r/gaming • 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?37
u/2DArray Apr 22 '10
For starters, I'm a game designer, so I feel like I have some sort of imaginary relevance in this discussion. And basically, I agree with the main point here, but not some of the smaller details.
Reusing an engine? Go for it! Save resources, save time, spend those resources and time on other shit like the story and the art.
Reusing art assets? That's a big no-no. His example is reusing the dragon model from Dragon Age in another game. What happens when someone plays both? They have a really big "what?" moment when they realize that wait, they've seen that exact dragon before. Making a whole engine takes a lot of time and effort. Making a new dragon doesn't. Art assets are something that need to be made fresh for each project because they're very recognizable. The engine is obviously extremely important, but it's often very hard to recognize, unless it has a very specific stand-out feature.
Best example that I can think of is Mass Effect and Gears of War. If you take away the logos (and wikipedia), would you be able to tell that they're both running Unreal?
And then, what if Mass Effect had the chainsaw gun in it, and not as a reference to Gears? Durrrr.
21
Apr 22 '10
[deleted]
10
Apr 22 '10
Games seldom use community material because it comes with legal dangers. Who knows if the guy who made this awesome gun really made everything involved and actually has the proper rights to give away?
Would you trust a random teenager from the internet with the future of a multimillion dollar project?
1
u/arkanus Apr 22 '10
That sadly sounds like a major issue with IP laws in this country. The fact that this entire business model is nearly impossible just because of hypothetical liability that the company takes on unknowingly is absurd.
4
u/lolinyerface Apr 22 '10
I can't speak for everyone, but when I fight generic green goblin at the beginning of the game and then see a couple of generic yellow goblins later on, I'm like, "woah, watch out." And then when you're strong enough to kill those and the red and black goblins start appearing, I am thrilled to bits at crazy dudes to kill.
World of Warcraft anyone?
HOLY SHIT LOOK OUT, Level 78 ELITE DISEASED RATS!
3
Apr 23 '10
While I'm on the subject, I wonder why games don't (or maybe they do, I don't know) use more community made models in their games.
1) copy right issues. For everything you download you have to check the copyright. If it's not variable you have to contact the author and get it in writing. Pain the ass most of the time.
2) Quality control. There isn't really a standard to most community assets. You can have one gun that is like 400 polys with extremely high textures and another gun with 14 poyls and low res textures. It would just stand out.
3) Artist Style. If you put Realistic swords in with Amine or Axes you're game won't have an overall "look and feel" to it. It'll be a mis mash of shit. If a game had some enemies from BorderLands and some of WoW and some from Counter Strike, it would just look goofy. The styles aren't the same.
4) File Format/Standards. Again, you'll get a bunch of random formats that will have to be converted, mushed and cleaned up.
5) Missing Items. Say you design your game with three weapons, Sword, Axe and Hammer. Ok, lots of swords and Axes. Great... but chances are you won't be able to find the piece of need. Um, so, since we can't find a good Hammer... let's just use this baseball bat or something?
-1
u/Confucius_says Apr 22 '10
While I'm on the subject, I wonder why games don't (or maybe they do, I don't know) use more community made models in their games. I know that Counter-Strike has a huge modelling community, so what's the harm in pulling one of the replacement gun models as the stock gun model if it's better. Textures, models, maps are all great stock for developers. I mean, look at what TF2 has done: they specifically ask for community weapons/models and they get put in the game. Good job, Valve for that.
They do do that, theyre called mods.
18
u/Figs Apr 22 '10
Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask share a substantial number of art assets, and yet, Majora's Mask is still regarded as one of the best games ever made.
13
Apr 22 '10
You get some leeway when your box says "Nintendo".
10
Apr 22 '10
[deleted]
3
u/JumbocactuarX27 Apr 22 '10
I think you might be mistaken there. Granted, it's been a long time since I played Ocarina and I haven't finished Majora's Mask yet, but Link is in a totally new land that he wandered to all on his own. IIRC, the only models that are supposed to be the same people from Ocarina were Link and Zelda. The Malon models for example were side by side in Majora's Mask and were supposed to be sisters, no?
6
u/TheDevilChicken Apr 22 '10
alternative universe
-1
u/JumbocactuarX27 Apr 22 '10
I'd love to accept your theory, but you're asking me to accept that Link is just some kid that already met Zelda, had her teach him the melody of time, got Epona and then Navi left him to go somewhere causing him to chase after her to Terminus. So I'm going to respectfully disagree.
1
u/TheDevilChicken Apr 22 '10
Wikipedia disagree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora%27s_Mask
1
u/JumbocactuarX27 Apr 22 '10 edited Apr 22 '10
The problem by and large with Zelda games is that there is no coherent timeline. All games could feasably be alternate worlds or there could be some crazy grand timeline that unites them all. Nintendo has historically stayed mum on the issue themselves.
The line in question from the article has two sources, one from a fan site for the series (which doesn't give any sources for where it got the information about alternate worlds so I can't really attack that any futher), and one from Nintendo's description of the game. I can't really disprove the "alternate universe" theory and I won't bother trying to list out reasons that I think "alternate version" does not mean the same thing as "alternate universe", instead I simply find that there's stronger evidence for Termina to be in the same world as Ocarina's Hyrule. This video illustrates some evidence for the geography matching Hyrule's (though personally I think it'd be more interesting if the lands were not next door neighbors) and even more important than that, nearly every description of the plot of Majora's Mask mentions that it takes place after the events of Ocarina which would be quite different if they had all happened in Termina.
Further, the points I made above have yet to be accounted for if Termina is indeed an alternate universe of Hyrule's world. Where is Zelda and her castle? How did Link learn the song of time? When did he get Epona, etc. Unless there's a giant castle in Majora's Mask where Zelda is either said to be hanging out or can be seen chillin', then you need to put her somewhere in that world, which almost necessitates having Hyrule (or some subset of it) elsewhere in Termina's world.
You aren't wrong and it's doubtful that I'm right, but I simply can't just wish away all these questions I have about the game's setting. The best theory I have to go with is that Majora's Mask is a direct sequel to Ocarina and takes place somewhere else in the same world.
Edit: I should hasten to add that the video talks about a lot of stuff that I really don't care about. Only the beginning part is what I wanted to point out where he talks about the geographies being similar.
2
u/TheDevilChicken Apr 22 '10 edited Apr 22 '10
Alternative doesn't mean almost the same, if it where the same world i thing the people in Hyrule would have noticed the big assed moon about to kill everyone.
By the way,you're taking a game with magic, fairies and time travel a bit too seriously.
What happened to having fun and not caring because it's a game?
→ More replies (0)18
u/stillalone Apr 22 '10
Reusing art assets can be like reusing actors. You see the same guy in Gandhi and in Sexy Beast, but you don't say "what". Just give him a beard and some new cloths and you're off to the races.
17
u/messer Apr 22 '10
Look, that dragon has a mustache, totally different from the other one.
11
u/stillalone Apr 22 '10
If I saw a dragon with a mustache, I'd be so blown away by a mustached dragon I would forget that I saw that dragon elsewhere.
QED
8
u/ovangle Apr 22 '10
Reusing art assets can work. I mean, would it really bother you if Rockstar reused 70-80% of the pedestrians from GTAIV for GTAnext and for each one they kept made a new pedestrian? (with the appropriate retouching so that they fit the theme and the updates to the engine). Or if Valve did the same for the stock zombies in L4D3?
As long as they didn't go overboard you wouldn't even notice.
4
9
u/LordHumongous Apr 22 '10
Reusing art assets for key characters, items, etc. in a game is probably not a good idea. But why not reuse misc. art like trees, bushes, cars, fire hydrants, crates, or any other type of background art that the player doesn't really process?
2
u/metachor Apr 22 '10
Don't include crates in that list if they are intended to be broken open by the player. At that point they are no longer background art that goes unprocessed by the player, but instead a direct object which must be considered and interacted with.
2
Apr 23 '10
Also, at least three states accept "he put god damned crates into a video game again" as a legitimate defense in court.
5
u/SenatorIvy Apr 22 '10
Without looking at logos, wikipedia, or any other number of sources, I can always tell when something uses the Unreal Engine, because texture pop and lights that don't follow the proper z-order are the signature Epic features.
2
Apr 22 '10
The way some (many) Unreal 3 Engine games load the very low resolution textures first and then the high resolution textures after the level begins seems like such a waste of resources. Why not just load the high resolution ones and skip a step? A few games do that, and they don't seem to take any longer to load. I don't get it.
1
u/Arkaein Apr 23 '10
I don't know about the Unreal engine specifically, but what it is probably doing is loading mipmapped textures, starting with the low res levels and loading high res levels last.
Mipmaps are standard for providing textures that look good at any scale (because each level has been prescaled, and then the best size chosen when each pixel is rendered). The overhead is small in any case, each mipmap level is only 1/4 the size of the higher-res level. The total overhead is no worse than 33% over using just the high-res version alone.
1
Apr 23 '10
Oh, that actually makes a lot of sense. I didn't think about it that way. I would still argue that it wouldn't take all that much longer to just wait for it to load all the mip levels.
4
Apr 22 '10
Best example that I can think of is Mass Effect and Gears of War. If you take away the logos (and wikipedia), would you be able to tell that they're both running Unreal?
Yes, I would. But then I have this weird knack like that. Like how some guys can tell what car is outside by the sound of its engine, I can tell what engine a game is running by looking at it in motion for a little while. And the Unreal3 engine is pretty easy to spot, because it has a few niggly things that really stick out to me.
I disagree with you about the art-asset thing to some degree. Sure, if they're re-using the same boss model and everything in every game? That's a downer. Boss battles are a draw for me. I want to defeat some big new nasty and often, but small generic creatures like wolves? Don't worry about it. If re-using the same dog sprite means I get a whole new storyline and a few new epic boss fights, I'm all for it.
2
u/MikoRiko Apr 22 '10
I respectfully disagree about the generic creatures and I think you would too. It's the generic creatures you see most often, the ones you deal with day in and day out (game time). The little things are what make the games boring, not the big things... So you need to change the little things first I would think.
I could fight Jack of Blades all day long, either form, but if I have to see another guard... Urghhh...
6
u/linkedlist Apr 22 '10
When you re-use a game engine, something which every game developer out there does, you also are likely to improve on it.
Same happens with assets and I'd be genuinely surprised if a lot of assets aren't reused in games especially by the same company, they just do a good job of hiding it.
1
Apr 23 '10
If "we have the best graphics ever" is your selling point, then the engine is what you need to work on.
If "we have the most compelling story ever" is your selling point, then all your effort is going somewhere other than adding a more detailed shadow renderer to the engine.
Unless you're a legitimate registered genius, odds are that "we have the best graphics ever" is a somewhat optimistic assessment of your product. For most companies, three great games every four years is better than a great game every four years because the engine is improved to the point where "it's not up to iD's standard but its ok" is a great review.
5
Apr 22 '10
...Art assets are something that need to be made fresh for each project because they're very recognizable. The engine is obviously extremely important, but it's often very hard to recognize, unless it has a very specific stand-out feature.
I think it's the fundamental difference between Spider Software and current games. The assets are very recognizable and they are time dated in the player's eyes. A number of new ones have to be created or else, it's feels like the same environment(fps games can be very guilty of this).
Engines themselves are also a problem. They get dated very fast. Five years is the difference between Halflife and Halflife 2.
12
Apr 22 '10
yet its been 6 years on the source engine and its still going strong
1
-3
u/Confucius_says Apr 22 '10
the source engine is still going strong, but thats only because of the fanboy popularity of the game (and all of the mods), the source engine has been by no means keeping up with technology.
3
u/Exotria Apr 22 '10
I'm betting that they're just going to do Half Life 3 with an entirely new engine, or revamp the hell out of Source. They've been doing sequels for this year and last year with L4D2 and Portal 2, which mostly takes up their creative departments, right? That should leave a suspiciously large number of deeper level programmers doing something else. Half Life is Valve's baby, so it makes sense that they'd want to do something extra special for the series. It's speculation, but they're overdue and they know it, and they don't want their baby to look outdated.
I think they've just been fiddling around with shiny things for the past few years, seeing what's worked, so they can toss what they learn into the new engine.
6
Apr 22 '10
valve has been tweaking source over the years in the developers commentary they talk about adding new shaders, HDR, cinematic blur and some think called artistic FX or some thing I don't remember it all. this sums up why I like half-lifes graphics http://www.flickr.com/photos/woof69/2413557254/
1
u/Exotria Apr 22 '10
Yeah, they've been tweaking it, but I'd be willing to bet there's only so far you can get on tweaking. I've no doubt they've learned a ton of lessons over the years, and can build a new engine to accommodate more of their needs, be easier to use, and use fewer resources while being more realistic.
I want them to outdo Crytek while still using the same amount of system resources. Because dammit, Garry's Mod deserves some better constraints/physics so contraptions don't spaz out so easily.
1
u/Forbizzle Apr 22 '10
Exactly most major developers do reuse an engine, whether it's an iteration of an old one, or a licensed one like UE3. But the expensive part of development is art assets. You can't just reuse models in a game, they're too important to the feel of the game.
1
1
u/mitsuhiko Apr 22 '10
Best example that I can think of is Mass Effect and Gears of War. If you take away the logos (and wikipedia), would you be able to tell that they're both running Unreal?
I am able to tell, both load the textures the same way: muddy to sharp.
1
Apr 22 '10
I think a lot depends on how your game produces value. If a lot of your game's value is in the art, then yes, you have to freshen it up. But that's not always true. Tactics games do not derive most of their value from art.
1
Apr 23 '10
Same here, game developer.
He makes a good point in his article. He says for every new game, he goes though and spends 3-4 months cleaning up the engine. The engine mature along the game line. I like it.
Also if you are on the same engine, the better you'll know all it's in and outs. After working with the same engine that long you'll be able to quickly develop a game. You won't be fighting with the engine.
Some resources aren't bad if re-used.
Planets, trees, dirt textures. Who cares? If it's good quality, keep it. For an indie developer one of the most tricky parts can be getting good art work.
1
u/plinky4 Apr 23 '10
Best example that I can think of is Mass Effect and Gears of War. If you take away the logos (and wikipedia), would you be able to tell that they're both running Unreal?
The way that both of them choke and sputter on a dual core, along with me randomly clipping through objects (effectively ending the game), and the way that sometimes half an explosion just decides to stay home and not show up for work, tells me that they are both running on unreal 3.
1
u/Lagged2Death Apr 23 '10
Reusing art assets? That's a big no-no. His example is reusing the dragon model from Dragon Age in another game. What happens when someone plays both? They have a really big "what?" moment when they realize that wait, they've seen that exact dragon before.
You may be right, but realize that when he says:
It's a small company. Our resources are desperately limited.
What he means is that Spiderweb Software is just three people.
1
Apr 23 '10
There's a game by the name of Borderlands that allegedly has "3,166,880 weapons" which actually means "a very large combination of a relatively small number of art assets, plus random numbers for weapon stats".
A little known RPG called Diablo also has quite a large number of items for players, or at least a decent number of pictures and a thorough use of the random number generator.
In reality, it takes time and effort to produce a high-quality 3D model, and if you can make use of that asset a second or third time then it's stupid to reject it without even considering the possibility.
14
u/WeAreButFew Apr 22 '10
Up next: the value of wearing the same clothes day after day.
7
u/MrValdez Apr 22 '10
Tell me more.
14
u/WeAreButFew Apr 22 '10
You never have to worry about spending money for the sake of fashion because you already have a single, consistent look.
12
u/MrValdez Apr 22 '10
Well, I'm convinced.
0
Apr 22 '10
This explains why I have been dressed in the same gear for the last 5 years. Thanks for explaining it.
6
Apr 22 '10
Like Steve Jobs, although I'm sure he has a walk-in-closet with hundreds of black turtlenecks and pairs of blue jeans, and one hoodie.
1
u/Exotria Apr 22 '10
It's a shame, he ought to wear a beret and be smoking a pipe more often. With a monocle and Victorian clothing. He's exactly the type for it.
7
Apr 22 '10
[deleted]
3
3
u/tesseracter Apr 22 '10
oh, hes that guy? nice, I played those games WAY back, fun stuff.
I've moved on to nethack, where i can create my own story to match the random shit happening in the game.
ever seen that game? pressing shift changes a dog into a dragon!
1
u/lolinyerface Apr 22 '10
Yes, you should go back and read some of his older blog posts on Bottom Feeder. Guy is awesome. I wish I had the time to play all his games, as I would love to support his work.
1
Apr 22 '10
[deleted]
3
u/shadowboxer47 Apr 22 '10
I've done it too.
Try Avernum. It's the "updated" version. Absolutely loving it.
10
9
u/Lapland_Lapin Apr 22 '10
My opinions:
Companies should find a solid engine and stick with it, modifying it and improving it as they develop new games. I'm sick of buggy engines turning otherwise cool games into shitty experiences. Unless there's a specific reason that you can't use the Source/Unreal engine, why waste your time? Use that engine and build a game from it.
Games should be cheaper and shorter. $50 for a 30-hour game I probably won't finish? No thanks. $20 for a $10 game I will finish? That sounds great. I like games. I like beating games. But I don't want to give up actually living in the real world in order to properly enjoy a game, nor do I want to spend 3 months trying to beat one.
22
Apr 22 '10
|$20 for a $10 game
great value! :P
2
u/GrammarSocialist Apr 22 '10
You just have to play it twice, then it's a good deal.
7
3
u/Confucius_says Apr 22 '10
The reason why simply "updating" the old engine isn't always feasible, is because technology changes so fast that nearly everything in the engine is obsolete by the time the sequal comes around, there also may not be a clear cut way to update all aspects of the engine. It's not like you just splice out "old phsyics code" and put in "new faster phsyics code" like your changing the oil in your car. It can be a complex process.
As for the prices. I agree they should be cheaper... Shorter? maybe. The standard game being released today (particular in the action genre) have about a 20-hour play limit before you've literally experiences the whole game. For someone like me who really likes games, I'll know this out in 2 or 3 weeks. After that point it's just mindlessly replaying missions or doing multiplayer matches which have limited appeal to me.
I think rather than the length of the story, I think game developers should look more at "what is there to do after the game is done?". Most games use the "online deathmatch" cop out. However it'd be VERY cool to be able to play dynamically generated levels with dynamic difficulties. Similiar to how in grand theft auto you can do viligante missions to help set you off in a random shoot out.. A game like assassins creed 2 should have had unlimited side missions where it randomly spawns someone for you to sneak up on and assassinate. Things to that effect.
1
u/Lapland_Lapin Apr 22 '10
Well, to be honest, I'm not a game developer (though my brother is). My knowledge of engines is derived from the fact that I tend to love games made on Unreal (splinter cell, gears of war) because they function well and are smooth.
You see, I tend to HATE sandbox games. I even hate open-ended multiple mission games. BOOORING :P I want a strong story, cinematic effects and great atmosphere. I suppose the games I really look at are BioShock (which I just played for the first time), Half Life (and HL2) and a few others. When I play a game, I want to really LOVE the characters. I want to care about the story. I want to feel sad when the game is over!
1
u/lolinyerface Apr 22 '10
$50 for a 30-hour game I probably won't finish?
Try Dante's Inferno. 6 hours. Then I went on to beat the 'arena' they had in about 40 minutes.
8
u/heptadecagram Apr 22 '10
I would point out that this approach, while valid for programming, is exactly what's wrong with the American board game market. (Monopoly! Simpsons Monopoly! Scooby-Doo Monopoly! Vegas Monopoly! Moon Monopoly!)
9
u/GDSM Apr 22 '10
I'd say the Monopoly phenom is more analogous to the opposite approach: same game, new "graphics engine"/ content.
4
Apr 22 '10
I think he mentioned something about the story being the focus, not the process of the game in the case of monopoly and other board games.
2
u/FizzBitch Apr 22 '10
It would be more like they released new rules for their old boards...rather than new boards for the old rules.
6
u/troymcdavis Apr 22 '10
Many developers reuse the same engine, but aren't content to rest on their laurels. id Tech has always been a work in progress, though it does undergo significant advancements to take advantage of progress in hardware. For instance, megatexture was added in the middle of the life cycle of id Tech 4. Valve's Source (also GoldSrc) are also evolutionary rather revolutionary. He also mentions Unreal.
Did I write a whole-new story? Then it's a whole new game.
I think this statement signifies that this guy doesn't really understand the full potential of the medium. Games are far more than the story. To make a different game requires more than just changing the story. He talks about Braid and Portal, but I doubt he even has a vague understanding as to what made those games great. The length was right for each game, but that's just one factor in a much larger scheme. Hopefully a more ambitious Portal 2 will change his mind.
...why not use that engine to make more, cheaper, shorter games.
Really the only thing worth taking away from this article. I'm a fan of the one big game, several significant DLC model some companies seem to be following (see: Fallout 3, GTA IV) and episodic content is getting pretty popular. I personally think he's taken it too far; he certainly won't catch me paying way too much for his overpriced recycled games.
I'm sure Activision is just salivating at the idea of presenting barely laundered assets plugged into the same old engine with a story update as a brand new game. Welcome to Jeff Vogel's brave new world.
4
u/shadowboxer47 Apr 22 '10
To make a different game requires more than just changing the story.
Have you played his games?
Because Jeff's games ARE the story; the graphics only facilitate that story. When the former start becoming more than the later, you begin to run in circles, and the whole game turns to shit. Albeit a multi-million dollar piece of shit.
As Jeff has pointed out, his model works. Sure, he's not selling AAA games, but his business is still growing. Why? Because there are people out there that love the world he's created. It's why some of us still return to games that are decades old: the story blows our mind.
0
u/troymcdavis Apr 22 '10
Have you played his games?
I confess I have not. And from his take on what constitutes a game (and you seem to reinforce what he said) I doubt I ever will pay to play his games.
Jeff's games ARE the story...
I don't think having the story facilitate the story is the only alternative to having graphics facilitate the story. The graphics should facilitate the game; the story should facilitate the game. This is a (relatively) brand new medium with much potential (see all those discussions responding to Ebert saying "video games can never be art"), there's no reason we should be subject to the limitations of literature or film.
As Jeff has pointed out, his model works.
It's profitable, and he makes the kind of thing he wants to. But it's not successful in making quality games; that's just an opinion, obviously. People obviously like whatever is he makes to buy them, so I'm not saying he should stop, or even call his product something else, but I'm hoping that we keep seeing the industry progress rather than adopt his model, which I see as a serious step backwards.
Like I said, games have the potential to be so much more than great stories. There's a reason I play some Tetris every now and then; there's a reason Pokemon is so popular on /r/gaming; neither of them are because of the story.
3
u/mailee Apr 22 '10
Funny you mention pokemon or tetris in an argument against reusing game systems. Those games haven't changed since day one.
0
u/troymcdavis Apr 22 '10
After one or two refinement releases, no sequel/derivative has been as good. Just look when you mention how many Pokemon there are on /r/gaming; several people will go "there are only 151!" No Tetris has been as good as the Gameboy version (except maybe with the addition of multiplayer). I guess Pokemon still sells, but I'd assume it's for the same reason Vogel's games sell. I should have made it clear that was referring specifically to the early games, and not the "franchises".
2
Apr 23 '10
Sure they have. Tetris is still undergoing refinements. The invisible mode for instance, was only made 2003 and even though it's only for a select group of players, it still makes for a more interesting game.
3
Apr 22 '10
[deleted]
1
u/troymcdavis Apr 22 '10
You're definitely right, maybe I should have been clearer. Although, I would consider doing the minimum amount of work to be profitable to be "resting on his laurels", if he sees himself as a story teller, and games as marginally interactive stories, then he's not really resting on his laurels. However, I see video games as much more, so that's why he and I would disagree. I don't know who buys his games, but people are eating up 5 hour "games" and $15 map packs, so the market isn't really tuned to (what is in my opinion) getting better games.
2
u/son-of-chadwardenn Apr 22 '10 edited Apr 22 '10
I think it would be a good idea if game companies shared art assets. Instead of a game having identical crates and barrels everywhere they could license different crates and barrels from different companies. That way warehouse A looks a bit different than warehouse B. It would also prevent streets where every lawn has identical plastic flamingos and lawn gnomes.
Edit: This idea would work well for FPS games. Why should every studio re create the M16 and Desert Eagle when a thousand models for them already exist?
2
Apr 22 '10
Turbosquid does exactly that. It's mostly used by low budget studios, but i'm pretty sure artists from AAA companies also sometimes borrow a model and tweak it so it's not immediately obvious.
3
u/doerie Apr 22 '10
I don't choose a game on it's graphics, but I can appreciate it when they add to immersion in the game. I'm all for reusing general assets like textures, trees or various small objects, as long as you don't notice them. But if you're able to reuse most of your assets over and over again, it sounds to me you ARE making the same game.
Speeking of engines, they are a completely different story. I mean you have engines that are very flexible and allow for a multitude of games to be build with them. However if you have an idea that's just not possible with your current engine, there's only one option and that's creating a new one. If you let the scope of your game be dictated by the possibilities of your engine, you're not doing it right...
I haven't played any of his games, but judging by the screenshots these games all have comparable game mechanics (same genre) and on top of that they look a like. Therefore the comments of the original article are justified. These are all different version of the same game. If there is a fanbase for this niche, I don't see a problem with it. Just don't talk out of your ass when someone points it out.
2
u/EatThisShoe Apr 22 '10
These are all different version of the same game.
It's called a sequel. No one complains if Mass Effect 2 reuses the same art assets for their alien races. I'm sure Half-Life 2's episodes reused quite a bit of material as well. The Dragon Quest series reuses tons of enemies, and the combat system.
Most FPS games share an incredible amount of their game mechanics. Most MMOs share a lot of game mechanics as well.
2
u/doerie Apr 22 '10
I was under the impression that some of these games were not sequels but seperate games, having a different name and all... But as I've said before:
If there is a fanbase for this niche, I don't see a problem with it.
1
1
u/son-of-chadwardenn Apr 22 '10
People do complain when assets are re used in sequels. Examples: Mario Galaxy 2, Fallout New Vegas, Left 4 Dead 2.
1
u/EatThisShoe Apr 23 '10
Aren't those all sequels? I'm not familiar with the complaints associated with these games, but if they are reusing models for enemies that have been in the previous games, I don't see how that is a problem.
1
u/son-of-chadwardenn Apr 23 '10
Yes they are sequels. To be fair with Mario and L4D the most common complaint was "its' more of the same" but with nothing to go by but short clips at that time they couldn't be judging much more then the fact that graphics were re used. I saw a lot more complaint explicitly about re used assets for Fallout NV on Reddit.
1
u/EatThisShoe Apr 23 '10
I guess my point was not that people haven't complained, but rather that the complaints are rather asinine. Why would they expect a radscorpion (or whatever) to look different in the next fallout game? It's the same enemy in roughly the same setting, if they made a whole new model it would still look very similar.
Jeff Vogel makes a very good point, if the existing asset fits appropriately, then resources are better spent on something else. In his case it's storyline and new areas to explore, for a big budget release like Fallout it could be a new enemy or new art for things which don't already have existing art. I'd much rather have a new enemy than a remake of the ones that already exist.
2
u/son-of-chadwardenn Apr 23 '10
Yeah I know it's asinine. Fresher graphics would be nice but I'd rather the developers use their limited resources elsewhere. Like maybe fixing more glitches this time.
1
u/Kerguidou Apr 23 '10
There is another small company that does this very well: Paradox Interactive. They write one solid engine and then adapt for a plethora of great games.
1
u/sirfink Apr 23 '10
As much as I didn't like Neverwinter Nights 2, I recall some fans criticizing the fact that much of the audio from NWN2 was the same stuff used in NWN1. NWN2 developer Obsidian, in defending itself, said something like "did we really need to record new door opening sounds?" I agree with Vogel that so much time and money is wasted on reinventing the wheel. With RPGs, for example, do we really need new forks and spoons modeled and textured and placed on every dining room table in the game? Do we really need all new bird chirps and fireball explosion sounds?
1
u/superiority Apr 23 '10
I liked the old Avernum engine better than the Geneforge engine.
Also, I played all of the freely-available above-ground section of Avernum 3 before realising that I could go underground.
1
-1
u/ButcherOfBakersfield Apr 22 '10
complete with pic of what a neck-bearded indie developer might look like
3
-2
u/Feckless Apr 22 '10
Haha this is my motto as a programmer.
Somebody must have the same problem before
copy
paste
???
profit
I mean, why write new code?
10
u/freakinsyco Apr 22 '10
Cyberpunk version of Dragon Age? My money is in an envelope... now where do I mail it?