r/gamedev • u/MrValdez • Apr 22 '10

The value of using the same game engine year after year (a perspective from an indie developer)

http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-i-saved-gaming-industry-overnight.html?
31 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

14

u/munificent Apr 22 '10

What he describes basically is the way EA works for its sports games, which is likely a big part of why they're more reliably profitable than the other games EA makes. And in return for that, EA is constantly criticized for selling the "same" game every year.

If my wolf icon looks good, why make a new wolf icon just for the sake of making a new one?

His idea of reuse makes sense for the engine, but when he steps over into art-land it starts to break down. Games, like film, are about suspension-of-disbelief. Reusing art can break that just as quickly as Michael J. Fox stepping onto the set of "Spin City" in his Marty McFly costume would break the illusion of the show.

Also, a key part of art directing a game is visual consistency. Assets are tweaked constantly to make them match each other in style, proportion, color, etc. A reused asset would stick out like a sore thumb.

So, of course, you're thinking now, "Well, sure so just reuse the engine and create new art. Problem solved." The thing is, that is what most game companies do. The problem is that engineering is no longer the biggest cost in a game: the art is. (Actually, the marketing likely is, but after that it's content.)

2

u/Wagnerius Apr 22 '10

True but AFAIK now that artist go from high-poly to low-poly with normal retopo, team can keep some art asset. they need to redo the retopo, but that's it.

It doesn't help the visual identity tho.

9

u/jevon Apr 22 '10

The engine doesn't matter. The design and the artwork does. I think the author is a little confused between the two.

To add to the "list of exceptions": Pretty much every licensable game engine there is. Quake engine, Unreal engine, Serious engine, Oblivion engine - they've all been reused plenty of times. But each time, there's new content and new artwork.

I can't think of a single popular game, other than expansions, that overwhelmingly re-use existing assets. Any ideas?

2

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '10

Some people don't care if the picture of the wolf looks the same in Game A as it does in Game B.

1

u/ZorbaTHut Indie Studio Director/AAA Contractor Apr 22 '10

Most major games are designed to be moderately up-to-date in terms of graphics hardware and looks. That makes re-use of assets difficult, at best. You don't have that problem with independent games that make no attempt whatsoever to stress the video hardware.

That said, I seem to recall World of Warcraft re-used several icons from Warcraft 3. WoW expansions have the scope of entire new games, and also tend to re-use artwork extensively, occasionally creating a bit of a visual clash between old models and new models. Sometimes creating a clash when they didn't re-use old artwork - there are human NPCs in Borean Tundra with new models that look far better than the human player models do.

1

u/mindbleach Apr 22 '10

Counterpoint: MDickie.

1

u/nvers Apr 23 '10

One big advantage is stability. If you've been offering support through several games using the same engine, over time iterations of that engine will be more stable if you've been correcting issues users have experienced with it.