Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

err

13

Comments

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 7,433
    Image result for jack sparrow images
    AsheramPhry
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    Nyctelios said:
    So, hows the game?
    I played before the launch as the servers broke, and I quite like it.

    It's the expectable wonky but it's quite a bunch of content and cool situations such a crewing a ship as it is fighting enemy ships in high sea, it gathers quite a bunch of points there, so I think they have hit a really good gameplay design that will easily make this title mainstream with continuous improvement over the early access period.

    Having played Ark I say more fun than Ark. This is more friendly of grouping up and go into some adventure together.
    Tokken
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited December 2018
    MaxBacon said:
    The launch woes were expected.  The blatant asset recycling (apparently including asset folders still named "ScorchedEarth" and "Aberration") screams lazy flip on what amounts to a conversion ARK mod.  That bothers me much more than any launch issues.

    Hopefully as folks progress into the game it sets itself apart more.  Keeping an eye on it, but the apparent lazy reusing of asset data keeps me from wanting to buy right now.
    I don't see the bother. It has more of its own game by using the same engine as Ark than different battle royale games that are literal copy/pastes.

    The scale of the world, the different focused gameplay theme abd the MMO network setup are worth of its own merits.

    The copy many assets is just logical to me, re-creating things just for the sake of make them less resembling of Ark on the engine of Ark would be rather pointless. The actual lazy bit is having re-used things that were not good points from Ark, such as its UI.
    Laziness in general is bad.  No need to reinvent the wheel, but it definitely brings the "quality" factor down if many assets are obvious hand-me-downs.

    In the end, what will draw me will be the mechanics, which is why I'm keeping an eye on it.  If the mechanics stand out as novel, I'll give it a go.

    image
  • NycteliosNyctelios Member EpicPosts: 3,823
    Well, this guys is playing atm


    MadFrenchie
    Steam ID Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - 

    Current playing: 
    Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn - Shadowbringers; Genshin Impact

    "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear." Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.
  • AsheramAsheram Member EpicPosts: 4,412
    edited December 2018
    MaxBacon said:
    The launch woes were expected.  The blatant asset recycling (apparently including asset folders still named "ScorchedEarth" and "Aberration") screams lazy flip on what amounts to a conversion ARK mod.  That bothers me much more than any launch issues.

    Hopefully as folks progress into the game it sets itself apart more.  Keeping an eye on it, but the apparent lazy reusing of asset data keeps me from wanting to buy right now.
    I don't see the bother. It has more of its own game by using the same engine as Ark than different battle royale games that are literal copy/pastes.

    The scale of the world, the different focused gameplay theme abd the MMO network setup are worth of its own merits.

    The copy many assets is just logical to me, re-creating things just for the sake of make them less resembling of Ark on the engine of Ark would be rather pointless. The actual lazy bit is having re-used things that were not good points from Ark, such as its UI.
    Laziness in general is bad.  No need to reinvent the wheel, but it definitely brings the "quality" factor down if many assets are obvious hand-me-downs.

    In the end, what will draw me will be the mechanics, which is why I'm keeping an eye on it.  If the mechanics stand out as novel, I'll give it a go.
    I heard they paid $500,000 dollars to modders for their work through the mod sponsorship program should they not be able to use assets that they paid for in their game?

    Would Tabula Risa fans be upset if the game they wish they had back made a similar game with assets from it?
  • TokkenTokken Member RarePosts: 2,553
    edited December 2018
    The reviews will be bad at first, many still can't get on.  Error messages, Disconnection issues, Throttling server log in issues (whatever that is?)...... so ppl will be negative. I expect these issues at any game launch. Anyway, When I have been on Atlas it has been very FUN.   I haven't been this excited for a game in a while like I am for Atlas.  Let the haters hate...... I'm taking things in stride.
    Asheram
    Make PvE GREAT Again!
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Asheram said:
    MaxBacon said:
    The launch woes were expected.  The blatant asset recycling (apparently including asset folders still named "ScorchedEarth" and "Aberration") screams lazy flip on what amounts to a conversion ARK mod.  That bothers me much more than any launch issues.

    Hopefully as folks progress into the game it sets itself apart more.  Keeping an eye on it, but the apparent lazy reusing of asset data keeps me from wanting to buy right now.
    I don't see the bother. It has more of its own game by using the same engine as Ark than different battle royale games that are literal copy/pastes.

    The scale of the world, the different focused gameplay theme abd the MMO network setup are worth of its own merits.

    The copy many assets is just logical to me, re-creating things just for the sake of make them less resembling of Ark on the engine of Ark would be rather pointless. The actual lazy bit is having re-used things that were not good points from Ark, such as its UI.
    Laziness in general is bad.  No need to reinvent the wheel, but it definitely brings the "quality" factor down if many assets are obvious hand-me-downs.

    In the end, what will draw me will be the mechanics, which is why I'm keeping an eye on it.  If the mechanics stand out as novel, I'll give it a go.
    I heard they paid $500,000 dollars to modders for their work through the mod sponsorship program should they not be able to use assets that they paid for in their game?

    Would Tabula Risa fans be upset if the game they wish they had back made a similar game with assets from it?
    What do you mean by the modder program?  Wildcard paid the modders?  What does that have to do with reusing assets?  Who cares how they got them; my point is hand-me-down assets communicate cutting corners.  That worries me.

    image
  • AsheramAsheram Member EpicPosts: 4,412
    edited December 2018
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    Torval
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited December 2018
    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I get what you're saying.

    I'm sure it would save work, but I'm not so sure that would result in any better work in other areas due to the division of labor expertise (i.e. artists not making new models can't just jump on the PvP design team).

    That said, I have to mention that the game also isn't being sold for $60 atm.  As such, I wouldn't mark it off my list solely for that con.  The things I wanna see before I take the plunge are stability in network/performance and mechanics that truly set it apart from its predecessor.
    Asheram

    image
  • AsheramAsheram Member EpicPosts: 4,412
    edited December 2018
    So small or large not sure observation here. Got it downloaded went to server list clicked pve na and each quadrant point to pick to spawn in had different ping highest was like 126 lowest was 87 I think. Needless to say wasn't able to enter any of them. So I decided to try the pvp servers and noticed the pings were alot lower 33 on some up to like 60 or so, there was one that had 1605 but all the rests ping seemed really doable for pvp. I wonder if they bought cheaper servers for the pve part.

    P.S. also each one of those spawn in points says 150 player capacity and there are only 15 which = 2250 not 40k. Is that just the starter area population?
    MadFrenchiePhry
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,293

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    ChildoftheShadowsAsheramConstantineMeruspantaroRedemp
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,941
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Probably a bit more than just asset flipping complaints that are a problem. This reminded me of something I read today.

    https://medium.com/@morganjaffit/the-cost-of-doing-business-c09cc5cc8728

    "Wake up, It's RNG, there is no such thing as 'rare'"
    - Ungood
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Asheram said:
    So small or large not sure observation here. Got it downloaded went to server list clicked pve na and each quadrant point to pick to spawn in had different ping highest was like 126 lowest was 87 I think. Needless to say wasn't able to enter any of them. So I decided to try the pvp servers and noticed the pings were alot lower 33 on some up to like 60 or so, there was one that had 1605 but all the rests ping seemed really doable for pvp. I wonder if they bought cheaper servers for the pve part.

    P.S. also each one of those spawn in points says 150 player capacity and there are only 15 which = 2250 not 40k. Is that just the starter area population?
    The only question really is if they have set the instance limits too high, given how they are handling it i am a bit surprised it is over 100, if they can have the game run stably with up to 150 players then that would be impressive and surprising. I am surprised they didn't start off with a limit of 50 per instance. Its possible that the spawn areas are set to a higher 'cap' and the player limits will be less outside of those areas, also whether or not the areas are heavily instanced themselves, having players in the same area but seperate instances seems probable.
    The difference between the PVE and PVP 'pings' is probably due to the PVE areas being the most populated, the PVP ones could be virtually empty. :/
    Asheram
  • GanksinatraGanksinatra Member UncommonPosts: 455
    I actually had to go look up what this game even was, and when I found the story about it.....well, let's just say I will be waiting/never buying this hehe.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited December 2018
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.

    image
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,293
    edited December 2018
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • NycteliosNyctelios Member EpicPosts: 3,823
    Rants and hair pullings apart... To the topic;

    I watched the stream and well, the game sure needs work: The animations are clunky and the UI is so bad... But underneath all that it looks really fun. Maybe this is the closest thing I'll get from a new Salem. Maybe. We'll see.
    Steam ID Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - 

    Current playing: 
    Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn - Shadowbringers; Genshin Impact

    "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear." Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Torval said:
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Really?  They reuse assets blatantly, without editing or modifying them to make them fresh?  Then why is it titular characters like Geralt look distinctly different throughout the series?  That would be one that re-usage would be absolutely expected, as he's the same character throughout, yet they modified his aesthetic for each game, even if they kept his basic features/model the same.  Same with characters like Triss.


    Again, there's a difference between being efficient and being lazy.

    image
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,293
    Torval said:
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Really?  They reuse assets blatantly, without editing or modifying them to make them fresh?  Then why is it titular characters like Geralt look distinctly different throughout the series?  That would be one that re-usage would be absolutely expected, as he's the same character throughout, yet they modified his aesthetic for each game, even if they kept his basic features/model the same.  Same with characters like Triss.


    Again, there's a difference between being efficient and being lazy.
    There is a disparity between how things work and how you imagine they work.
    ChildoftheShadowsSBFordConstantineMerus
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited December 2018
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Really?  They reuse assets blatantly, without editing or modifying them to make them fresh?  Then why is it titular characters like Geralt look distinctly different throughout the series?  That would be one that re-usage would be absolutely expected, as he's the same character throughout, yet they modified his aesthetic for each game, even if they kept his basic features/model the same.  Same with characters like Triss.


    Again, there's a difference between being efficient and being lazy.
    There is a disparity between how things work and how you imagine they work.
    Elaborate then.  Is there not a difference between lazily porting assets, unchanged, in large swathes as opposed to modifying or sparsely using old assets?

    And no offense, but your code example is irrelevant.  The end user doesn't see the code.  It's not an art asset.

    image
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,293
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Really?  They reuse assets blatantly, without editing or modifying them to make them fresh?  Then why is it titular characters like Geralt look distinctly different throughout the series?  That would be one that re-usage would be absolutely expected, as he's the same character throughout, yet they modified his aesthetic for each game, even if they kept his basic features/model the same.  Same with characters like Triss.


    Again, there's a difference between being efficient and being lazy.
    There is a disparity between how things work and how you imagine they work.
    Elaborate then.  Is there not a difference between lazily porting assets, unchanged, in large swathes as opposed to modifying or sparsely using old assets?

    And no offense, but your code example is irrelevant.  The end user doesn't see the code.  It's not an art asset.
    Because it's not all about art assets. This wasn't even about textures originally. This was people finding folder names and leaping to conclusions as to what that had to imply.

    Did you actually see something specific that shouldn't have been used or reused? Did they copy paste some blatant gimmick from ARK all over ATLAS? What exactly shouldn't have been used? That's the real question.

    If you just don't like the idea and have no specifics then we're done because I'm not interested in micromanaging other peoples projects from the theory side of things. I hate when my projects get micromanaged and I try really hard not to even go there with others.

    Now, if you actually have an instance where you think it was poorly done and shouldn't have been used then reference that and then maybe we can form an opinion because that's tangible. If you feel like they've been copy pasting something in a ridiculous manner then let's out that because I think it's cheap. Reuse where it makes sense. Don't be cheap when something should be developed from scratch whether that be code or art.

    To me, so far the game looks like the same artists that worked on ARK worked on ATLAS. It looks like they built it off their same core engine code and use the same kinds of lighting and all that. The parts that seem like ARK feel common to any survival type. The parts that look piratey don't look much like how it works in ARK at all. Also, it's early access and I'm cautious of those because they can flip flop directions at any time and that's happened.
    ConstantineMerus
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:

    Asheram said:
    Wouldn't that make making better games easier rather than discard all that work and starting over?


    Did Funcom use any assets from AoC to make their limited size world survival game? I haven't played that one just curious.
    I have no problem reusing assets and code. I reuse my code between every project I can. There's always custom stuff to write.

    MMO gamer outrage at asset flipping in a genre that has been a giant asset flip for 20 years is laughable anyway. Gamers are hypocrites. They'll damn a game in one thread and fight tooth and nail to defend their game doing the same thing in another. The FO76 threads have been great for that. It's weird.
    Come now Torval, good devs don't leave obvious asset re-usage (and yes, I'm looking at Blizzard here too.  WoW in the past has been one of the worst).  And where have I (the MMO gamer here, apparently) made excuses for asset flips or supported them in the past?

    I don't wanna see blatant asset flipping anywhere.  If you wanna reuse models with minimal/no edited features in a new way, that can work and is efficient if done intelligently and the model isn't a focal feature point object.  But there's a big difference between efficient and lazy, something you don't seem to acknowledge in your post.
    Yes they do. They most likely forked or cloned ARK from their git repo and built the game from there. It's not a big deal to me if they haven't ripped out or renamed old folder structures yet, or at all. What do I care? I don't care if they reuse assets either.

    These guys make survival games. If this game feels like Pirate Survival instead of Dino Survival then great. I'd think that's what their core demographic is looking for.

    Sometimes derivation works and sometimes it flops. Whether this works or not depends on if it is enjoyable to play, not the methods to build it. Bethesda just tried derivation and it didn't go as planned. Ubisoft just pulled off a few incredible derivative coups this year. MMO expansions are the grossest examples of rehash. See where I'm going?

    I'm not going to get into a philosophical debate about how software developers should do things. I look at their results. If I like the results I'm happy because it's about the code. If I don't then whatever. I don't really like how a lot of software projects are run, so I don't get involved with them. It ends there for me.

    If these guys start pulling a bunch of crap like adding a cash shop later, or promising concurrency and not delivering, or any number of shenanigans studios pull lately, like selling DLC before they leave EA, then I'll take issue with that. I don't care how they develop the product up to that point.
    Really?  They reuse assets blatantly, without editing or modifying them to make them fresh?  Then why is it titular characters like Geralt look distinctly different throughout the series?  That would be one that re-usage would be absolutely expected, as he's the same character throughout, yet they modified his aesthetic for each game, even if they kept his basic features/model the same.  Same with characters like Triss.


    Again, there's a difference between being efficient and being lazy.
    There is a disparity between how things work and how you imagine they work.
    Elaborate then.  Is there not a difference between lazily porting assets, unchanged, in large swathes as opposed to modifying or sparsely using old assets?

    And no offense, but your code example is irrelevant.  The end user doesn't see the code.  It's not an art asset.
    Because it's not all about art assets. This wasn't even about textures originally. This was people finding folder names and leaping to conclusions as to what that had to imply.

    Did you actually see something specific that shouldn't have been used or reused? Did they copy paste some blatant gimmick from ARK all over ATLAS? What exactly shouldn't have been used? That's the real question.

    If you just don't like the idea and have no specifics then we're done because I'm not interested in micromanaging other peoples projects from the theory side of things. I hate when my projects get micromanaged and I try really hard not to even go there with others.

    Now, if you actually have an instance where you think it was poorly done and shouldn't have been used then reference that and then maybe we can form an opinion because that's tangible. If you feel like they've been copy pasting something in a ridiculous manner then let's out that because I think it's cheap. Reuse where it makes sense. Don't be cheap when something should be developed from scratch whether that be code or art.

    To me, so far the game looks like the same artists that worked on ARK worked on ATLAS. It looks like they built it off their same core engine code and use the same kinds of lighting and all that. The parts that seem like ARK feel common to any survival type. The parts that look piratey don't look much like how it works in ARK at all. Also, it's early access and I'm cautious of those because they can flip flop directions at any time and that's happened.
    The audio has been reported both here by users (iirc) and Steam as being identical to ARK.  They've also reported actual environmental assets ported over completely unchanged.  At least cleverly hide or position the damn things to avoid it immediately sounding bells in the ARK player's head of "oh wow, it feels like I've been here dozens of times already."

    I get that basic models and textures are shared, but you can position, modify, or light those assets in a way that makes them seem new.  However, that takes skill and careful planning, the type of careful planning that doesn't result in delaying a release date AFTER the time/date had clearly passed.


    This studio doesn't have enough cred for me to ignore that shit.  At the same time, I can recognize it's not being sold for $60 which is why I said elsewhere I'm waiting on more details about how the gameplay differs from ARK.  Because if they don't do something significant enough, like it or not, those file folders and hidden menu options will paint a shitty picture of just how much time was actually spent developing this game.

    image
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,941
    The fact that they used assets from Ark is not an issue. They just did a very poor job of making it feel like a new game and that, IMO, is what people should be focusing on. 

    The problem with everyone making a big deal about it actually using assets is that most developers who create more than one game that are alike will in fact reuse some assets. The emphasis should be about the quality in which they did it.
    "Wake up, It's RNG, there is no such thing as 'rare'"
    - Ungood
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    The fact that they used assets from Ark is not an issue. They just did a very poor job of making it feel like a new game and that, IMO, is what people should be focusing on. 

    The problem with everyone making a big deal about it actually using assets is that most developers who create more than one game that are alike will in fact reuse some assets. The emphasis should be about the quality in which they did it.
    Well, that was my point in debating with Torval.  There's effience in reusing base models, then there's porting audio and environments, for example, over wholesale without even using or changing them in a way that prevents ARK players from immediately recognizing the exact same assets.

    image
  • RedempRedemp Member UncommonPosts: 1,136
    edited December 2018
    The good news is that while the sounds are similar, or identical in some cases .... the art assets are entirely new from what I've seen. All of the mobs, terrain, buildings are certainly built off old Ark assets but have been changed. Like I said in another forum ... there is enough new and unique here to satisfy me.


    * Working on configuring our private server now, having issues with harvest permissions which is strange. The dev kit for private servers is nice so far.

    MadFrenchieTorval
Sign In or Register to comment.