How much work in a game...

[Weta43]

Dan Houser talking about "The Warriors" Rockstar Games (Grand Theft Auto) founder describing the effort required to make the new game:

Mr. Houser took pains to emphasize that it took about 50 people - from programmers to costume directors - four years to make the Warriors.

That's with no reality for hard-core fans to check against.

No Wonder E.D. would rather do incremental changes than wholesale re-writes...

[TucksonSonny]

Dan Houser talking about "The Warriors" Rockstar Games (Grand Theft Auto) founder describing the effort required to make the new game:

Mr. Houser took pains to emphasize that it took about 50 people - from programmers to costume directors - four years to make the Warriors.

That's with no reality for hard-core fans to check against.

No Wonder E.D. would rather do incremental changes than wholesale re-writes...

 

In my opinion projects over four years are not a good idea because hardware and software is evolving much faster (rather on a 2 year period) and as a result the GFX-engine would be history after 4 years.

Just compare falcon4 engine with lomac/FC and you know what I mean.

New GFX engines based on new directX versions (like DirectX 9.0c) are setting new standards.

 

Example: Panzers Phase I/II was setting a new standard in the RTS genre last year:

(I am curious if Microsoft can beat the GFX with Age Of The Empires III next month)

;)

[Gazehound]

Mr. Houser took pains to emphasize that it took about 50 people - from programmers to costume directors - four years to make the Warriors.

 

The thing I find most amusing about this is that I have never heard of this 'Warriors' game :o I just went to their website and couldnt find much apart from flash menu nonsense lol.

It does put ED projects into perspective though, although im sure its a completely different set-up, I imagine rockstar are using motion capture & actors, rather than 3d modelling, and if its a cult film, it must be adhered to!

[Dudikoff]

Example: Panzers Phase I/II was setting a new standard in the RTS genre last year: ;)

 

I never saw any standard set with that game. It's like Swine but with WWII tanks and troops. As a similar game, I found Soldiers: Heroes of WWII much more realistic AND fun to play. The sequel is looking even better (Outfront II). Too bad crap like this Codename Panzers gets the publicity (and publishers) while a serious product from 1C that was called WWII RTS (who knows what's it called now) has so much problems finding a publisher.

[192nd_Erdem]

Example: Panzers Phase I/II was setting a new standard in the RTS genre last year

 

I doubt.They just took their time to work on graphics engine and models.I downloaded the demo with the hope that it's the WW2 RTS I've been waiting for,and after playing for 5 mins every byte of that game was deleted from my comp with a big disappointment.I just hate WW2 RTS' that say "OMG TRY THIS!THIS IS THE BEST REALISTIC WW2 RTS EVA!" and no bit of it in the game.

 

And if you're saying that an "arcade" game that just has good animation/graphics set a new standart in RTS,there's no need for those to set standarts.Put the best atmosphere and realism in it and it'll "set standarts" like Falcon :)

 

Now my fingers are crossed for 1C's WW2 RTS ;)

[TucksonSonny]

I never saw any standard set with that game. It's like Swine but with WWII tanks and troops. As a similar game, I found Soldiers: Heroes of WWII much more realistic AND fun to play. The sequel is looking even better (Outfront II). Too bad crap like this Codename Panzers gets the publicity (and publishers) while a serious product from 1C that was called WWII RTS (who knows what's it called now) has so much problems finding a publisher.

 

 

I guess I had in mind: a new standard in GFX engine. Anyway the GFX engine is. I was a fan of “Sudden Strike II” but had (until panzers) not seen any true 3D in RTS with 3D perspective. Can you name an RTS which is not arcade? If not it was a sim.

It is true me too I have modded panzers a lot to get this panzers a little realistic.

I turned my back also for the T72 tanksim which was too arcade for me.

The problem is there are no sims anymore except ms flightsim2004, F4 and FC ;) !

Anyway, sometime it is fun to blow stuff up without studying a manual first.

:icon_weed

[tflash]

I agree with Sonny. If you look at the quantum leap in graphics, even between Panzers I and II or other big RTS titles, you understand the Flightsim world no longer has any lead whatsoever.

 

Lockon is a 2003 game! Il-2 is essentially the game it was before the great IT-dawn in 2000 (You know, granddad's time when people believed in computers and internet and stuff)

 

What does Microsoft have? CFS3 is the shame of the industry and FS2004 just didn't deliver.

 

If someone can tell me the difference between WOV and the ages older SFP1, please tell me (that's why both are still my favourite).

 

F4:AF: this really sports dinosaur graphics. Do people really think this is acceptable today? It's a DOS-game, dead simple.

 

Advances in Flightsims are really crawling, and are measured in terms off "burn through is now at 10nm instead of 15nm" or "the R-27AE is no longer available for enhanced realism". Or: "maverick locks are now limited at 3nm since we didn't find any documentation proving otherwise." Waaaaawww. What a progress. What a worth-the-wait!

 

The problem seems that Lockon has the highest standards for to long now already, but doesn't seem to SET the standard: the industry does't follow. I guess they think making an AFM in Lockon's way is to expensive; on the other hand it's graphics are good, but don't seem at pace with the hardware. the game is nearly three years old (it would be an antiquity in RTS-world) and only now do I have a PC that really maches its capabilities.

[Weta43]

Which for E.D is good - they can get another release from this engine & still be at the front of the pack, & we can just slowly wind up the graphics from MED. as our machines catch up.

[Dudikoff]

but had (until panzers) not seen any true 3D in RTS with 3D perspective. Can you name an RTS which is not arcade? If not it was a sim.Anyway, sometime it is fun to blow stuff up without studying a manual first.

 

Well, try the Soldiers:Heroes of WWII I mentioned. The AI could be better, but it's certainly not worse than Codename Panzers. You have realistic armour values, weapons and can even command single infantry units and pickup up weapons from dead soldiers. Tanks have AP and HE rounds with matching behaviour (for instance, an AP round will just go through an APC but if you hit it with HE it will be blown to pieces). The only thing that's overdone are the vehicle explosions.

 

And talk about blowing stuff up! You have this direct control mode where you take command of the unit and it targets where you point your mouse and fires when you press the button. Not only does the game have a 3d engine (camera can be rotated, but the up - down vview angles are limited as well as the zoom) but all objects on the scenery are destructable.

 

Panzers are nothing more than a big JOKE after you play this game. Ok, I only played panzers demo but it was enough to see what piece of shit it is, especially after Soldiers. And it's sequel just got the publisher (the dreadded Ubisoft - it will be called Faces of War).

 

And if you want something more serious, I mentioned WWII RTS. Full 3d, full realism. I only wish they find a publisher (they got in a fight with Codemasters) and that somebody makes a tank sim out of it.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/wartimecommand/news.html?sid=2865016

 

But I agree about T72. Besides the bullshit story the game has, the demo was unplayable as a tank sim. It was that bad. I hope Steel Beasts 2 will be finished soon.

[TucksonSonny]

Well, try the Soldiers:Heroes of WWII I mentioned. The AI could be better, but it's certainly not worse than Codename Panzers. You have realistic armour values, weapons and can even command single infantry units and pickup up weapons from dead soldiers. Tanks have AP and HE rounds with matching behaviour (for instance, an AP round will just go through an APC but if you hit it with HE it will be blown to pieces). The only thing that's overdone are the vehicle explosions.

 

And talk about blowing stuff up! You have this direct control mode where you take command of the unit and it targets where you point your mouse and fires when you press the button. Not only does the game have a 3d engine (camera can be rotated, but the up - down vview angles are limited as well as the zoom) but all objects on the scenery are destructable.

 

Panzers are nothing more than a big JOKE after you play this game. Ok, I only played panzers demo but it was enough to see what piece of shit it is, especially after Soldiers. And it's sequel just got the publisher (the dreadded Ubisoft - it will be called Faces of War).

 

And if you want something more serious, I mentioned WWII RTS. Full 3d, full realism. I only wish they find a publisher (they got in a fight with Codemasters) and that somebody makes a tank sim out of it.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/wartimecommand/news.html?sid=2865016

 

But I agree about T72. Besides the bullshit story the game has, the demo was unplayable as a tank sim. It was that bad. I hope Steel Beasts 2 will be finished soon.

 

WWII RTS that looks indeed pretty good. Very promising and I like the camera angles too.

I definitely am going to buy this if it comes ever on the market. I have 2 interests at the moment: flight sims (since Falcon3.0) and WWII RTS.

 

About T72 I have to say that I have based my opinion on some bad comments found on the net (I even did not try the demo). Maybe I give it a chance anyway.

 

 

Thanks for the info ijozic,

[Shaman]

Developing some games takes "Forever"

Think, Duke Nukem :D

[SUBS17]

At least Doom is now a movie, can't wait to see that chainsaw in action:D