part crowdfunded - development. A big part of that reason is because there are people who "believe" in a type of game. I have my doubts that they will all succeed but I wish them all well and don't, imo, bash them.

    Could a game like Vanguard - say - have turned out differently if crowdfunding had been around back then? It had its ardent believers even after it had an absolutely horrendous launch - a launch forced on Sigil because they ran out of money. Obviously - following the logic of some posters - they should never have released the game and carried on working until it was free of issues ..... I agree as a general rule and when a big well funded company releases an unfinished mess absolutely so. Sigil though had no choice.

    And here CiG have "no choice". All the doubters would be up in arms if they held back - there is no game yada yada yada. So its out. The question is will it improve. And - to date - things have been improving. Features have been added. Will they get there in the end - no idea - but I wish them well.
    I will just comment on point 1) and a bit on 2) as that seems to be important ( for me at least )

    1) If you raised $176M , and you didn't finished half the game in 3-4 years, then that's a very bad management of the money. in 2014 , they had around $70M raised, enough to finish the game. 3 and some years later, they fail to deliver anything but an alpha. 

    But the most important question would be ( for me at least ) , how much money they have spent and have left from $176M. If I would be a supporter and a backer of this game, I would surely like to know this info , because the project itself , needs to be transparent , just how they said it will be. 

    2) See in 2014 , they had around $70M raised, enough to finish the game. 3 and some years later, they fail to deliver anything but an alpha. 

    So,  let's say they started from 0 in 2014 with $70M. So that means, from day 1, they had enough money to finish whatever project they wanted. 3 and some years later, they fail to deliver anything but an alpha. If they would of run out of money , it would of been discutable, but no , they even raised 100% more then the initial $70M, which should of helped the development by A LOT. 

    Orinori said:

    why not just list them. You don't have to, it wasn't meant to be a trick question. I was curious and interested, you said you would provide a list, I was already capable of doing my own list :/
    Company - Bethesda

    Game : Fallout 3 - Bethesda Softworks started working on Fallout 3 in July 2004. 

    Release : October 28, 2008

    Game : The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion - Work on Oblivion began shortly after the release of Morrowind in 2002.[23] By mid-September 2004, Oblivion had been officially announced, and its title revealed

    Release : March 20, 2006

    Company - Arkane Studios ( owned by Bethesda )

    Games : Dishonored 2 & Prey - Released in 2016 and 2017 , so same dev time-frame with of course, no more then 5 years on both.

    Company - Square Enix

    Game - FFXIII - Development of Final Fantasy XIII began in February 2004.

    Release - December 17, 2009

    Game - FFXIV - Planning for Final Fantasy XIV began in 2005.

    Release - September 30, 2010

    ----

    Now, I don't know the development cost , put surely they don't go beyond your beloved SC budget.  Anything else? PS: I really hope you will not reply with "but it could of cost them 1000 mil $" , because then ...gtfo ! :)

    PS2: Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

    There is only 1 game which said to cost more then 100$ mil - Development cost that is , because this is what we are talking. The rest are sub 100$ mil ( and most are GREAT games ) , which makes SC even more of a fraud then its actually is.

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    @IceAge you mustn't take everything you read on wiki as gospel.

    For example Destiny. Wiki gives the cost as $140M - and there is a reference to a contract so it must be true right? Sooooo ...... someone from Bungie turned up at Activision and said heh we want to develop a game just give us $140M? Not a hope. Bungie will have spent some time - and the suggestion is quite a lot of time - coming up with the idea and then a chunk of time and money developing "assets". Probably quite a few people - suggestion was that Blizzard had at least a team of 50 on "Titan".  So it took longer and cost more.

    Not sure whether the server costs were in there wither since RK spoke of a $500M cost to Activision and seemed to include the cost of servers in that. Its fuzzy but it shows you need to consider like with like. I do - however - consider Destiny to have been a superbly run game. And delivered in a pretty decent timescale as well - probably helped because once they had signed the contract with Activision they were able to staff up to 450+ people. (as  per Gamasutra interview)

    As for FFXIV that will have been one of the most expensive games. Yes it launched in 2010. And people resigned afterwards and a lot of extra work before FFXIV ARR was launched. SE great company btw and the FF brand is well looked after. Did the near 2 years extra count though - some I reckon, all not sure. And lets not forget that if SC had that bad a launch well ......

    Ditto ESO. Another "disaster" at launch - enough problems that the console launch, which was due to happen a couple of weeks or so after PC was canned and subsequently delayed for c. 18 months. Do these 18 months count in the development? The ES brand however has been "nurtured". And lets not forget that is SC had that bad a launch well .....

    Then we have sone real outliers. Wildstar. Carbine worked on it for 2 years before NCSoft bought the company. Now I reckon those 2 years were pre-development. Probably akin to what Bungie were doing for example before they inked the deal with Activision. After which - well 5 more years and then another mess at launch and another do you count the extra 1-2 years fixing it.




    Regarding point 1 though could they have done better from the point at which they had $70M? If they had stopped and started from scratch maybe. Used different project control and organisational structures for example. Changing over would have cost money and taken time to implement - especially on international projects. I have been involved - it would have been disruptive and would probably have delayed things by c. 9 months. (You have to make the change, then measure the change, then assess it and fine tune.) Maybe more given the blinding glare that everything is done in. They still could do it today but they will always have to ask "is it worth it". The answer - in hindsight - may well have or be - yes. Hindsight though is always perfect. They will - based on last year for example - have expected to be further on and the benefits of change vs. disruption caused less attractive.

    So it is what it is. There is this thing called an "alpha" that people can use to judge whether they are interested in the game or not. Uninterested - well I move on. And at the end of the day there is nothing, imo, to suggest that SC won't launch. No idea when!
    Darkpigeon
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    I picked this studio because of the two games thing and tried to look closer at it and try to make reasonable comparisons (even though it is a stretch).


    Arkane studios - created 1999 
    Dishonored 2 - 12h 10m game play (42h completionist)  4years (best guess due to Dis 1 finish time)
    Prey - 15.5h game play (41h completionist) 4.5yrs (same as above plus reboot, original work start 2006)

    150 staff - $81 million development cost

    Both just single player games, providing only 27hrs average total gameplay.

    As we can see with CIG it wasn't until the beginning of their second year that they had 150 staff, without trying to totally discount previous years work of others (all though we could note that Prey had some previous work also at least in some kind of planning and design ideas as most was scrapped.) 

    So in arguably equivalent 3 years since full momentum CIG has managed to produce -

    Arena Commander:
    Multiplayer Spaceship dogfighting arena
    Multiplayer FPS 'Star Marine' battleground
    Multiplayer Racer
    Multiplayer / Single player AI wave mission
    (all playable now)

    Showcased vertical slice 1hr gameplay of single player story driven SQ42 
    (We can assume plenty of ground work for the rest)

    Created the base for Persistent Universe (mmo) Star Citizen:
    3 complete planetoids /moons and the tech to complete many more
    Various Space stations and space ports
    Missions, cargo and economy
    Plenty of intricate highly detailed ships, clothes, weapons, ship components
    All in a highly detailed seamless fps universe. (all playable now) 

    Leaving another 1 year to realistically catch up with the 4 / 4.5 years of development team allowed for full team Arkane Studios to develop their games. projected cost by then $180 million?

    I am trying to be fair and not start stupid squabbles, feel free to make reasonable corrections.
    This would mean CIG certainly would have spent a lot more (almost $100 million) but when we take into consideration the vast differences that will be available between the 4 games, we are talking 27hrs game play that will be squashed by SQ42 alone, never mind the persistent universe and what we can hope it will offer within another years worth of development. The content creation is a massive difference and easily arguably worth that 100 million extra.

    I don't see a rip off, I see progress on a highly ambitious project with stunning potential. 




    Post edited by Orinori on
    IceAgeDarkpigeon
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    gervaise1 said:
    IceAge said:
    Arillix said:
    By all means bash away.
    This is here.
    has bugs, NO SHIT, ALL software has bugs, it is the nature of the beast.
    ALL games can lag, nature of the internet, what game has NOT lagged.
    Killing all the haters in game repeatedly is going to be such a blast, remember running to the grave yard?
    Oh how you will regret your in game existence.  
    When you have a budget of 176 mil $ , and after 5 years you release this shit , then I am sorry , but you are a blind fan of which , because of you this genre is going down , by supporting shitty companies.

    MaxBacon said:
    <snip>
    1. Just because they have raised $176M (or whatever) doesn't mean they have spent $176M. CiG believe that they have enough money to finish the game and there are those who say it is going to take "many" years - and if that is the case then maybe they haven't spent anything like $176M.

    2. A problem all Kickstarter games have - all - is not knowing how much money they will raise. If a company knew what it would raise - and had it available on day 1 - then they would probably do things differently. Kickstarters can't do that though. Just the way it is.

    3. I tend not to agree that the "genre" - whichever genre you are talking about - is going downhill. The big publishers are not doing much though. Many - most - of the promising developments are coming from crowdfunded - or part crowdfunded - development. A big part of that reason is because there are people who "believe" in a type of game. I have my doubts that they will all succeed but I wish them all well and don't, imo, bash them.

    Could a game like Vanguard - say - have turned out differently if crowdfunding had been around back then? It had its ardent believers even after it had an absolutely horrendous launch - a launch forced on Sigil because they ran out of money. Obviously - following the logic of some posters - they should never have released the game and carried on working until it was free of issues ..... I agree as a general rule and when a big well funded company releases an unfinished mess absolutely so. Sigil though had no choice.

    And here CiG have "no choice". All the doubters would be up in arms if they held back - there is no game yada yada yada. So its out. The question is will it improve. And - to date - things have been improving. Features have been added. Will they get there in the end - no idea - but I wish them well.
    Point 1 it was said somewhere by CR or CIG that if funding dried up today (when it was said not today today lol) that they would have enough to finish SQ42 and then they would use the profits from the sale of that game to fund the rest of SC. That was said almost a year ago so they didn’t have enough money to finish at least one of the games then and I wonder what they would say today if asked the same question today.
  • IceAgeIceAge Member EpicPosts: 2,511
    Orinori said:
    I picked this studio because of the two games thing and tried to look closer at it and try to make reasonable comparisons (even though it is a stretch).


    Arkane studios - created 1999 
    Dishonored 2 - 12h 10m game play (42h completionist)  4years (best guess due to Dis 1 finish time)
    Prey - 15.5h game play (41h completionist) 4.5yrs (same as above plus reboot, original work start 2006)

    150 staff - $81 million development cost

    Both just single player games, providing only 27hrs average total gameplay.

    As we can see with CIG it wasn't until the beginning of their second year that they had 150 staff, without trying to totally discount previous years work of others (all though we could note that Prey had some previous work also at least in some kind of planning and design ideas as most was scrapped.) 

    So in arguably equivalent 3 years since full momentum CIG has managed to produce -

    Arena Commander:
    Multiplayer Spaceship dogfighting arena
    Multiplayer FPS 'Star Marine' battleground
    Multiplayer Racer
    Multiplayer / Single player AI wave mission
    (all playable now)

    Showcased vertical slice 1hr gameplay of single player story driven SQ42 
    (We can assume plenty of ground work for the rest)

    Created the base for Persistent Universe (mmo) Star Citizen:
    3 complete planetoids /moons and the tech to complete many more
    Various Space stations and space ports
    Missions, cargo and economy
    Plenty of intricate highly detailed ships, clothes, weapons, ship components
    All in a highly detailed seamless fps universe. (all playable now) 

    Leaving another 1 year to realistically catch up with the 4 / 4.5 years of development team allowed for full team Arkane Studios to develop their games. projected cost by then $180 million?

    I am trying to be fair and not start stupid squabbles, feel free to make reasonable corrections.
    This would mean CIG certainly would have spent a lot more (almost $100 million) but when we take into consideration the vast differences that will be available between the 4 games, we are talking 27hrs game play that will be squashed by SQ42 alone, never mind the persistent universe and what we can hope it will offer within another years worth of development. The content creation is a massive difference and easily arguably worth that 100 million extra.

    I don't see a rip off, I see progress on a highly ambitious project with stunning potential. 




    Really , thats your excuse? I did knew that you will come up with an excuse no matter what I said and that's why I didn't want to spend time giving you the examples. You said triple AAA games. I gave you some exemples, but there are many more , yet .. now you start with pathetic comparations.

    Until your beloved company release ( please read it wisely my friend ) one of the 2 games, you have absolutely no right to comment on development time frame, money , etc. Until now, after 5+ years, they have earned $176M , and they haven't release a single game. 

    Now off you go. Next time, do some researches because in your ignorance, you believed that no company on earth, can deliver 2 triple AAA games in a time-frame of 5 years. That's .. pathetic.

    I am done with blind, ignorant and believers for today.
    Darkpigeon

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    IceAge said:

    Really , thats your excuse? I did knew that you will come up with an excuse no matter what I said and that's why I didn't want to spend time giving you the examples. You said triple AAA games. I gave you some exemples, but there are many more , yet .. now you start with pathetic comparations.

    Until your beloved company release ( please read it wisely my friend ) one of the 2 games, you have absolutely no right to comment on development time frame, money , etc. Until now, after 5+ years, they have earned $176M , and they haven't release a single game. 

    Now off you go. Next time, do some researches because in your ignorance, you believed that no company on earth, can deliver 2 triple AAA games in a time-frame of 5 years. That's .. pathetic.

    I am done with blind, ignorant and believers for today.
    Well it is kind of hard to compare like with like as SC development of MMO plus single player to this scale has not been done before, so I tried to keep it as fair as I could.

    "in your ignorance, you believed that no company on earth, can deliver 2 triple AAA games in a time-frame of 5 years"  I never stated such a thing, the point was only for you to take into consideration when you wanted to compare development of games with your list. 

    The two I picked only delivered a measly sized 27hrs combined play for 81 million over 4.5 yrs. I won't be alone in saying I have already spent considerable more time than that in the Star Citizen universe and the game is only beginning.

    There maybe better examples but I choose that one due to the concurrent games across multiple studios. I presumed the whole point of providing your list was a comparison against Star Citizen and trying to discover the value of Star Citizen and its development. I guess I was wrong.










Sign In or Register to comment.