He's been writing his book and working on his blog. [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/]Nooners said:
The Big Cost of Small Places
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Nice to see Shamus back. Hopefully Stolen Pixels will make a return?
Anyway, I have to admit, I didn't consider all of these little nuances that go into making these high quality games until they were pointed out. I was a bit disappointed with how games had become insufferably linear and short in these past few years, but, after considering exactly how much effort would have to be put into making these games tick, I immediately retract and forgive my previous comments about this.
Still, they could at least give us the honor of making sure the games don't suck. I know that some of these things take a lot of time and effort, but then you run into stuff like movie-licensed games and dime-a-dozen shooters that feel really rushed and hackneyed pieces of crap.
Anyway, I have to admit, I didn't consider all of these little nuances that go into making these high quality games until they were pointed out. I was a bit disappointed with how games had become insufferably linear and short in these past few years, but, after considering exactly how much effort would have to be put into making these games tick, I immediately retract and forgive my previous comments about this.
Still, they could at least give us the honor of making sure the games don't suck. I know that some of these things take a lot of time and effort, but then you run into stuff like movie-licensed games and dime-a-dozen shooters that feel really rushed and hackneyed pieces of crap.
I have been saying the exact same thing for at least 3 years now, because it's so very true yet so many people STILL don't get it!
Some common rebuttals to this argument include "well, if it takes so much time for one person to do it, just hire more people!", which is another great example of how people have no concept of correlation. Hiring more people = spending more money. Then there's "if it's done once, it can be just copy pasted, so why don't they copy paste more?!" Or how about the old "well, they've already done one game with this engine, so why is the sequel taking so long!?"
I thank you for trying to explain a little bit of what people are missing, but the fact remains that people who are more familiar with playing games than making games have, honest to god, no idea whatsoever the amount of work that goes into these games.
I bet most people have no idea the amount of work that went into making Deus Ex, nevermind the two orders of magnitude more work that went into Human Revolution! If people don't understand the baseline as taking a lot of work, then trying to explain the concept behind something taking MORE work than that baseline is like saying "There is more water in the ocean than there is in a lake"
They'll respond with "Okay, but that still doesn't explain why the ocean is so much bigger than the lake!"
People just don't get it.
Some common rebuttals to this argument include "well, if it takes so much time for one person to do it, just hire more people!", which is another great example of how people have no concept of correlation. Hiring more people = spending more money. Then there's "if it's done once, it can be just copy pasted, so why don't they copy paste more?!" Or how about the old "well, they've already done one game with this engine, so why is the sequel taking so long!?"
I thank you for trying to explain a little bit of what people are missing, but the fact remains that people who are more familiar with playing games than making games have, honest to god, no idea whatsoever the amount of work that goes into these games.
I bet most people have no idea the amount of work that went into making Deus Ex, nevermind the two orders of magnitude more work that went into Human Revolution! If people don't understand the baseline as taking a lot of work, then trying to explain the concept behind something taking MORE work than that baseline is like saying "There is more water in the ocean than there is in a lake"
They'll respond with "Okay, but that still doesn't explain why the ocean is so much bigger than the lake!"
People just don't get it.
Great to see you back Shamus!
I did muse about this once while playing Metro 2033. Every room is very unique and this does add up. So I'm with you when you say we shouldn't be in a rush to the next console cycle.
*crosses fingers for stolen pixels*
I did muse about this once while playing Metro 2033. Every room is very unique and this does add up. So I'm with you when you say we shouldn't be in a rush to the next console cycle.
*crosses fingers for stolen pixels*
Surely the solution to the furnishings and buildings to some degree would be to copy the real world: outsource. Not insource, properly outsource:
Create an industry environment such that virtual furnishing specialists can exist.
This might sound utterly batshit insane in isolation. In a world suffering from yada yada yada we have resources to spare on virtual professions etc etc etc. All that crap. But think about it: What we have at present is a bunch of companies each re-inventing the same blasted wheel. I'm not suggesting that a stage set in the office of the CEO of a design company not utilise unique furniture -- of course not, the NPC itself is a designer -- but rather that there's no reason the slums in Game A by Developer AA set in the year 20XX shouldn't have the same furnishings as the slums in Game B by Developer BB set in the same year 20XX. Suburbia too to an extent. Consider houses built from generic plans in outer suburbs.
In reality we have IKEA. Bunch of vikings, cheap hotdogs, frozen meatballs, shitty stub-pencils, allen keys, bookcases named after tall, fair and mysterious men. That's most of the Western world. But even beyond that, life isn't dissimilar. Presently I live in a small nation not in the Western world where every apartment comes with the exact same crappy chair. I'm sitting on it now, the rim of it jabs up into my butt and makes me lose bloodflow after 5 minutes. I seem them in businesses too. Same cheap chair. Another example: I grew up on the exact same model of bed you'd see in cheap motels across an entire country. That's a different country by the way, and I believe they weren't even IKEA models either, just another mass-producer existing in competition. What I'm saying is this shit isn't a country or locale-specific thing, that's just how business and economies of scale work in this era. Believe it or not, 1990s game design principles actually mirror reality for much of the world.
To an extent, the same approach can work for apartments too. To repeat things without it feeling weird, developers just need to observe reality and take stock of areas where uniqueness can and should be sacrificed.
Sure, for games with unique design aesthetics (fantasty stuff basically) this approach wouldn't work, but these games also have the design-space to simplify ones surroundings. It's only realistic shooters and the like that need a realistic room, so why not take a realistic approach?
Create an industry environment such that virtual furnishing specialists can exist.
This might sound utterly batshit insane in isolation. In a world suffering from yada yada yada we have resources to spare on virtual professions etc etc etc. All that crap. But think about it: What we have at present is a bunch of companies each re-inventing the same blasted wheel. I'm not suggesting that a stage set in the office of the CEO of a design company not utilise unique furniture -- of course not, the NPC itself is a designer -- but rather that there's no reason the slums in Game A by Developer AA set in the year 20XX shouldn't have the same furnishings as the slums in Game B by Developer BB set in the same year 20XX. Suburbia too to an extent. Consider houses built from generic plans in outer suburbs.
In reality we have IKEA. Bunch of vikings, cheap hotdogs, frozen meatballs, shitty stub-pencils, allen keys, bookcases named after tall, fair and mysterious men. That's most of the Western world. But even beyond that, life isn't dissimilar. Presently I live in a small nation not in the Western world where every apartment comes with the exact same crappy chair. I'm sitting on it now, the rim of it jabs up into my butt and makes me lose bloodflow after 5 minutes. I seem them in businesses too. Same cheap chair. Another example: I grew up on the exact same model of bed you'd see in cheap motels across an entire country. That's a different country by the way, and I believe they weren't even IKEA models either, just another mass-producer existing in competition. What I'm saying is this shit isn't a country or locale-specific thing, that's just how business and economies of scale work in this era. Believe it or not, 1990s game design principles actually mirror reality for much of the world.
To an extent, the same approach can work for apartments too. To repeat things without it feeling weird, developers just need to observe reality and take stock of areas where uniqueness can and should be sacrificed.
Sure, for games with unique design aesthetics (fantasty stuff basically) this approach wouldn't work, but these games also have the design-space to simplify ones surroundings. It's only realistic shooters and the like that need a realistic room, so why not take a realistic approach?
This ties in to a point I had as well, something that I tend to think about sometimes.
How much more graphical fidelity do we really need, anyway? Are we at the point yet that the cost to benefit ratio doesn't justify making things any "prettier"? We aren't exactly at photorealism yet, but assuming we ever got the tech to the point it could produce photorealism, could any company afford to actually make a full game using it?
I imagine there's a plateau of sorts, some point we'll reach where the graphics are as good as they'll get while still being cheap enough to produce that a profit can be made off it.
How much more graphical fidelity do we really need, anyway? Are we at the point yet that the cost to benefit ratio doesn't justify making things any "prettier"? We aren't exactly at photorealism yet, but assuming we ever got the tech to the point it could produce photorealism, could any company afford to actually make a full game using it?
I imagine there's a plateau of sorts, some point we'll reach where the graphics are as good as they'll get while still being cheap enough to produce that a profit can be made off it.
Yeah....I agree thats all that SHOULD be needed. Spending several years working with people who will take any opportunity to lord their degree over me while they ask for my help turning their computer on has made me incredibly cynical. People are stupid. People are self absorbed asshats with no idea how much work anyone other than themself does. There are exceptions of course.The.Bard said:
From my own point of view, I would quite happily trade in some photo realism for more levels. I could also live if the toilets don't flush. Its a nice touch and all, but it doesn't add to the gameplay, I'd rather have another level.
I had an interesting experience this week, we dug out the Lightcycle custom level on starcraft 2. Here is a game with the most basic gameplay "don't crash" pretty basic graphics. Yet I can categorically say I enjoyed it more than I enjoyed CoD. Photorealism and lipsyncing is nice, but we seem to be forgetting to make games fun.
Here's another idea - how about furniture manufacturers letting the game developers use the 3D models/textures/normal maps of their furniture (I'm pretty sure they have those during the conceptual/manufacturing phase)? The developers won't have to spend time on creating these assets and potentially not pay for them either, as they work as in-game advertisement.snave said:
In fact, stretch this idea to other facets of asset development as well. It's a win-win situation for everybody!
Your last statement there, I'm gonna have to take issue with. What makes you think that the next generation of consoles will shoot for better, more expensive graphics? The industry is already struggling to breathe under the weight of all the expenses you just mentioned, and I don't think that the hardware manufacturers are going to find it a smart move to continue on the "better, more expensive" path (except maybe Sony). Wouldn't the next generation be more likely to focus on making things EASIER for the devs, instead of throwing more and more expensive nonsense at them when we're way past the point of diminishing returns?
This could be a good topic for a future Experienced Points. If, you know, you ever get around to it.
This could be a good topic for a future Experienced Points. If, you know, you ever get around to it.
I think the big thing about this article, is it illustrates how we can't go back. Once we've been shown what we've been shown, not to do it makes the game dull and boring and non-sensical.
And the thing is, for the people saying a new console generation might not do this, if we have a couple of Crysis people, a couple of Battlefields, a couple of Uncharted's, making games look as good as they do (and to be fair, there is nothing wrong with a beautiful game, there's some things which are inherently right about a game so beautiful you have to stop and stare) then suddenly all the people developing games that look as good as they do now will have games that look ugly and stupid by comparison, and we won't be able to go back again.
I guess I'm hoping that maybe stock resources and power to stop the need for optimisation, might make this problem gradually get better, but as you point out, detail has to be designed and that's always going to make time Even if we don't have to create the magazines to go on a table, even choosing the magazines and placing them on the correct tables takes more time that not even having a table and you can do so much by designing detail it'll look sloppy when people just bash something together
EDIT: Hmm typed the wrong word into the captcha and it still published, is there some kind of margin for error?
And the thing is, for the people saying a new console generation might not do this, if we have a couple of Crysis people, a couple of Battlefields, a couple of Uncharted's, making games look as good as they do (and to be fair, there is nothing wrong with a beautiful game, there's some things which are inherently right about a game so beautiful you have to stop and stare) then suddenly all the people developing games that look as good as they do now will have games that look ugly and stupid by comparison, and we won't be able to go back again.
I guess I'm hoping that maybe stock resources and power to stop the need for optimisation, might make this problem gradually get better, but as you point out, detail has to be designed and that's always going to make time
Even if we don't have to create the magazines to go on a table, even choosing the magazines and placing them on the correct tables takes more time that not even having a table and you can do so much by designing detail it'll look sloppy when people just bash something togetherEDIT: Hmm typed the wrong word into the captcha and it still published, is there some kind of margin for error?
Thanks for covering this. It's probably the biggest and least obvious current issue related to games. I quickly googled the dialogue for both since it's an easily quantifiable and reliable indicator, apparently in the time of DX its 10k spoken lines were startling enough to be worth mentioning in releases. HR has 200k, 20x the number and at release that also was a selling point. Everything needs to be bigger and better than the thing that came before, but it's reaching the limit of profitability for AAA games.
The only thing that seems likely to help is some form of modularity in the development process. The majority of developers will not current build a graphics engine, preferring to license one pre built and tailor it to their needs. In the same way, it must become possible to access a pool of pre built objects, each of which can be tailored to suit. While still far from a solution it would at least provide an alternative.
Unless you want everything to be generated randomly and procedurally, of course. That's a whole other discussion.
The only thing that seems likely to help is some form of modularity in the development process. The majority of developers will not current build a graphics engine, preferring to license one pre built and tailor it to their needs. In the same way, it must become possible to access a pool of pre built objects, each of which can be tailored to suit. While still far from a solution it would at least provide an alternative.
Unless you want everything to be generated randomly and procedurally, of course. That's a whole other discussion.
Building on what Chirez said.
Basically what people need these days is Stock Gaming Footage Programs. Programs that design X amount of base environments and the developers can just use that to suit their needs and detail it to their own taste.
Basically a separate company or a software company that does little else but design stuff. Puts it in a big library then licenses that library to whoever wants to. Than any developer can just pull a couch off of that library, add a bloodstain and BAM! We're back to the level of time and effort it took to design a couch in 2000.
The thing is though established industries are always slow to change. It will probably take years if not decades before an idea voiced by a random guy on the internet actually gets implemented even if current day technology can handle it perfectly. I mean we still don't have "Movie on demand" from Hollywood. Pay 8$ to see a movie on release date streamed to your TV.
Basically what people need these days is Stock Gaming Footage Programs. Programs that design X amount of base environments and the developers can just use that to suit their needs and detail it to their own taste.
Basically a separate company or a software company that does little else but design stuff. Puts it in a big library then licenses that library to whoever wants to. Than any developer can just pull a couch off of that library, add a bloodstain and BAM! We're back to the level of time and effort it took to design a couch in 2000.
The thing is though established industries are always slow to change. It will probably take years if not decades before an idea voiced by a random guy on the internet actually gets implemented even if current day technology can handle it perfectly. I mean we still don't have "Movie on demand" from Hollywood. Pay 8$ to see a movie on release date streamed to your TV.
To be honest I still get excited if I press A or X in a shower and it does that 3 second burst of water! Even if nothing gets visably wet, and it appears to flow through the character, its a nice touch!
Hell! I replayed the Darkness again recently, and it was the first FPS I played where you could see your body, and ever now and again I would do the 'look down and see your legs and coat' dance! I like the games as detailed as they are! Hell I play a lot of RPG's on my DS, and I have never once actually been bothered that all the furniture all over the world is identical, its just something my mind has accepted!
Hell! I replayed the Darkness again recently, and it was the first FPS I played where you could see your body, and ever now and again I would do the 'look down and see your legs and coat' dance! I like the games as detailed as they are! Hell I play a lot of RPG's on my DS, and I have never once actually been bothered that all the furniture all over the world is identical, its just something my mind has accepted!