Page 3 of 8
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:45 pm
Kojack wrote:I'm not sure why Sony is involved. They make Android phones and don't have any other conflicting business with Google, but they helped start a group that is trying to take google down.
Sony bought a youtube-like company I don't remember the name of which will be used to publish videos from PS4 game sessions.
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:54 pm
Hmm, that would explain why the PS4 supports uploading videos to facebook but not youtube.
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:11 pm
This info might not be totally correct as I can't find the source (it was at the end of last year if I remember correctly).
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:53 pm
Well Sony launched that youtube competitor site way back about 6 years ago. It was a japanese service called EyeVio, or did they do something since then?
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 6:13 pm
Maybe it's part of the PSN, as they have video service there on the Playstation Network website.
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:32 pm
I'm heading in to work after a week break. I bet I will get a comment along the lines of "ogre is crap" (from a certain person) before 9:30.
I'd love to be wrong, but not likely.
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:24 am
Wow, 11:22am and no complaints yet.
Instead the person I was expecting it from was distracted by being pissed off with 3ds max, computer mice, cartoons with loud noises and many other topics. So ogre got lucky.
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:39 am
There's room for all of us to be pissed off at 3DS Max
That software is the patience litmus test. It could make Ned Flanders break out into 4 letter words.
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:30 am
Been trying to think of something that super-irritates me for this thread, but nothing came to mind. Until today when I played Team Fortress 2.
Now that it's free to play, half the teams are ruined by too many people playing sniper and spy. These two classes have the special ability of a one-hit kill, the sniper by headshot and the spy by backstab. They are also fairly tricky classes to play well, especially the spy, and not that useful in large numbers since they are fairly weak healthwise so not much good for attacking or defending points directly (or pushing the cart). They are more support classes, although that doesn't mean they can't be the best or most useful player on the team. Ideally a team might have one of each, and not more than 3 all together, played by people who really knows what they are doing.
Instead, every n00b thinks he's going to be a hero and slaughter the other side with his incredible one-hit kill skills. Many teams you have 3 spies AND 3 snipers, most of them totally bloody useless. That's half the team wasted, plus there's no one left to play medic. If the other team is even moderately competent, they slaughter you from beginning to end, capture-point after capture-point. If you complain in chat, they don't listen. And then as the game draws to it's awful, inevitable losing close they all bail.
And n00bs have no concept of a well rounded team. It doesn't matter if it's glaringly obvious the team desperately needs a medic for healing, or an engineer for teleports, or a pyro for spy control, or more muscle in the form of heavies and soldiers. No, they'll stick to spy or sniper, despite lots of desperate team chat requests for the needed classes. Until perhaps the last 30 seconds of the game, on the brink of unavoidable loss, when they'll suddenly all change to the needed classes, way too late to make any difference to the bleak outcome. And when the next game starts, they all switch right back to sniper/spy.
It was never like this before free-to-play, but now pretty much every second game is like this. I've been on teams where there were 7 snipers. All clueless.
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:29 am
I feel with you.
I played the game when it was not free, mostly as a spy. There were no more than 2 spies on each side. And it was fine. You actually have to "play your role" which is not easy and I'm sure I sucked at the beginning, too. But yes, I can really imagine how it is now with everyone wanting to play a spy first. It would be weird even if everyone was good at it.
I also played the other classes, but to be honest, the spy for me was just most fun. First of all, it is vastly different in gameplay. With all other classes, you just run around shooting (rockets, miniguns, health-rays, sniper, ...) something. That's more or less what all shooters do, they only vary in nuances (like how you move while you shoot). But spies are very different to play. Maybe that is the "problem"?
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:43 am
I used to love playing the multiplayer demo of Return To Castle Wolfenstein (never got around to playing the full version as multiplayer). It had a map where the allies land on the beach, dodge enemy fire, blow up a wall with dynamite, then try to infiltrate a base and steal some plans.
I used to be great at the engineer class, the one who blows up the wall. That was also worth a ton of points.
Friendly fire was usually off, but the dynamite (which could only be planted at the right spot) could still team kill.
Here's what would often happen:
- Match starts.
- I tear up the beach, through the barb wire and obstacles, and reach the wall before most of the axis forces have even started to get in position.
- I'd plant the dynamite. This leaves a giant red flashing light to show the danger zone. A timer would start (it was like 10 or 20 seconds).
- The NORMAL procedure now would be for the allies to defend the area, to stop the axis from jumping the wall and disarming the dynamite (takes several seconds of using a tool). There's no way to proceed without taking out the wall.
- Point stealing idiot engineer on the ally side would run up to my dynamite, try to disarm it so he could drop his instead and take the points instead of me.
- Point stealing idiot engineer is too slow, and my dynamite goes off while he's still sitting on it.
- The game flags that as a team kill, and asks the point stealing idiot engineer if he wants to start a kick vote against me. Obviously he does.
- Everybody on the team gets a kick vote against me as a team killer. Most automatically pick yes.
- I'm kicked.
Yeah, kicked for playing the game correctly and well.
It happened often enough that I gave up on the game and never tried the full version's multiplayer.
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:06 am
It's one of the reasons I am not playing co-op multiplayer games any more: Other players.
Seriously, if the game allows players to screw over their own team by either being ***holes or noobs, I don't play them.
There are games where this is not true, like Firefall or Guild Wars. There, it doesn't really matter if there is the odd "unhelpful" player. But there are games where such people can ruin it for everyone (Natural Selection comes to mind). I just don't play those. When starting as a new player, I know I'll be ruining it for some. That just sucks. When being experienced, I know some new players will ruin it for me. Also sucks.
There are so many great games out there (which do not have frustration I can do nothing against) that I made the decision not to bother with the described sort of co-op games any more.
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:49 pm
For some reason I find competitive multiplayer games much more addictive than single player. Despite the massive frustration and the fact that I'll invariably lose roughly half the time, the satisfaction from being on a successful team is something I just can't get from single player games. Even though those teams are just a bunch of pub strangers thrown briefly together. It's weird, I hate competition, and firmly believe that Hell is other people, yet multiplayer combat has me hooked. I've played more hours of TF2 than I probably have of all the other games in my entire life combined. I guess something about human versus human combat, where the outcome is not pre-defined, taps something deep in the psyche. Single player games want you to beat them, but multiplayer games are genuinely trying to stop you.
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:26 pm
mkultra333 wrote:For some reason I find competitive multiplayer games much more addictive than single player. Despite the massive frustration and the fact that I'll invariably lose roughly half the time, the satisfaction from being on a successful team is something I just can't get from single player games. Even though those teams are just a bunch of pub strangers thrown briefly together. It's weird, I hate competition, and firmly believe that Hell is other people, yet multiplayer combat has me hooked. I've played more hours of TF2 than I probably have of all the other games in my entire life combined. I guess something about human versus human combat, where the outcome is not pre-defined, taps something deep in the psyche. Single player games want you to beat them, but multiplayer games are genuinely trying to stop you.
This is interesting.
I have 2 things to says on that very topic:
1. I'm a lot worried that my game could contribute to "gamer anger" as being very competitive. I'm like you I don't like that, but I also don't get addicted to competition because I've seen how angry it can make people, for no good reasons. I don't want to participate to that with my game, but it's also a game that encourage conflicts and playing with others... so competition is natural for it. I'll work at making it more enjoyable in collaboration though. I've worked hard to technically allow different kind of multiplayer setup, like team deathmatch or collaboration against armies of AIs. However I think I will not be able to avoid setting up some kind of ladder. I'm looking for ways to do it that would be enjoyable for everybody, but research on this shows that it's possible but hard to setup.
2. I think FROM SOFTWARE got it right with Demon's Soul and Dark Souls. They are the ones inspiring the whole new consoles games that mix solo and multiplayer, and I believe they did it the right way, by not allowing stupid taunting, by making the game about skill more than anything, by using a context that inspire respect and overall makes the community very respectful. Also, stressful in some ways but only if you go in multiplayer modes.
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 7:15 pm
I consider the individual competition less important than the team competition. I'm not indifferent to individual status, I certainly prefer to be top 3 on my team, but in general I value a team win over personal glory and a team loss. I'd rather be 5th on a winning team than 1st on a losing one.
Edit: In terms of game design, perhaps to encourage team play rather than individual play, simply don't give any glory to anyone on the losing teams. TF2 as standard only mentions the winning team and the top 3 players on that team. So it's best to be one of the best players on the better team, and better to be on the winning team than the losers. Being the best player on the losing team is worthless as far as glory goes.
Some mods alter this, and also show the best three players on the losing team, and sometimes stats like best kill streak regardless of team win or loss. I think that's a mistake, because it means selfish players are still tempted to sacrifice what's best for the team for what's best for them individually, as far as recognition goes. You can get a team where the top three players are snipers, but the team lost. Yeah, they killed a lot and scored big, but totally failed to do anything useful strategically as far as holding points or pushing the cart, and the team lost because of that.
Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:39 am
I think it is more important to align goals of selfish players with the team goals. Pissing off selfish players will just hurt game popularity. Those players can be extremely helpful if "used correctly". I know this is probably not possible in every game, but I would again bring in Guild Wars 2 as a great example of how this can be done.
Let's say you have a daily mission of "Kill 30 mobs of type X". In Guild Wars 2, this will automatically make you run around, looking for that type of mob and while doing so you will encounter other players or groups that probably have the mission "Protect this guy running from A to B". And it just so happens that it is possible that their mission will bring in mobs of your type X monster. So, of course, you will help the others. The other players have an easier time with their mission (without losing XP), you get a chance at your daily mission and get the additional bonus from helping out on a mission. It's win-win.
Of course, this is easier to do in any MMO structure than any kind of team vs team setups. Then again, I wouldn't exactly expect players that don't like team gameplay to play that many team games.
Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:50 am
Yeah there is less data about ways to do this kind of things when it's more like a RTS (like my game), although Dota and LoL have strong data about community features that helps limit people being nocive at each others.
Posted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 11:32 pm
I am a college student and I can say with experience that college students will complain about anything and everything in general. I've seen it, and I've heard it from so many of my peers! The fact is complaining about your instructor won't improve your grades. I don't ever complain unless I have a legitimate reason because of that fact. Personally I think they should be grateful that they are there, and there to learn, not get good enough grades to get a good job. The fact is if you have the knowledge and skills an employer will hire you. Most employers don't even look at your grades! Look at bill gates, and other successful drop outs. They knew enough about the subject to drop out and still succeed, whether the schooling helped them or not. I'm not saying its a good idea to drop out even if you know your stuff though. That's a decision that's up to you.
I will paraphrase what LazyFoo said on his website (http://www.lazyfoo.net
) about bill gates with some of my own input thrown in: lots of people think that they can drop out and be successful like Bill Gates because people like the idea that they can succeed without even trying. Like education is some sort of evil thing that won't ever let you get anywhere in life. They defy common sense but anyway Bill Gates had 10,000+ hours experience programming computers. Even after starting microsoft and making the windows operating system he barely did any programming. He was CEO for a good number of years remember, he had an uncountable number of underlings to do that for him.
In my own opinion Bill Gates was more a business man than a genius software engineer.
Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:22 am
Half an hour into the final student game presentations and there's already industry guests asking why a torchlight clone is using ogre instead of unity, because ogre limits the potential audience, delays development so less artwork can be done and stops them going commercial somehow.
fighting to hold my tongue (and failing).
Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:00 am
I get why they think Ogre delays development, but I have no idea how anyone could possibly conceive that it limits the potential audience. Do gamers only play games if they are made in certain frameworks?
Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:15 am
Kojack wrote:Half an hour into the final student game presentations and there's already industry guests asking why a torchlight clone is using ogre instead of unity, because ogre limits the potential audience, delays development so less artwork can be done and stops them going commercial somehow.
fighting to hold my tongue (and failing).
I lol reading that it makes me doubt how expert they are. For instance torchlight was developed in OGRE in 11 month with a team of 14. For a full game to be designed and released in that time is very good imo.
Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:50 am
One of the main problems I have with this unity craze in education and indie dev is the proposition that unity is now the only possible solution, it's impossible to make games in a short time period without it. Do these people not remember the games industry existing before unity's release? I also see a lot of non programmers (industry people and teachers) who think the end result of a student project is directly the fault of the graphics engine. Project missed a milestone? Must be ogre's fault. Character meshes aren't well modelled? Probably because ogre mesh exporters aren't good enough. Nobody wants to say "you know, students don't always make 100% AAA quality game content in their first large scale group project, it's not the middleware's fault". Well, they do do that, when it's something like unity. Then it's the student's fault. but if ogre is involved, it gets the blame for everything.
I don't have a problem with professional devs using unity (I know a lot of former students of mine who are enjoying making mobile or pc games on unity because it's fast and simple to develop), but I think it's important for students to not take the easy way out when learning to become programmers. A student who builds an engine with separate middleware like ogre is going to learn a lot more than someone who has it all already done for them in unity or just grabs something from the asset store.
I was making a vr demo of a highly detailed character model made by a coworker (million plus tris). easy ogre exporter exported it flawlessly without changes. i had to hand make the materials because she used some custom max material node plugins, but the geometry was simple. just for the hell of it i tried loading the same model in unity. it failed to load. but over and over i'm told that the ogre art pipeline is a huge hinderance to artists.
Choose ogre? Fine. Choose unity? Fine. Choose irrlicht, osg, horde3d, etc? Fine. Just don't criticize others for thinking there's more than one choice available.
i find the exact same mentality from iphone developers. some of my students made a cool android game and released it on the store. when shown to industry guests, they were asked "why did you limit your market by not doing it on iphone?" the students said they all owned android phones and tablets. the industry guys said "then buy iphones". the coder said "i already know java well and have coded for android before". the industry guys said "you should have learned iphone". i really wish i wasn't as polite as i typically am, i had many things to say.
hmm, sorry for the atypical lack of capitals and formatting, i'm typing this on a virtual keyboard in a food court.
Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:31 am
Sounds like when your school invites industry people to look at your students' work what you actually get is shills or a bunch of profit-maximising business folk instead of people who like making games.
Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:40 am
This is another stupid industry one iphone doesn't hold the market android does face palm. These people need sacking imo they don't know the markets.
http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/12/window ... shipments/
Interesting one in spain I didn't know about http://www.businessinsider.com/apples-i ... ut-2013-12
Actually in my office the only people to have iphones are directors. Rest are windows/android mix
Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:29 pm
Android recently passed 80% market share in the mobile domain. Windows phone has risen significantly, to the point they will likely hold more share than iphone. (edit durp I just clicked your link, Zonder and it spells all that out haha. Good show!) Turns out consumers don't want an 800$ unlocked phone, or to be stuck in a 2-3 year contract with their carrier. Go figure
There was a time when the apple store was a much better bet for developers than google play, since apple users were more likely to spend money in the store than android users ... so I get why people still parrot the outdated info.
areay wrote:Sounds like when your school invites industry people to look at your students' work what you actually get is shills or a bunch of profit-maximising business folk instead of people who like making games.
Sadly, I bet many developers go through the same crap with their publisher. Like hey we need a vertical slice, so just delay your whole development cycle and re-arrange all your production so we can verify if you can actually make a character run around the screen. Also you need to target X and Y hardware ... and ooooo we heard that the W and Z demographic is strong right now so add some emo characters.