Development Info Wasteland 2 progressing rapidly

[tuluse]

Source is pretty stable now, but when Troika was using it, it wasn't done yet. Remember they had to write their own AI because it hadn't been added to the engine yet, and it was awful?

Shouldn't AI be custom-tailored to the game mechanics and thus done by the developer anyway?

Well that was a specific thing pointed out by people working at Troika, I think they would know better than you or me. I'm guessing it's easier to modify existing AI to what you want that create your own from scratch.

The debate might not be new, but the options available sure are. The tools and middleware has increased probably exponentially since 2001.

Like?

I'm not saying you're wrong, btw, just trying to understand your point better.

I don't have any hard numbers, but how about the fact that Unity itself exists? Could you get an engine of this caliber for $1500 in 2001? Or look at all the engines you can download for free to play around with: Unity, Source, Unreal, CryTek, that's just off the top of my head. What engine could you download for free in 2001 to mess around with before you decided to license it?

The market has also clearly spoken with regards to this debate, with a ridiculous number of games using the Unreal 3 engine. Building an engine from scratch is now the domain of basically a handful of companies.

Because licensing is cheaper or better?

When you have a budget what's the difference? Either a company has the resources to build a engine from scratch and make it work or they don't. A big problem with Troika was that they didn't but they tried anyways (or used unfinished engines).

It seems to me that a small or medium sized studio would be fools to build their own engine from scratch. There is no way they will be as efficient at it as a company devoted to making engines, and would be better served spending their money and time on modifying an engine to fit their purposes and creating content.

Also, there is the whole side of middleware that isn't engine specific. I don't think that market even existed 10 years ago. This is something that Obsidian is supposed to be helping InXile with too. Tools for making content.

 

[kaizoku]

I don't know enough to compare Unity to the Steam and Source engines, so I'd be curious to know what your statement is based on. The Source engine was buggy, that's for sure, but what makes you think that Unity is in a much better shape? As for the Steam engine, it seemed pretty solid to me.

Overall, the "custom engine vs licensed engine" debate is hardly a new one. What's pretty clear is that neither option is better by default and neither option guarantees a smooth sailing. Developing your own engine is time-consuming but you get exactly what you need and you know it like the back of your hand. Going with a licensed engine removed much hassle but usually adds as much because you're dealing with a generic, someone else's engine that's bound to have many different, exciting, and completely unexpected issues.

Looking back at your enterprise with AoD would you have preferred to develop your own engine?

I have no experience with those toolkits nor have I developed a game engine, but - being a programmer myself - I doubt developing a game engine is a walk in the park.
The principle being when you have to use some middleware. What matters is: it is good or does it suck? That makes the whole difference. And I've had both good and bad experiences.

Anyways, it's clear that Troika was not up to the task of building an engine that was as bug free as consumers expect. InXile probably isn't either but they're not trying to.

They could if they had the time/money.

It's easy to be righteous when you have no money. What would you do in their place? Go support interplay (PST around 36k sales), Troika (~90 k sales) or shit like beth, bio and etc. It's the gamers who failed the industry, not the publishers. They publish stuff that sells.

The problem isn't with the gamers (well assuming Sturgeon's law to be an immutable fact).
The problem was with managers/owners trying to make shinier games - which where more expensive to make - in order to attract more customers. Throughout the years they saw that the "old complex gameplay ways" were not compatible with new gamers, so they simplified... and ended up where we are today: everything is shit (tm).

In the old days only smart people used the computer and played games, now everyone does it.
The "hardcore RPG" (and adventure games) is a niche market and it will always be.

Wasteland 2: 61,000 backers 3,000,000$

In the old days: http://www.nma-fallout.com/content.php?page=news-archive-05-2000

The sales statistics for a variety of other titles may surprise you. Fallout and Fallout 2, which are considered to be two of the best RPGs released in recent years, sold approximately 140,000 and 120,000 copies, respectively, in PC Data's tracked data. Very good sales, especially since the overall figures are likely double those amounts, but considerably below the sales volumes for true blockbuster titles.
Here's a sales chart which shows that Fallout sold more copies than "Planescape: Torment"!
Baldur's Gate (all formats) 500,000
BG expansion pack 156,000
Fallout 144,000
Fallout 2 123,000
Diablo 1,300,000
Revenant 37,000
Darkstone 75,000
Ultima IX: Ascension 73,000
Planescape: Torment 73,000

Times (dev costs and game costs) were different, also a lot of piracy then... but it does put things a bit in perspective.



edit: corrected the W2 backers typo from 61M to 61K

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't have any hard numbers, but how about the fact that Unity itself exists? Could you get an engine of this caliber for $1500 in 2001? Or look at all the engines you can download for free to play around with: Unity, Source, Unreal, CryTek, that's just off the top of my head. What engine could you download for free in 2001 to mess around with before you decided to license it?

The fact that Unity exists tells us nothing. It's a third-rate engine that nobody really wants.
http://unity3d.com/gallery/made-with-unity/game-list

Like Torque and other cheap engines, its primary market is wannabe developers who will get the license, tinker with it, but will never produce anything. A proper studio can certainly make a good game with it, but because they have skills, not because Unity is that good.

The cost is irrelevant. Fargo could have as easily paid 250k (for argument's sake). What engine you could download? Pretty sure any engine. All engine companies would let you try before you buy (assuming you were a semi-legit company). As for engines, they were always around. Gamebryo? Lithtech (of TORN's fame)? Torque even?

The market has also clearly spoken with regards to this debate, with a ridiculous number of games using the Unreal 3 engine. Building an engine from scratch is now the domain of basically a handful of companies.

Because licensing is cheaper or better?

When you have a budget what's the difference? Either a company has the resources to build a engine from scratch and make it work or they don't.

It's not that simple. No company is eager to spend more than they have to - the engine licensing business is based on this very principle. Engines are priced in such a way that it's always cheaper to license one than to build one (of equal value) from scratch, thus it's a purely business decision.

A big problem with Troika was that they didn't but they tried anyways (or used unfinished engines).

Again, Troika's homemade engine was decent. I don't recall having any engine-related issues in Arcanum or ToEE (in fact, the engine seemed to be well polished in ToEE). The bugs in both games were caused by scripting errors, not the engine itself.

Also, there is the whole side of middleware that isn't engine specific. I don't think that market even existed 10 years ago. This is something that Obsidian is supposed to be helping InXile with too. Tools for making content.

Obsidian sharing their tools and expertise is a different topic. If we're talking about some magical middleware that helps you make games faster, I'd like to know what they are. If you mean tools, what you can get on the middleware market is generic shit. If you mean things like SpeedTree and such, they were available 10 years ago.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Looking back at your enterprise with AoD would you have preferred to develop your own engine?

Yes. I've lost count how many times we've run into problems with Torque and had to look for workarounds and replace parts of the engine with custom code - despite Torque being in development for a long time and having a large community and the whole web 2.0 thing going.

I have no experience with those toolkits nor have I developed a game engine, but - being a programmer myself - I doubt developing a game engine is a walk in the park.

It's not, but working with a third-party engine isn't a picnic either.

 

[Licaon_Kter]

talking about engines, indies do deliver:

 

[Vault Dweller]

Looks pretty cool, especially the swamp level (starts at 2:30 or so).

 

[Jaesun]

The Trees look like shit. The rest of it was ok.

 

[l3loodAngel]

It's easy to be righteous when you have no money. What would you do in their place? Go support interplay (PST around 36k sales), Troika (~90 k sales) or shit like beth, bio and etc. It's the gamers who failed the industry, not the publishers. They publish stuff that sells.

The problem isn't with the gamers (well assuming Sturgeon's law to be an immutable fact).
1. The problem was with managers/owners trying to make shinier games - which where more expensive to make - in order to attract more customers. Throughout the years they saw that the "old complex gameplay ways" were not compatible with new gamers, so they simplified... and ended up where we are today: everything is shit (tm).

In the old days only smart people used the computer and played games, now everyone does it.
The "hardcore RPG" (and adventure games) is a niche market and it will always be.

Wasteland 2: 61,000,000 backers 3,000,000$

In the old days: http://www.nma-fallout.com/content.php?page=news-archive-05-2000

2. The sales statistics for a variety of other titles may surprise you. Fallout and Fallout 2, which are considered to be two of the best RPGs released in recent years, sold approximately 140,000 and 120,000 copies, respectively, in PC Data's tracked data. Very good sales, especially since the overall figures are likely double those amounts, but considerably below the sales volumes for true blockbuster titles.
Here's a sales chart which shows that Fallout sold more copies than "Planescape: Torment"!
Baldur's Gate (all formats) 500,000
BG expansion pack 156,000
Fallout 144,000
Fallout 2 123,000
Diablo 1,300,000
Revenant 37,000
Darkstone 75,000
Ultima IX: Ascension 73,000
Planescape: Torment 73,000

3. Times (dev costs and game costs) were different, also a lot of piracy then... but it does put things a bit in perspective.

1. No not expensive, just more skewed towards the median, to increases player base, to get a pay off. Let's assume I am a publisher. Each investment into a game, has a risk. Sometimes even the best games fail (PST). So I invest my 10 $ m. into development of a game. After the royalties to developers, marketing costs and selling costs (You had to pay for the shelves), I got left with 12 $ m. So that's a 20% pay off. Now to finance another game I need more money, because of cost inflation, higher marketing costs, wage inflation and higher selling costs. So the new game will be developed in three years and will cost me 11 $ m.(due increase in costs). But my maximum pay off is the same, because my target audience didn't expand. Now please tell me that it makes a sense from business perspective to invest into a similar game, because all games have a chance of failure.

Now this is the place where gamers come in. Gamers wanted crash Bandicoot with story and they got it. Gamers didn't want complex story or complex game play elements. The golden era was when the niche audience was the whole audience. Those time won't come back. There is a niche audience, but it's just that a niche.

2. No they did not. BG series got 656k sales while FO,FO2, PST got 340k sales. BG series are actually inferior to the former Interplay games, but they had higher sales. How did this happen? Well you hire worse writers (Hepler instead of MCA), felicitate the player (The hero arises from the ashes to save the world once again), ad some romance and remove C&C. All of this reduces your costs. And after all of this you are rewarded with higher sales. Who in their right mind would go to finance Interplay after all of this?

3. Piracy is a fake controversy like that with Hepler. We had low sales not because our game sucked, but because of piracy. Most of the Piracy comes from players who would not buy the game at all or from people who don't have enough money to buy a game. Where I live new AAA title costs 1/4 of minimum wage $75 (after taxes, retailers and etc.). Please tell me that removing piracy would drastically increase sales.

 

[kaizoku]

1. While you may also have a point there, games did still get more expensive. Voice overs, cinematics, shinier graphics... all of these cost money. (AAA games have budges of hundreds of millions now)

2. In respect to BG vs Fallout I'm guessing it was the D&D aspect of it that was able to attract a greater number of players. Why PS:T failed, I don't know, maybe it wasn't properly advertised then or that cover made mom and dad stay away from it.

3. Maybe I wasn't clear.
I meant that the number of players who actually played the game was far superior to those sales figures.
Also, at least where I live, piracy was rampant for a long time until maybe 5 years ago. Nowadays, people are able to buy games. It saddens me to say this, but all the old games I played were pirate versions. I simply did not have the money for that. Having a computer was a miracle in itself.
(KS gives me a chance to redeem myself)

 

[Infinitron]

(AAA games have budges of hundreds of millions now)

This is an exaggeration, most AAA game budgets are still on the order of tens of millions.

 

[l3loodAngel]

1. While you may also have a point there, games did still get more expensive. Voice overs, cinematics, shinier graphics... all of these cost money. (AAA games have budges of hundreds of millions now)

2. In respect to BG vs Fallout I'm guessing it was the D&D aspect of it that was able to attract a greater number of players. Why PS:T failed, I don't know, maybe it wasn't properly advertised then or that cover made mom and dad stay away from it.

3. Maybe I wasn't clear.
I meant that the number of players who actually played the game was far superior to those sales figures.
Also, at least where I live, piracy was rampant for a long time until maybe 5 years ago. Nowadays, people are able to buy games. It saddens me to say this, but all the old games I played were pirate versions. I simply did not have the money for that. Having a computer was a miracle in itself.
(KS gives me a chance to redeem myself)

1. That's a different topic called "What happened latter". Back to this topic I can say that the costs are irrelevant it's the cost - pay off ratio that matters. It's much harder to get high pay off from niche games.
2. This confirms my point as it shows that players are dumb. They choose D&D instead of TB and they didn't care about the content of the game. PST however, was also D&D.
3. I too was unable to buy games until recently. What I am saying that number of those who played the game would not translate into the sales.

 

[PorkaMorka]

This is my personal view of the entire process, which is not specifically tied to Wasteland 2.

In other words, just a little farther on the timeline, one should be getting a lot more enthusiastic about Fargo's updates. Right at this moment, not so much, IMO.

Is Wasteland 2 confirmed to be a Fallout-like? From what I recall of the marketing for Wasteland 2 it was not pitched as a Fallout style game with C&C and dialogue as the focus of gameplay.

They could potentially shave off a large amount of development time needed for scripting and debugging if they made it more like a post apocalyptic version of Dark Sun: The Shattered Lands. Only a very limited amount of C&C, but better combat than Fallout.

 

[General Maxson]

This is my personal view of the entire process, which is not specifically tied to Wasteland 2.

...

In other words, just a little farther on the timeline, one should be getting a lot more enthusiastic about Fargo's updates. Right at this moment, not so much, IMO.

Is Wasteland 2 confirmed to be a Fallout-like? From what I recall of the marketing for Wasteland 2 it was not pitched as a Fallout style game with C&C and dialogue as the focus of gameplay.

They could potentially shave off a large amount of development time needed for scripting and debugging if they made it more like a post apocalyptic version of Dark Sun: The Shattered Lands. Only a very limited amount of C&C, but better combat than Fallout.

Nope. C&C is in bitches. :D

What I mean you didn't understand well, or misinterpreted the "pitch".

It will have crpg mechanics like Fallouts.

 

[Computer Gamer Refugee]

While talking about how to make a game I think that the game producers have their hands tied when it comes to how they focus. If they are making a labor of love they can do whatever they want. However if they make a difficult, unstreamlined game the result is that for every prestigious Codex member who goes "OMG, I just got my ass handed to me because I vastly underestimated the difficulty of the first combat *orgasm*"* there are probably 10-15 people who say "fuck this shit, I play games to have fun, not to be anally raped. I'm gonna go play Skyrim where I am the chosen one and can kick ass."

It is a problem making a game for the first audience? Well, yes and no. If you are someone like VD who is making a labor of love and trying to recoup a bit on his hobby (seriously, I doubt you will get more than 10-25c per hour when all is said and done) then it really is not an issue. Etsy is full of people who do things like that. On the other hand, if you are looking to feed your family then not choosing the second option leads to listening to your malnourished children whining that they need more gruel.**

Wasteland is an outlier because it takes advantage of nostalgia and pent up demand. Unless it is way better than I am expecting***, then I think it will be a one-off only; their market is just not big enough to afford to spend that kind of money on a regular basis.




* I very much put myself in the first group, not that the second group is wrong, they just have different goals and entertainment desires.

** Slight exaggeration for comedic effect

*** The game will have to be entertaining enough to get the latter group in the above example excited and interested; I personally think I will love it quite a bit. I consider this task tantamount to inventing a new team sport that is fun enough that the player actually wants to go out on the field to play it every week. Not too hard get a certain number of people to come out, but trying to make the new basekitball so compelling that the indoor set invested is much more difficult.

 

[PorkaMorka]

Nope. C&C is in bitches. :D

What I mean you didn't understand well, or misinterpreted the "pitch".

Nah, I just stopped paying attention after I put in my money. Sunk costs, etc.

 

[Licaon_Kter]

The Trees look like shit. The rest of it was ok.

Yeah, some polishing and it will be ok, but man the atmosphere is great, I bet one can get some Crysis fans fooled by showing them parts of this demo. :D

and another FOSS one even: http://www.pixellight.org/site/index.php/page/Videos.html

 

[almondblight]

I just don't get why is taboo to bitch about Wasteland 2. It seems that some Codexers are too invested (emotionally and otherwise) in this game and can't stand negativity or skepticism.

It's taboo amongst, like, 4 people that end up posting about 20% of the posts. That's often the case with all the "Codex hates XYZ" or "Codex thinks stupid XYZ meme is awesome" issues - when you actually look at who's posting, it's usually a hand full of people but they feel the need to post all the time. Looking at how much bitching there was about AoD, and when VD finally posted a poll, 2/3's liked the game, 1/3 thought it was OK, and like 3% didn't like it. Or look at what posts get more than two brofists - mostly decent ones, very rarely inane ones. That's why it's so idiotic when a developer (like, eh, Stoic) sees 3 or 4 members bitch about their game and figure that "The Codex" is out to get them.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

3. Piracy is a fake controversy like that with Hepler. We had low sales not because our game sucked, but because of piracy. Most of the Piracy comes from players who would not buy the game at all or from people who don't have enough money to buy a game. Where I live new AAA title costs 1/4 of minimum wage $75 (after taxes, retailers and etc.). Please tell me that removing piracy would drastically increase sales.

It applies mainly to developing countries, in which actually buying games for prices dictated by the western developers is detrimental to the whole development process. These countries have more a "buying original games for prices that westerners would never want pay instead of saving/investing" problem, not a "piracy problem".
There was still a piracy problem in the west which is the primary audience of these developers, though.

 

[Naked Ninja]

The discussion about whether Unity is or is not a great engine is missing the point a bit.

IMO, it IS a great game engine. But, it's not an RPG engine. All the RPG systems have to be built on top of it. Is that better than building a new game engine from scratch? Definitely. Does that mean no bugs? No.

In fact, stitching dozens (or hundreds, if Fargo's eventual estimate is correct) of disparate code assets from different programmers together is a great way to create a complete fucking mess. You shift the time spent from getting the basic features developed, to making sure the code assets you've bought from different sources, designed with no knowledge of each other, play nicely together.

I LOVE Unity's asset store, personally, it's a fantastic resource. But it's not a silver bullet, and the talk about how many assets he's integrating into one project makes me a bit skeptical. Building a framework around a base of 10-20 solid code assets, I could buy that. Dozens or hundreds of the things sounds like wild PR bullshit.

Just my 2c, I could be wrong, of course. Like I said, I'm REAL curious about which specific assets they're using.

 

[Licaon_Kter]

was this posted already? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9UIKsaROLU&fmt=35

 

[EG]

was this posted already? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9UIKsaROLU&fmt=35

If it was, I didn't see it.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

was this posted already? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9UIKsaROLU&fmt=35

If it was, I didn't see it.

I was posted in the general W2 thread.

 

[Infinitron]

was this posted already? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9UIKsaROLU&fmt=35

If it was, I didn't see it.

That's just the gameplay video Brian showed at the Unity 2012 conference.

 

[EG]

was this posted already? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9UIKsaROLU&fmt=35

If it was, I didn't see it.

That's just the gameplay video Brian showed at the Unity 2012 conference.

And he was just so excited about the 3D camera.