Random Thoughts.....What Are You Thinking?

I think everyone as a whole would benefit from an engine standardization, where every few years they came out with a new engine and everyone used it.

But I'm crazy and like open source :P

Engine updates are fine if you ask me.Providing the engine *** works and isnt glitchy as *** (bethesda games) .And they use it on proper hardware that isnt shocking bad at it (frostbite 2 on consoles)

well you get what I mean, standardization, that way there wouldn't be shitty coding as often.

In a perfect world............without EA and Wacktivision :(

qft

hmmmm

mmmmmh

thats a tall demand. especially when developing a new(good) engine takes time and costs a lot.

and everyone is a greedy *** that wants to make as much money as possible.hate gaming as a business,remember when it used to be about the experience of gaming itself?

not really, if the collective put effort into it, I don't mean every 2 years do a fresh start, and the emphasis was more on the standardization than of the how often, I'd say how often should be determined based on the life cycle use of that engine+upgraded. But that probably makes too much sense.

that just sounds like the perfect setup for a continuation of multiple game series that'll just be yearly repeats like CoD -bleh- and Halo -insert number here- and final fantasy MCXXIV which to me will lead to an overall shitty quality in general.

I'm not totally adverse to engines lasting a while,just as long as the engine is acceptable for as long as it does go through.Obviously an engine gets tweaked and improved over its lifetime,which is to be expected.But certain engines outlive their life

I want to be in a band where everyone wears overalls, and the only way to discern the lead singer is a neckerchief.

1. what you insinuated is what the industry does anyway.

2. I can't believe you just compared Halo, to crap like COD...

3. SE has been producing quite the load of crap for years now, I don't see them changing direction anytime soon.

4. I could see it as a possibility for the industry to focus less on the individual cost of programming/graphics and more on the actual gameplay, but that's just me.

true a lot of game companies do have a series they continue like ofc cod,halo,tekken,soul calibur, street fighter,battlefield, medal of honor, etc etc But between each game in their series there's very little innovation and improvement. A lot of it is just some visual upgrades, adjustments to the AI and some dazzle and flare to other things for the average achievement hunter.
Yes I did compare Halo to Cod. Although I like the story and lore behind Halo its pretty much the same game over and over. same thing with CoD. Even the multiplayer gets repetitive. Kill people to defend this or capture X amount of this. or Kill X amount of people.
Yes I agree SE has been producing crap. Last good FF game to me is probably 11.
As for the your last statement. Ya IT would be nice to see industry come out with games that were actually focused on the game play and story like FF use to do but I think a large part of what really drives a game is having that studio or company be innovative enough to come out with their own engine and be like "hey, we're doing something with our own engine that you guys can't do" which helps with gameplay/story but also engulfs the player into the setting they want to portray. For example Borderlands, Battlefield 3, Planetside 2, minecraft.
its like if there's an overall standardization for a game engines every few years to a point where every company basically using the same game engine then it'll be like playing the same game with the only difference if its going to be single player or multiplayer

http://www.redbullstratos.com/live/


HE'S GOING UP! :3

thats a crazy view

Halo by no means is the same game over and over, there's actually quite a bit of changes, a lot of people *** about it too.

and ummm, no.

I don't think you fully grasp what an engine does. The engine pretty much has nothing to do with the story either, and it's each company making their own which is what dev costs so high on graphics, they spend nothing on story anymore.

edit: and I haven't played much of SCV but they did change a good bit of it from what I had seen.

gah I just bombed a quiz on Active Directory >.>

discovered an ancestor in the revolutionary war. He's a greatx5 Grandfather. Named John Dew and he married a Rocky Cannon (which is kind of an awesome name for a chick) and they moved to TN post war. My entire family has been in this backwards state for forever T_T

/comfort

For the majority,this is already happening.With the state of games companies and their "success or gtfo" business models.A perfect example is in fact battlefield 3.All the ***talk EA had on the run up towards activision.Activision never talked ***back.Then battlefield didnt sell as well as the latest CoD at the time and then EA backtracked on everything they were saying about how innovative,original and revolutionary their own game was.The game came out its just a black ops clone (and I'm not a CoD fanboy).They were hyping up the engine more than the *** game.The game is subpar and never shoulda appeared on modern generation consoles.

Your point about games varying only slightly is flawed though.Well,partially.While true in its own way,by your logic I should never play another RPG because they'll be the same (stop an overwhelming evil trying to take over/destroy the world) and every FPS because they're all the same (shoot X million terrorists because they want to destroy/take over the world)

halo fanboy.

So for example you'd prefer all games to come out if it was running on frostbite? Wouldn't that look like the same game to you regardless of story or gameplay?

So true.A perfect example I use for the modern developers is "All Style and no substance" with FFXIII.When FFXIII came out,it was the first FF game for this generation of consoles,and the first single player one that had hype since FFX (since FFX-2 and FFXII all kinda waned in hype even before release).Then we find out its on 3 discs (xbox 360 used for example,since thats what I got it on) so thats 3x 8gb discs,a total of up to 24gb's worth of Final Fantasy goodness.This lasts a total of a little over 20 hours,which was mostly dominated by cutscenes and full motion videoes.At the end of last year I replayed Legend of Dragoon and I told my friend that on a 4x 700mb cd game (2.8gb total) and I had twice the gameplay time that FFXIII had by the time I finished it,now all the SD and HD differences and what not,but the majority of it was actual gameplay.All *** style and no *** substance in these modern games

Edit: And metal gear solid 4,nuff said

well this discussion could probably go on for hours so i'll try to cut it short.
There's people who play games for the gameplay/the competitiveness/visuals/story/fun/playing with friends/justtopissoff13yearoldkids
but i think we can pretty much agree the big title companies should focus on the gameplay and substance of their product instead of just producing crap

Not really, I enjoy the story, and drunken lan multiplayer, I prefer Gears.

I can just tell the difference between a game they spent time on and is of quality: Halo, and fps meathead regurgitated crap: cod.

Like I said, you really need to learn what engines really do and are capable of, to answer your question though: no they wouldn't look the same, unless they used the same graphics data.

Agreed

because of costs, most of which is in the engine

Not sure what you're getting at jet :x

I agree that alot of over production and proprietary engine development can lead to these over the top costs + delays.We the consumer and loyal fanbase are the ones that get *** at the end of the day :(

If you can complete everything in 13 in 20 hours, I think you deserve a medal. I'd never be able to blow through the story and beat all 64 Cie'th Stones in such a short time.