Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

The Future of Game Dev (Except in St. Louis) 170

Posted by jamie from the stanley-is-steamed dept.
ksquire writes "Ben Sawyer, of Digitalmill, has published an interesting article at Avault.com about the past, present, and future of game development. Sawyer argues that the game industry is going more and more toward 3rd party development tools and '4th party' publishing -- meaning that game developers are essentially tool developers for game enthusiasts to create mods (also using tools like Alienbrain or Discreet's GMAX). I'm really curious as to whether the Slashdot community thinks we'll see a future era of standardized game tools and developers courting modders, or if we'll continue to see more specialized game engines. Maybe a greater PC / Console split?" Meanwhile, over in St. Louis, the Free Expression Policy Project has filed an amici curiae brief by 33 media scholars saying that "Most studies and experiments on video games containing violent content have not found adverse effects." They're trying to stop the county from banning violent games -- Wired has the story.
ksquire points out that "Sawyer also wrote an article, Serious Games: Improving Public Policy through Game-Based Learning and Simulation, which was discussed on slashdot."

netphilter and TCPALaw get credit for the Wired link. Previous Slashdot stories on violent gaming include this one and this one.

TCPALaw's full comment was (minus a dangling modifier): "Wired has a nice story on the St. Louis ban on violent video games. If the ban sticks (it was upheld by Judge Limbaugh against a constitutional challenge... Rush Limbaugh's uncle ... the same judge who struck down the federal ban on junk faxes as an abridgment of free speech - go figure) it could be extended to MP games available to play over the Internet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Future of Game Dev (Except in St. Louis) More

The Future of Game Dev (Except in St. Louis)

Comments Filter:

  • I live in St. Louis... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by motardo ( 74082 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:24PM (#4362361)
    I've seen a HUGE decline of arcades here because of this ruling, many of them have closed. The local mall near me used to have an arcade...until they put in a police substation across the hall. I hate it here because of stupid stuff like this.
    • What you're saying that the staggering popularity of Dance Dance Revolution is not enough to singlehandedly keep arcades open?

      This is news to me.
    • I have seen a trend in closing arcades in many areas of the country. To my knowledge none of these areas have any such laws regarding the games.

      The reason for the decline of arcades in your area may have something to do with your laws but, I think that the answer lies elsewhere.

      • Re:Closing arcades. (Score:2, Interesting)

        by handle ( 156615 )
        I know that I'm dating myself here, but arcades haven't been the same since the demise of pinball [pinball.org]. I stopped going into arcades when I realized that everyone in the joint was giving me the hairy eyeball because I was some weirdo who wanted to play the lone analog game in the place.

        • Re:Closing arcades. (Score:3, Insightful)

          by The_dev0 ( 520916 )
          I have to go one further here. I agree that the death of the pinball machine was the beginning of the end, but I believe the arcade's final nail in the coffin is the advent of the higher-power home consoles. Before the Super Nintendo and such, you had to visit your local arcade because the best games were only available on the robust hardware, but now... Every kid has a equally powerful system parked under their television at home. Man, I remember putting about $10 a day through my local street fighter machine but nowadays I could buy my own copy instead for the price of a couple of days' play. (i'm not ignoring the rapid adoption of PC's, its just that PC's have only become common for the average Joe over the last 10 years or so. Before that, it was enthusiasts only!) Consoles brought gaming to the masses, and will continue to do so.
    • I live in St. Louis too, but my observations do not concur with what your saying. I am not, however, into gaming like I used to be say 10 years ago so I may be off slightly.

      Many of the malls I've been to recently ie. Crestwood and MidRivers have large arcades that the teens seem to flock around. Also, that new huge theater, i think its called Ronnies, has a large amount of spaced dedicated towards arcade games.

      So as far as arcades are concerned they seem to be largly unchanged since my teenage days. What games are available may be a different story, I can't comment on that.

      puck
      • Yeah, the huge one at Northwest Plaza is still open I think... the one that takes up the whole basement of that mall.... I don't think there are fewer violent games there either. Arcades are in it for the money.... and kids that age like violent games so I don't think they'll be putting family-oriented arcade games there anytime soon since it's still largely a teen-hangout place.
    • I live in St. Louis too, but I dont' think the arcades are closing because of the law... arcades are closing because they're getting really sucky business!! It's like nobody plays arcades that much anymore.... there are still a few large large arcade plazas still open, but the small ones (like the one that used to be in Chesterfield Mall, Aladdin's Castle) are just disappearing.

    • Re:I live in St. Louis... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:35PM (#4362448)

      Personally, I think arcades are in decline because there are really only about 4 games out there these days, and DDR is the only one that's at all innovative -- the others are all retreads of "shoot an Uzi", "drive a car", and "twitch kung fu fighting game".

      • What spoiled children we have now. Twenty years ago there was only one arcade game. It involved moving a dot on a screen to run away from something, block something or blow something up.

        How many games do you need as an excuse to get out your parents house and hang with your friends.

    • Seems to me that arcades have closed because there's less of a need / desire for them. Ten years ago, you could play games at home on your Nintendo, but it didn't even come close to the stuff they had in the arcades. Since then, though, consoles have gotten better, and arcades haven't -- the games you have on an XBox / Gamecube / PS2 rival what you're going to see in an arcade.
      • Arcade games also have the problem that their goal tends to be to get the player to drop in as much cash as possible in the shortest time possible.

        You don't often see a PC/Console racing game that doesn't let you finish a race if you don't hit all the checkpoints in a predetermined time. (With the exception of, say, Burnout and a few others.)

        Console developers have a lot more freedom with what they can write, because they can assume there are no line-ups to deal with.
      • That, and arcades are freakin EXPENSIVE now. It costs at least a dollar a play on most of today's systems, what happened to the one quarter for one (or even three) credits days? I don't want to blow $20 every time i go to the arcade, but if i don't, i'm only there for about 20 or 30 minutes. These days i can spend $50 on a couple arcade ports for my Dreamcast that i can play whenever i want, and for as long as i want; an overpriced arcade can't hold a candle to that.
      • Ah.

        The days of 'Aladdin's Castle' at one end of the mall, five dollars, and 25 tokens.

        And each game was one token! (This was around 1983, give or take. The days of Defender and Pac Man and Donkey Kong.)

        And my personal favorite ... Wizard of Wor.

        Of course, playing Wizard of War or Tron or Bump and Jump or Mappy or Spy Hunter on MAME is nowhere near the same experience at those early years in the arcade...

    • It should be noted that the offending ordinance only affects St. Louis County, and thus does not affect the City of St. Louis (an independent city since 1876). Move the arcade to the City, away from County Council rhetoric and brownshirt police, and the issue vanishes. (mostly because the Board of Aldermen is too busy yammering about a new stadium to worry about video-game violence.)

      I mean, honestly. It's a simple solution.
      • Bonus points for knowing that the city is not part of the county. But honestly, do you think the city is a better place to run an arcade? There's not a lot of places in the city where kids (especially with lots of money) hang out. And the city makes it much harder to run a business. Not to mention the stupid 1% income tax for people who work *or* live in the city.
    • Are you referring to the big one in Northwest Plaza? (Hi from Olivette!)
    • from one of my favorite episodes of the Simpsons.

      Dr. Marvin Monroe (via satellite from Athens, with a camera around his neck)
      points out the inconsistency in Marge's logic, since she supports one form
      of freedom of expression, but not another. Marge concedes defeat.

      I guess one person make a difference, but most of the time,
      they probably shouldn't.
      -- Marge, ``Itchy and Scratchy and Marge''
    • I work in the video game industry, and used to work on arcade machines, so I can tell you that the decline in arcades and arcade machines is not a St. Louis area problem, but a nationwide problem. One of the big reasons for the decline in arcade machines is that the home consoles now roughly equal the power of the arcade machines, and throwing more polygons at the problem really isn't going to cause a huge increase in visual quality. This means that the arcade machines have to offer things that are not available at home, hence the reason for too many driving games, shooting games, and dancing games. These games are tend to stand out because of the interface to the machine, and it is something that is just not easily available at home. This has the side effect of increasing the price of the machines significantly. Older arcade games, or at least your standard full-size arcade machine, will run in price from 2000-5000 dollars, depending on the game (mind you, there are exceptions to the rule, but this is about standard, and the price of the machines hasn't changed much since they first appeared). A full size driving game or dancing game will run in the 10,000+ dollar range, and on top of that, with something like a driving game, you really need to have multiple machines networked together to give people the experience they are looking for. The extra mechanical components also result in an increase in the cost of maintenance on the machine. This means the operator needs to increase the cost per game of the machine to make money, which results in lower sales, etc. This is the reason for the decline of the arcade market. Interestingly enough, when doing field tests of games, we tended to make more money when the machine was set to $0.25 or $0.50 price range, rather than the $1.00 to $1.50 price range, as people tended to keep dropping money into the machine, so our usage was much closer to 100% at the cheaper price range, compared to less than 50% at the 1 dollar and up price point. But good luck convincing the operators of this, etc. Anyway, just thought I'd give some inside insight as to why there is a decline in the arcade market.
    • The local mall near me used to have an arcade...until they put in a police substation across the hall.

      Are you speaking of Northwest Plaza? It seemed to be the place of choice for all the gang-banger types to hang out and cause trouble. I suspect that had more to do with any closure there than the law....

  • Mods begat popularity. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:26PM (#4362378)
    Look at Half-Life. I can still, after how long now, fire up Half-Life and join a decent game.

    Hell, I can still find Quake 2 servers around, and there's still a few Quake 1 holdouts.

    Gamers love mods. For the developer, it gives them a chance to experience how games are made first-hand and also gives them an arena to show off their skills to existing gaming houses.

    For players? Depending on the mod community, it's like buying one game and getting ten in return. And everyone likes to save money, eh? ;)
    • True! and that's almost exactly why this article is bullshit. Game publishers, and by extension, game developers (who want their games published) make games to make loads of cash (the sims, everquest, roller coaster tycoon, myst).

      Games are generally going away from SDK style engine releases (except for a niche few like NWN and ID games).
    • What better match could exist than opensource tools, game engines, etc and mod programmers? The geeks that are really good at programming can release their code without having to fake their way through producing some half assed artwork and the mod makers can have full access to code, tools, everything. Feedback can go directly from the mod guys to the programmers and new code can be cranked out as needed just to suit their needs. It might take a while before the two sides find the right combo to bring them together but then it'll be a match made in heaven.
  • I'm really curious as to whether the Slashdot community thinks we'll see a future era of standardized game tools and developers courting modders, or if we'll continue to see more specialized game engines. Maybe a greater PC / Console split?"

    Uhhh ... standardize? That would make game programming like .... WORK!

    • "Uhhh ... standardize? That would make game programming like .... WORK!"

      Uhhh... what? Ya mind putting a little more meat on your point, or are ya just redundantly ranting about the need for game patches?
    • Uhhh ... standardize? That would make game programming like .... WORK!

      This is exacly why I had such short attention for games which came with editors which allowed me to build my own levels. It became work. Creating games should be creative fun. Alas, 1980 was a long time ago, back in the day when a guy could sit in his basement and write up something like Sneakers and submit it to a place like Sirius Software to see if they'd be interested. Now it's all producers and specialists and my nephew actually wants to get into it as a line of work. Take a second major, I say, keep your options open. Games should be a labor of love, first, a way to make a living, second.

      My 2 centimes anyway...

  • Game Development (Score:3, Informative)

    by moertle ( 140345 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:27PM (#4362388) Homepage
    Having just started a game development project our major goals include cross-platform compatibility (ala SDL / OpenGL), modularity, and open formats.

    How popular would Doom and Quake be without these things? Part of the fun of these games is the possiblity of expansion and innovation by peers. For example Capture the Flag was a user mod that was incorporated into later versions of the Quake series.

    • "Having just started a game development project our major goals include cross-platform compatibility (ala SDL / OpenGL), modularity, and open formats."

      let me know when you join a gam company whose major goals include Fun, and entertaining.

  • Engines don't necessarily need to standardize. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Myshkin ( 34701 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:27PM (#4362390)
    What would be cool to standardize would be the 3D modeling language and behavior scripting representations. After that it is a matter of compiling the world models and behaviorisms into the games custom binary representation.

    We aren't that far from this now. There are a number of *common* engines. Various generations of Quake and Unreal seem to be used in all sorts of games. If both of these could compile levels and models designed in a standard 3D editor, others would surely follow.

  • speaking as a modder... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MP*Birdman ( 315788 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:28PM (#4362395) Homepage
    I've seen alot of companies hiring people based off of their proven abilities in the mod field.

    Likewise, I've seen people use their contacts in the mod community to get better jobs.

    With some of the newer games coming out with good tool support (Unreal 2k3 has dedicated programs included, for example) for people to make their own content (be it maps, models, sounds, what have you), I fully expect game companies to actively search out mod teams.

    Obvious case in point:
    Think about what Valve would be doing right now if it wasn't for a very small number of mods.. (Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, Action Half-life, etc... Especially Counter-Strike)
    • Is the saved keystoke worth sounding like a manager?

      • Re:2k3??? (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Is the saved keystoke worth sounding like a manager?

        Really! And if he wanted to be cool he would have typed: 2k+3, showing that not only was he willing to obfuscate a simple piece of information, he was willing to do it with no economic (keystroke) advantage.
    • "Likewise, I've seen people use their contacts in the mod community to get better jobs."

      Speaking as a 3D Artist, I can happily say that GMAX is a good thing if the industry decides to support it.

      Right now, I work in LW. I may want to get a job in the game industry in the next couple of years. If so, I need a tool that's fairly close to the game. The neat thing about GMAX is that Discreet is trying to push it as a model format that other games can import. Should this take off (if it isn't already, haven't checked recently) then I'd be able to download this tool and start cranking away at models.

      Eventually, tools like this would probably be used in-house at the studio developing the game. I tell you what: That's the biggest fear I have about getting a new job. Knowing LW is fine and all, but I'll have to adapt to their tools, whatever they may be. The more access I have to those tools already, the more valuable I am.

      I guess the short version of what I'm saying is: Mods give the gaming public an avenue to increase their employment value at the companies making the games. They're creating their own talent pool!
      • GMAX is slowly but surely gaining in popularity from what I've seen..

        There's some large fees to get your game supported for it though, I believe.

        GMAX and MayaPLE are great though. Between those and milkshape, anyone can do 3D modelling now.
        • "GMAX and MayaPLE are great though. Between those and milkshape, anyone can do 3D modelling now."

          Does Maya PLE allow one to save meshes, or save them into a game format? Or did you refer to Maya as an educational tool?
  • As long as game engines provide a flexible enough API for building specialized modules for specific games, I think it will fly. The goal should be to make the engines modular enough, so that developers will be able to enhance specific aspects of the underlying engine without a major rewrite.

  • Dear jamie (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 )

    These two articles had nothing to do with each other, save for the fact that they both can be filed under the 'games' topic.

    They should have been posted as separate stories. By trying to nail the two together as a single story, you're not doing anything except fragmenting the discussion.

    • Re:Dear jamie (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by Elbereth ( 58257 )
      By complaining, you just encourage them to do this sort of thing more often in the future. The slasdot editors are merely trolls now. When was the last time you saw a story that was truly insightful or interesting? Sure, they still slip in occasionally, but just about everything posted on the main page is flamebait. Think about it. Which of the following front page headlines would you expect to see on Slashdot today:

      New Study Says P2P Networks Encourage Drug Use In Teens
      Intel, Microsoft, and MPAA Try To Squash Our Rights Again
      RMS Announces Linus Torvalds' Name Is Now GNU/Linus GNU/Torvalds
      I Constantly Reboot Into Windows XP, Watch MPAA Movies At The Cinema, And Donate To Senator Hollingworth's Re-Election Campaign, Yet I Am A Slashdot Editor
      Scientist Claims To Have Invented FTL Engine. Space Colonization Now Possible?
      Microsoft Has New Virus HAHAHAHA
      New Pre-Patch Of The Beta Kernel Available
      Google Patents Web Searching!!!!
      LNUX Stock At New Low; Threatened To Be De-Listed
      FreeBSD 5.0 Released
      New UltraSPARC V information released

      If you said all of 'em, then you're wrong! Slashdot would never comment on LNUX's stock tanking so badly. And the release of FreeBSD 5.0 would never get mentioned on the main page. And if you think Slashdot would actually mention technical, like the UltraSPARC architecture, you're fucking crazy.

      Why do you think they have so many spelling, grammar, and factual errors in every story? It's because they know that you'll take the bait. How else are they going to prove to their advertisers that thousands of people are seeing their ads?

      Let me tell you a story. One day, I was listening to a satellite radio station (broadcast in several states, including TX and NY). One of the New York callers happened to insult Texas, igniting a big call-in flamewar. The DJ almost creamed his pants he was so excited. Do you know why? Because every time they got a caller, that was another person they could list as a mindless zombie for the advertisers to indoctrinate. I turned off the radio in disgust, and I haven't turned it back on in almost ten years.

      Stand up and tell the slashdot editors that you're not just another demographic! Participate in the next Great Slashdot Blackout! Moderate everything as "overrated"! Post goatse.cx links!

      Or you could just waste all your karma trolling, like me.

      p.s. Almost forgot the "I know I'll get modded down for this" disclaimer.

      • Re:Dear jamie (Score:1, Offtopic)

        by wdr1 ( 31310 )
        Stand up and tell the slashdot editors that you're not just another demographic! Participate in the next Great Slashdot Blackout! Moderate everything as "overrated"! Post goatse.cx links!

        Err, I don't agree with the last two, but I do think the first Great Slashdot Blackout was a Good Thing. Are there any plans for the second?

        I know this is all off-topic, but I do think it's a shame this is really the only way people who care about Slashdot can express their voice in a non-troll manner. :-/

        -Bill

  • Game Devs == engine makers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:35PM (#4362446)
    This perspective only holds in the PC game enthusiast market. The PC market is only a fraction of the total videogaming market and the enthusiasts are only a fraction of that.

    The really big market for games is not on PC but on consoles, where customization is pretty much unheard-of. If you think that the industry is getting large enough that 3rd parties can create a market selling tools or libs or whatever, then that's absolutely correct and has been so for over a decade. If you think the market is going to 'decentralize', think again.
    • I think the underlying assumption is still sound, especially when most consoles now have HD's and network connections.

      Even before those were availiable some games let you at least edit levels and save them on memory cards.

      With network support, we might well see console makers host a mod site that would let console owners post new levels or perahps even TC's (like UT mods when the current UT client is put on the PS2 or XBox).

      The exciting thing about console makers hosting mod sites is the possibility they could pay for licences in some universes (like Star Wars, or The Simpsons, or Land of The Lost [how much would that licence be? $9.99??]) and then hold contests to have people create legal mods using licenced content. At least that's what they would do if they had a shred of sense.
    • When was the last time you made a console game? Why is it then that as a console ages, the games that come out push the limit of the console to new heights? Customization on a console port is key to really making the game hum. As developers become more intimate with the hardware, they come up with new hacks and tricks to get that extra chuck of processing power or memory bank switching to achieve new effects.

  • Banning violent video games (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm not sure how it works in the US but movies here have ratings on them. If you want to rent a movie or see a movie that is rated R you have to show ID that you are over 18 or accompanied by an adult and so on for PG 13 and AA14 and so forth, and there are parental guides on content. Why not simply apply those ratings to video games, since movies and games are from a content standpoint comming together the existing rating system would apply. A parent who lets their 17 year old buy a R rated movie or game is less inclined to care about it's content than a 8 year old kid, but then the person legally responsible for the child is aware of what their child is doing (insofar as they chose to be).

    Banning video games of any sort will be as effective as banning pornography or alcohol. Except al capone will be some guy with a webserver on a former british AA base in the middle of the atlantic.

    • Re:Banning violent video games (Score:5, Insightful)

      by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:51PM (#4362557) Journal
      Games in the US do have a rating system, the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board). It's completely voluntary, and all publishers have their stuff rated. Unlike movies who fought tooth and nail against ratings.

      It's also more specific than anything on movies or TV. A game doesn't just get M for Mature, but there's a short list of icons explaining *why* it got the M. Ie; Language, Adult Situations, Realistic Blood and Gore, Cartoon Blood and Gore.

      Thing is, while most retail outlets are now refusing to sell M rated games to minors, there's still a big whoopty doo because of things like Columbine, where the fact that the shooters played video games was blown out of proportion.

      Right now one of the big "targets" of the video game lobby is Grand Theft Auto 3. Now first off you have the title, then you have the box art covered with stylized mobsters, pimps, and prostitutes. Then you have a fairly prominent M for Mature, with underneath: Adult Situations, Coarse Language, Violence, Realistic Blood and Gore.

      Yet noone clues in that this isn't a game for 6 year old Billy.

      AFAIK, there's no legal accountability if Billy gets the game. Thats what they want, and they wouldn't dare hold the parents or gaurdians responsible for their childs welfare. It must be someone in corporate america's fault.

  • Credibility Gap (Score:3, Informative)

    by why-is-it ( 318134 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:39PM (#4362472) Homepage Journal
    Check out the list of scholars who are particpating in the brief. Only a handful are psychologists, and that is the faculty which is perhaps best suited to investigating whether there is any connection between observation of violent behaviour and violent behaviour. A brief read of the bio's of the scholars further indicates that most of these people are stepping well beyond their area of expertise.

    I would have thought that a brief to the court would carry more weight if the people lending their name to it had standing in the academic community in that area of research...

    • Anybody with any common sense should be able to see that there is no connection. This disgusting debate has got to end someday. As the article states, studies have been going on since 1928 and still there is no solid evidence of a link.

      Have you seen some of these ridiculous studies. They ask violent juvenile offenders whether they watch violent movies and play violent games. Of course, these kids do. I would be more surprised if they didn't but that doesn't infer cause and effect.

      Other studies stick two groups of kids in two rooms watching different movies - one violent and one wholesome. The kids in the violent movie come out more aggresive then those int he wholesome movie. Well, duh. The kids in the other movie are probably half asleep. And what do they mean by agressive? Just becuase a kid play boxes after a movie doesn't mean that he is going to go out an shoot up a school.

      As for these kids shooting up schools. These ultra-conservative old foagies always talk about how they are dressed like people and saying violent lines from movies. But what does that prove? If they had read War and Peace maybe they would have challenged their teachers to a duel instead.

      The truth is that even with 9/11 and the fighting between Israel and Palenstine we are living in one of the most non-violent times in history. Try being a Christian in Ancient Rome or a woman in Medieval Englang. Go fight the Crusades for imaginary artifacts or grab a gun and go to Normandy.

      I really wish that someday the Supreme Court would just say that anything entirely banning anything is unconstitutional and we could just get on with our lives. I will live with rating systems (although I think they are worthless when the parents don't even look) but banning is what is un-Patriotic.
      • The Big Problem(TM) is that people are confusing the symptons with the causes.

        Angry and violent people are often drawn to violent forms of expression, including violent games, movies and music. Some are trying to find a release valve for their feelings, others are trying to legitamize their feelings, and others are just acting out their feelings.

        They are trying to treat the fever and not tje infection that caused the fever.
  • i believe that once we have video cards that can all render scenes fsaa4x with *actual photo-realistic detail*, kind of like the NV30 but better... THEN we'll get standardized development environments & tools. THEN the crux of game development will be character development, art direction, and plot-related. The engine and graphics will be the easiest part. Developers will be able to focus on the game, and will not have to worry about framerates or physics engines, or light mapping techniques anymore.... it'll all be about developing a better story.... and OHHH THE FUN WE'LL HAVE THEN!
    • Really? Story will become the crux of game development?

      While that will indeed be true for many games, it wont be true for all games. It certaintly wont be true for the games that will often end up as the most remembered.

      Those elements aside, there is one thing that will end up prevailing over hyper developed characters. The fewer critical and important decisions that are left to the player, the less of a game it is. And to have a good and enduring story, you cannot let the player make the critical decisons.

      After all, your carefully devloped adventure where the Rugged Hero falls for the Beautiful Princess has some implied decions. Your story can have plenty of emotional development and character growth, but none of it matters if some Asshole like myself feels like shooting the woman instead of kissing her.

      END COMMUNICATION

  • This is just like Dungeon and Dragons, they said it contributed to murders, suicide, and increased violence.

    Funny how an increase in violent videos managed to contribute to decreased violent crimes throughout the 90's. Oh, that does not count that was the improved economy, with a weak economy there is increase in crime. So what they need to do is outlaw the economy taking a downturn, because THAT will prevent violence...

    • I'll bet most parents today would advocate a game like D&D that promotes actual problem-solving and creativity over trigger-finger-reaction games. Just another sign of the times.

      "Timmy, why don't you play a nice wholesome game like Dungeons and Dragons with the kid next door instead of making his head explode like a blood sausage with a sniper rifle? There's a good boy."

      -the walrus
    • Except computer games have a level of emersion(sp?) never see out side the 'real world'.
      It is know that if you go out and kill somebody, it changes your perspective. Kill enough people, you go from "I am a person who kills" to "I am a killer".
      So the question is, do the level of control over the enviroment your killing in have an effect on the brain? the answer is unknown. This is why a new serious study needs to take place that inviolves new computer games.
      Is DnD going to make you more likely to kill? no, but you are usually in someones living room, where most of your time is spent out of game context. If I say, I go over to the Orc and stab him, I'm not watching a character do that, I am watching the GM, or other players.
      If someone watches Violent TV, that person is still pretty far out of actual context. They have no control of the camera, they don't dictate the action.

      video game, NEW video game are achieving a prett good level of realism. What happens when a video game achieves near perfect realism?

      A method of brain washing is having some listen or watch something repetivly. With Video games, people often do the same thing, over and over again. What kind of effect does that have?

  • I think not (Score:2, Interesting)

    by adamwright ( 536224 )
    Did personal camcorders eliminate hollywood? Did affordable video equipment and home computing force ILM to close?
    • No but what I think is being said is when hand held equipment can produce images that seem like you looking through a window then yes we will see much of what hollywood is now change.

  • Doom movie negotiations round 2? (Score:4, Informative)

    by sheetsda ( 230887 ) <<doug.sheets> <at> <gmail.com>> on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:42PM (#4362502)
    From the wired article: One studio recently signed a deal to make Doom a motion picture.
    At first I presumed they meant the failed attempt several years ago, but then I found this article on Yahoo [yahoo.com] dated last Wednesday. I figured we would've seen a /. story about this by now, or did I just miss it?
    • One studio recently signed a deal to make Doom a motion picture.

      Two hours of shaky video, all in first-person perspective, while a guy with a camera on his shoulder runs around in the sewers shooting CGI monsters...

      And to think; I'd almost given up faith in hollywood to make good movies.

    • It's too bad they want to aim for the Junior High crowd with a PG-13 rating. The movie *should* be at least as violent as Alien{s,3,4} and the hell/horror component should be very high.

      Even if they aim for a PG-13 audience, they should also aim to keep the "where are these things coming from and why?" aspect of the story a mystery -- it adds interest and keeps you glued, hoping they can solve the mystery.

  • The decline of arcades is not because of "the man" keeping the violent game-playing kids out of trouble in the malls, it's because arcade games just aren't the profitable business they were 15 years ago. (Arcades are SO 1980's!) I remember when I was a kid, arcades were a big deal because I never had a console. Even the friends who did have Ataris and Nintendos liked the arcades because they had higher quality games. So, it was worth a special trip to the mall to play "Altered Beast" or "Mortal Kombat".

    Arcade games now are played more for the novelty than the experience. With the exception of maybe multiplayer racing games with cockpits, racing wheels, and gas pedals, games on todays home consoles are much higher quality, don't require rolls and rolls of quarters, and don't require a trip to the mall or the local pizza joint. The only reason I have to play a coin-op today is because there just happens to be one in the place I'm grabbing a burger, not because I'm going out of my way to play them. And if I see Galaxian sitting next to the latest version of Virtua Fighter, chances are I'm playing Galaxian, because I want a fun, simple game I don't have to pump 20 quarters in to master.

    Again, I don't think the majority of readers here are worried about what this means for arcades. It's just an unfortunate nail in the coffin. What people *should* be worried about is how far the advocates of banning violent games will take this - internet cafes, online content, what is sold in the local Best Buy?

    -the walrus

  • Not Black and White (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sdjunky ( 586961 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:49PM (#4362547)
    It's never black and white with anything. Do video games cause all kids to commit violent acts? No. Do some video games cause some kids to commit violent acts? Probably.

    Children that watch other kids do things mimic them but the way to overcome that is to ensure that there is a good moral foundation ( which comes from parents )

    Have we seen a spike in violence in children since video games became more prevalent? Yes. But why is the question. You'll note that this is the same time that most families had to start having two working parents ( to supplement income ) and so there isn't somebody to monitor tv, games and other media. Nobody there to comment on this being done in the game. Nobody to say "we don't do that in real life".

    Studies and statistics are often misleading and misused. A prime example that we learned in a Psych 101 is that of Churches and Crime rate. Did you know that in areas with more churches there is a higher crime rate? Considering that astounding revelation we should ban churches since they obviously lead to crime.

    The issue is that there isn't a direct relation, but rather a common factor between the two. Where are there more churches? In higher populated areas. Where is there more crime? In higher populated areas. The problem for higher crime is increased population, not churches.

    However, those in congress and those doing this study use common link evidence and say it is a direct relationship as if anything is so black and white
    • Children that watch other kids do things mimic them but the way to overcome that is to ensure that there is a good moral foundation ( which comes from parents )

      And part of providing a good moral foundation is preventing your children from playing with immoral toys.
    • It's never black and white with anything. Do video games cause all kids to commit violent acts? No. Do some video games cause some kids to commit violent acts? Probably.

      Video games cause kids to commit violent acts. What a bunch of crap. At the end of the day, you and you alone are responsible for your actions. If you choose to stick a pencil in your neighbours neck, that was your choice.

      You could argue otherwise due to insanity, but that's a whole different issue.

      You could also argue that people who play video games are more likely to choose to pencil their neighbours. But that is still their choice. This whole A causes B stuff is crap. Because between every A and B there is a person making a choice.

      • Sorry if I didn't make that clear... I don't think games make kids do anything. I think that people in general ( especially children though ) are susceptible to what they see when they are not brought up properly to discern things ( which has nothing to do with the game itself ) and are susceptible to anything. Peer pressure, media, writing on the local bathroom stall.

    • with the word 'induce.' There are those who also confuse 'induce' with 'incite.' I believe there are those that use such confusion willfully to further their own agendas as well.

      The distinction is, in strictly legal terms, extremely important.

      Executing a violent video game *causes* certain electronic phenomenon to occur in the machine.

      Violent behaviour among minors is *caused* by the minor in question acting violently.

      KFG

  • Future of gaming?? INNOVATION! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FortKnox ( 169099 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:54PM (#4362574) Homepage Journal
    The future of gaming is what every NES/atari/old school gamer has dreamed of. They always complain that games today are just copies of what is popular (how many quake/fps copycats can you name?).

    Well, modding is changing all of that. When a game comes out, modders push the limits of the engines to do anything they want... the clincher is... they do it for free.

    Now, for game designers to still make money, they have to come out with new and unique ideas. Doing your standard FPS ain't gonna do it anymore. Even single-player FPS with great plots are being done with mods. The games of tomorrow will have to be bigger and better than mod writers (or have a bigger and better engine), which means the days of the FPS copy-cat will soon be over.

    Also, to note, some publishers are encouraging the modding community to step forward into the gaming industry. Just look at Garage Games [garagegames.com]. They are selling their Torque Engine (the engine behind tribes 2) for $100 for a non-commercial license (and if you make a commercial product with it, no problem, as long as garage games is your publisher).

    Let the mod revolution continue!
    • When a game comes out, modders push the limits of the engines to do anything they want... the clincher is... they do it for free.

      I think the best source of game innovation is from players, and that doesn't stop with the modders. Look at all of the MMORPGs out there. Those players aren't creating mods, but by playing characters far better than any AI, they add to the level of game play for everyone. And they not only don't get paid, they pay the game company to play! "You mean you pay to play an elf, so someone else playing the game encounters a more realistic elf during their game?"

      The modders are almost yesterday's news compared to the people who pay to improve the game by playing it. Now that's a business model. You get a better "AI equivalent" than anyone could write, and they pay you for the privilege.

  • You cannot ever hope to complete even ONE level of any modern game on a single coin. (Okay, 50 cents.) The games are designed to make sure you get killed off quickly and must pump more quarters into the machine just to continue. I know this may seems like a great idea to get more income, but in the end it just frustrates the game player. And yeah, home consoles are right up there in graphics and sound with the "full blown" arcade machines, so why bother going to the arcade?
    • That's the way I always thought of it. I was always frustrated that I would put my coins into the machine and then die 10 seconds later as some unforseen random event causes your character to die. With the price you would have to pay to finish a game in the arcade, you could have just bought the console version and played it as much as you wanted.
    • I agree. Some dimwit probably thought it would make me pump a bunch of coins into the machines. Instead, I stopped going there and spending anything at all.

      Today's arcades are sad, boring places full of games that do not interest me. And I swear: I did not grow up. If the games were good, I would still be playing them.

  • Game violence in 1972? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Fig, formerly A.C. ( 543042 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @04:55PM (#4362583)
    From the article, referring to Donahue:

    In 1972, he invited Long Island mother Ronnie Lamb to bring her message to his show and launch her campaign to ban video games.

    WTF was the violent video game in 1972? Death pong?

    Did her Little Tommy kill somebody with a ping pong paddle? This is just silly.

  • "....meaning that game developers are essentially tool developers for game enthusiasts to create mods...."

    well the thing that this may lead to is that it will just shift the model out one layer - in that all the really good mod developers out there might actually start game houses. Granted this would take a while - but you can even see now that some quake mod developers are starting small "companies" (term used very roughly) and creating products. Whether they are actually selling them - or just making them is another issue.

    In any event - the rift might end up being so that the two types of really prevelant games are 1) MMORPGs and 2) Engine provided with a decent yet small Campaing ala NWN. with the tools and intentions for user end mods.

    While I do not think that this model would apply to sports games - the RPG genre is definitely a perfect arena for this type of development model.

    What we really need in gaming is some revelutionary ideas in the area of interface and gameplay (not to mention the need for new genres entirely - not an easy task.)
  • That's what happens when you don't keep your dangler in your pants.

    Modifier? I don't even know her!

    (Rimshot)

  • Studies have shown that most people making up studies that say killing in games leads to killing in real life were actually made up by the same person you killed in the same camping spot on dust2 in Counter-Strike until they got so frustrated, they left the game, and are now trying to make it professionally in the flamer industry. This is our payback for enjoying AWPing people.

  • Flawed thinking... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Pvt_Waldo ( 459439 )
    ...meaning that game developers are essentially tool developers for game enthusiasts to create mods (also using tools like Alienbrain or Discreet's GMAX)

    This is pretty flawed thinking. Because by that same logic, there should be little market for softare because clearly we can all just go get MS Visual Studio, or Perl, or PHP, or any number of other programming languages. Who needs application developers! Just give the masses programming languages.

    Just because you give someone a tool doesn't mean they can create greatness. GMAX is definitely a "dumbed down" version of a more sophisticated package, but in no way has it streamlined the users (artists) creativity or imagination, not to mention sense of aesthetics, balance, and proportion.

  • Future Game Development (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Torgo's Pizza ( 547926 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @05:08PM (#4362675) Homepage Journal
    As a once-and-future game developer, this is the way I see it. Developers will continue to use the best game engine available to suit their needs. If one isn't available, then they will create their own.

    A game engine that allows a user modification later is just gravy. We've pretty much have seen this as a marketing tool to get our game off the shelves and into the hands of gamers. The great success of the Quake and Unreal engines prove this. At first, just to play the Counter-Strike mod, you had to purchase Half-Life.

    Currently, only independent developers are using these third-party engines. The main reason is that they lack the resources ($$$, time and people) to create their own engine. These groups quickly find that their engine lacks the power or doesn't handle game functions as they would like. The best games will have the game design create the engine and not the other way around.

    Let's face it. To have a AAA title, you need to have your own proprietary engine. Those that use a high-end Quake or Unreal engine will often have to strip out and insert new code to make it work. (Wasn't Half-Life 85% new code?)

    I only expect to see more proprietary engines being created (as it always has been) and the ability to create user modifications as a marketing tool to increase sales.

    • Deus Ex wasn't a AAA title? While the developers had to add some functionality (for ladders, for instance), they did not have to strip out and rewrite much of the engine at all.

      Third party engines are the way computer gaming is going. Every time you write an engine, you're re-inventing the wheel. Why do that?

      • Re:Future Game Development (Score:4, Informative)

        by Torgo's Pizza ( 547926 ) on Monday September 30, 2002 @06:35PM (#4363190) Homepage Journal
        Ah, you'd think that. But that's not the case. Here's a quote from Warren Spector, designer of Deus Ex:

        Technology forced design changes, too. It took time to become familiar with the Unreal engine. I wish I could say we uncovered all its potentials and limitations quickly, but we didn't. Months of experimentation were necessary to reveal how best to do things in Unreal and what things not to do at all. When we stopped playing with Unreal andactually started working with it (roughly six to nine months after we got our hands on it), lots of ideas we'd come up with in the abstract didn't work quite as well in reality.

        Here's a case where game design was sacrificed in name of the existing game engine. Ah, but there's more...

        We went into Deus Ex hoping that licensing an engine would allow us to focus on content generation and gameplay. For the most part, that proved to be the case. The Unreal Tournament code we ended up going with provided a solid foundation upon which we were able to build relatively easily. Dropping in a conversation system, skill and augmentation systems, our inventory and other 2D interface screens, major AI changes, and so on could have been far more difficult...

        However, to my surprise, licensing technology didn't save us all the time I'd hoped it would. You'd think cutting a year or more of engine-creation off a schedule would result in an earlier release date. On Deus Ex, that didn't prove to be the case. Time that would have been lost creating tools was lost instead to learning the limitations and capabilities of "foreign" technology. Time that would have gone into making an engine went into focusing more on gameplay systems and tuning than normal. Unreal certainly allowed us to focus on content generation over everything else, but we spent more time doing it...

        There were times when we should have ripped out certain parts of the Unreal Tournament code and started from scratch (AI, pathfinding, and sound propagation, for example). Instead, we built on the existing systems, on a base that was designed for an entirely different kind of game from what we were making. It's not that Unreal had bad AI or pathfinding or sound propagation, but those systems were designed for a straightforward shooter, which was not what we were making. (The entirety of this can be found at Gamasutra [gamasutra.com])

        As I stated before, using a top-notch third party system might save you some time, but you often need to strip out a lot of the code and do some heavy modifications. Not to mention that they cost several hundred thousand dollars and a royalty percentage. Most of the time it's just better to write one yourself.

        • This is flawed thinking though. I agree that we are in a transition phase where story like Warrens are still more of the rule. However, overtime it is nearly inevitable that these problems will be mitagated more and more over time and it won't be true that "most of the time it's just better to write one yourself." As for triple AAA titles. GTA3 uses Renderware. So did Tony Hawk in some cases I believe. I think many people don't realize how many titles are being developed with less and less proprietary technology. Even then so much of the market doesn't care. Big Fat Greek Wedding didn't make 137 million to date because of ILM special effects or THX soundtrack. As the parent buying Tony Hawk for their 10 year old if they know how much of it was built using an off the shelf engine. Do you think they'll shreak and stick it back on the shelf?

  • Depends on the engine license. (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    As long as the game makers limit the ability of the modders to be compensated for their work, then game engines will continue to be made.

    Today, in many ways, you can "mod" a games using net built tools based on distributed games and have little chance of getting paid for your work (if you're lucky, you might get picked up by the original game producer). But, most modern games limit the ability of modders to actually sell their new levels, etc. (e.g. Neverwinter Nights)

    The other way to "mod" the game is to actually license the engine from the creator, pay them a fee and/or royalty and be able to then distribute your work based on the engine.

    Licensing the engine tends to give you a bit more flexibility in the final game, as you may be able to modify the actual source of the engine, whereas with typical mods you can not.

    It would be an interesting development when you can get a "reasonably priced" license from, say, Blizzard to build new mission sets for WC3 and then be able to sell them. Here, you don't license the actual engine, but rather simply use the tools that the internal level designers used to create single play campaigns for resale.

    This way, for example, WC3 becomes not simply a game, but also an authoring tool. The issue here, of course, is that if you're licensing the world building component, then later there may be difficulties regarding expanding and enchancing the games through patches and what not. If Blizzard decides to tweak a spell or capability in the core game, that tweak may throw a 3rd party scenario out of balance enough to ruin the scenario for players.

    These could all be dealt with, of course, but it would require some extra maintenance and forethought and communication by Blizzard. Now, since there are no licensees of the world building piece, they can change whatever they want and all of the hobbyist fan made changes can be damned.

    Mods are a great way to extend the longevity of a game (Total Annihilation anyone?), and keep it popular, but with the engines becoming more sophisticated, it would be nice to have channel for professional 3rd party content as well as amateur content.
  • I like it when people with little game experience start predicting the future of games. The article rehashes some of the popular predictions and adds one or two new ones, probably to legitimize whatever business model they're trying to use. If Mr. Sawyer wishes to continue speculate about the future of games he may want to spend some time in the industry before doing so.

    "This evolutionary process is not finished. Increased compartmentalization and object orientated advances will enable re-usable components, character behaviors, game logic and audiovisual content. Over time, some forms of fundamental standardization for various types of content may allow users and developers to interchange content from one product with that from another."

    Standardization? Sheya. We don't even have a standard animation format from product to product *from the same company*. Engine programmers are constantly attempting to gain speed and compression of assests and each rev of the engine will affect how assests processed. Even if you could standardize a 3D model format and an animation format you still need some way to hook it up to the game. The day performance is no longer an issue is the day you'll see standardization.

    "Key trends in development, including online worlds, continuous development and after-market products from fourth-party developers require new distribution systems."

    Oh yes, pay-to-play. That'll go over big with gamers. You dont own the disc anymore and you can't play if you're connection is down. Gamers rent the software, even if it's a one-player game. The Xbox os ready to do this (who woulda thunk it), but the PS2 and Gamecube can't unless you force players to buy more stuff.

    "Continuous Development" - old hat.

    • Accidently hit the submit.

      "Increased Monetization of Product Derivatives" - a.k.a. make gamers pay for mods.

      "Complete Toolset Integration & Standardization" - Ah yes, the glorious uber-prize that all people want to see. One toolset for all genres of games so it's just a matter of plugging the right bits together for your game.

      Sheya, that'll be the day. Take an engine that was build for first person shooters and try making a role-playing game out of it (i.e. ask the Anacronox team) and we'll see what you're tune is. And when you manage to make that easy, try making a fighting game out of that engine. When you do that, make it easy to make a racing game. When you do that...

      "Development Teams Become More Transient" - In other words, we don't want to pay for a full-time team of professionals.

      "With pervasive gaming, many of the previous nine points come together to create gaming's equivalent to electricity - it's everywhere, always available, and easy to access what you want, when you want it." - now you don't just play games for fun, you live them! Unfortunately, he's probably got this right. Except for the cell-phone part. Hard-core gamers wouldn't have the guts to actually talk to another person from the game.
      • Sheya, that'll be the day. Take an engine that was build for first person shooters and try making a role-playing game out of it (i.e. ask the Anacronox team) and we'll see what you're tune is.

        Ion Storm & Looking Glass seemed to do a decent job. Of course, those were FP RPGs...
      • Let me reply to this point-by-point.

        >increased Monetization of Product Derivatives"
        >- a.k.a. make gamers pay for mods.

        My point was that at some point modders will be released from having to give their work away for free. The result is there will be some monetization of this and that could result in more mods and people supporting teams who produce good ones. It doesn't mean much of it won't remain free otherwise or by choice of the developer. Already some developers have done this in the form of boxing and distributing various mods like CounterStrike.

        >"Complete Toolset Integration & Standardization"
        >Ah yes, the glorious uber-prize that all
        >people want to see. One toolset for all
        >genres of games

        Actually I didn't advocate what you are talking about. The "toolset" I'm referring too are more generic things like Bink, Renderware Studio, Havok, 3D Studio, Alienbrain, etc. Not a one-size-fits-all kit. I think I even said that there will be specific engines for specific genres. Also if you haven't played morrowind, EQ, or Asherons call, why couldn't you use an FPS engine to do a kick but RPG?

        >"Development Teams Become More Transient" -
        >In other words, we don't want to pay for a
        >full-time team of professionals.

        Again, misinterpretation. I'm talking about professionals who are hired in a different manner. In fact, the fmr. Xbox manager for MS recently wrote about this issue in Wired. Teams today are not very transient. They are hired in-house, and stay together as a unit for multiple projects at the same publisher. Instead if tools make it easier to manage the process I see publishers moving back to a time where they outsourced lots of development. It doesn't mean they will seek cheap unprofessional labor. It means that you're brought aboard a project, you do your job, and when you're done you leave and hook up immediately on another production elsewhere.

        >Except for the cell-phone part. Hard-core
        >gamers wouldn't have the guts to actually
        >talk to another person from the game.

        Actually the technology inherent in a number of cellphones and thus cellphone games makes it impossible to talk to someone during the game. Doing that requires you to drop out of the network and lose state. Overtime this will get fixed. However, in the article I didn't necessarily make this point vis-a-vis cellphone games. I pointed out that they, and PDAs, would at times offer supplemental access to PC and console titles, e.g. helping arrange a trade in madden2024 so when you got home the trade was done. Or corresponding with your characters allies in a wargame or game like EQ.
    • I find it odd you decide to attack me personally? You don't even know me... oh well. Here is my reply to some of this... Yes you are right - I didn't create tons of new thought. However, I never claimed to be inventing all of this. What I did was try to pull together a bunch of disparate thoughts a lot of people have and put some organization to it, which is a key part of any piece of writing. It allows people like you to see it all together so you can then attack me. As for the standardization comments. You're point was the same as mine in the article at some point standardization will increase. I think we're disagreeing on how fast but arguments of degree are never winnable on either side without until time passes. Also the point about speed and edge are hogwash now. GTA3 was never state of the art and it outsold lots of other SOA games. Yes SOA games will do well - we all like the latest and greatest but I think GTA represents the fact that if a huge hit game both with hardcore and casual gamers can be built using products like Renderware then it's going to get increasingly harder for every team at every publisher to justify building an engine from scratch. Yes technology does force changes but the thought that game developers after 20 years can't start to create standardized files with some level of backwards compatibility is crazy. The performance vs. function curve is rapidly dwindling and as it does standardization will grow. If you spent some time talking to Mike King at Criterion as I did at last years GDC you'd see that a lot of people are talking about this stuff and some are doing it even now. Talk to the guys at RAD Game Tools as well. Bink Video is becoming a defacto standard for game video. Talk to Jack Moffit the creator of vorbis and see how quickly that's become a standardize file format (royalty free to boot and open source) for a lot of game audio. Over the last 20 years mostly propreitary processes, tools and engines where the rule. Over the next 20 years they will increasingly become the exception. The macro-economics of the game industry and moores law will nearly dictate it. As I said in the article there will always be room for innovators and the Carmacks of the world but it will be far more standardized.

  • Today's gamers (Score:2, Insightful)

    by fcrick ( 465682 )
    Today's gamers are tomorrow's game developers, and I think this is something that wasn't as true ten years ago.

    With the recent increased popularity in both video games and software development, making mod-able games isn't so much a new innovation, but really just a logical step forward. Game developers can safely assume that at least a couple hundred of their players will be talented programmers, and from those a collection will be willing to work on things like mods. The benefits of this possibility are fairly obvious (look at other posts), and really the only cost is the need to organize your code into an SDK, which is probably benefits your codebase considerably if you are thinking about this from the start.

    Someone else mentioned this, but not only will you possible generate new games that will add to the value of your game, but the programmers who worked on these project are probably just the type you want working in your company, allowing you to basically hand-pick a few new programmers for your company from the vast pool of modders working on your game. I'm almost certain that Valve Software (Half-Life) hired a few guys from some mods, and I think they even keep the Counter-Strike developers on payroll just so they will continue their work.

    All this of course applies to artists and such as well.
  • I think that while we'll continue to see proprietary technology like UnrealEd, DromEd, Radiant, etc. in the game development world, there will also be a push towards engine technology that is directly compatible with the tools that are already on the market.
    Making it easier for people with Lightwave, Maya, Max, Nendo, Mirai, et al, to contribute directly to game content without jumping over any hurdles is a win-win situation for both the gaming community and the companies that make these products.

    There's always the argument that teenagers can't afford Max or Lightwave, but somehow they still manage to create whole sites of tutorials based on such software ;) In the end, these kids are growing up to become more than just members of the community, and will be purchasing licenses for these packages for work.

    It only makes sense for companies, in both a business and ease-of-use sense, to move away from the proprietary, and towards more open design standards that profit everyone.
  • Before developers can push the future of gaming development, and allow "4th party" users to create mods, we'll have to invent some pronouns with which to refer to these 4th parties! I mean, we already have 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person pronouns -- I, you, and he/she/it respectively. What will the 4th person pronouns be like? Are these at all related to the modifications to tenses required by time travel as expanded on by Douglas Adams?
  • Please note that St. Louis City and St. Louis County are completely seperate entities (and have been for well over 100 years). There is much animosity between the two and the hillbilly ignorance of the county should not be considered as a reflection on the city, which is much more sophisticated (this is only said partially tongue in cheek, you don't have to get far outside the city limits to be in Mississippi Burning land).

  • Those who would blame video games for violent behavior do not understand the cause of violence. Fear fuels hatred, and hatred fuels violence. Without the hatred, violence cannot flourish. If anything, video games reduce the level of stress an individual is experiencing, making it less likely that an individual will become violent.

    What this is really about is blame shifting. White middle class America can't even grasp the concept that they might somehow be responsible for the angst level of minorities and the underpriveledged. It is much easier for suburban America to have a politician pass a law against "violent" video games than it is for them to take a hard look at their own lifestyles. This way, they feel as if they are "doing something" while absolving themselves of any responsibility for the condition of their communities.

  • Some of the best games of recent memory for me were designed with technologies that are not particularly platform-specific. Id Software showed this during Quake III Arena beta development. Their initial public beta offering was available only for Mac OS systems in the first few days (specifically targeting a system at the time that came with a powerful video card).

    That small example expresses a point when developing games. It's not all one world, and many people no longer accept that a particular game is available only for one device (PC, console, whatever). All of these platforms have already converged in technologies and aren't particularly different except for the game accessory hooks (Windows: DirectX, Mac OS 9: InputSprockets) that make porting a pain in the patootie. Some companies that port the most popular PC games to other platforms or develop their games with concurrent release are great at it, but something's amiss now. The lack of ports for Linux games is shameful, given that one of the most popular UNIX-class operating systems show that these games work in this area (Mac OS X). I know it's not a "just recompile" thing, but it shouldn't be that hard, right?

    I'm not a programmer, but I've read the general qualms that make game development so richly rewarding and a pox on your soul. In a utopian game development world, I'd stick with these standards:

    - USB devices with common, open source drivers that work anywhere (everything handles USB now). Screw proprietary or legacy connectors.
    - OpenGL, OpenGL, OpenGL: Everything works with it--just keep refining it
    - Clone John Carmack, Westlake Interactive, Blizzard, Aspyr, and any other company/person who thinks the game first, and the platform second

    Are programmers so limited in skill that they can't develop without DirectX? Or are there plenty of politics that derail the idea of "code once, frags for all"?
    • > OpenGL: Everything works with it--just keep refining it
      As much as I love OpenGL, let me know when it runs at an acceptable rate on the PS2, because it will NEVER be fully accelerated on the PS2 due to lacking hardware features, such as Stencil support. (Yes you can fake it with clever Alpha tricks, but the point is, there is no common graphics API that runs on everything from PDAs through consoles up through PCs.)

      > Are programmers so limited in skill that they can't develop without DirectX?
      What a naive and arrogant statement. Us programmers don't feel like re-developing the wheel over and over again. Why waste time re-writing (and debugging) drivers when it (DX) already works? I only addressed the technological issue, but there is also a business/politcal issue. (See below.)

      A standard API is a good thing, yes. But there are very few high performance cross-platform APIs (RenderWare and NetImmerse middleware come to mind, but what others?) Add in the issue of cost (to develop & maintain) and very few developers/publishers are willing/able to afford it.

      > Or are there plenty of politics that derail the idea of "code once, frags for all"?
      Flexibility comes at the cost of performance. Engines are designed to do a few things well, the rest ok or even poorly -- only so man hours can be applied to the "problem" of writing efficient & flexible code. The level of algorithmic optimization you can apply depends on the problem. As hardware converges to common feature sets, I agree, this gets easier.

      It's not just a political issue, but a business one - i..e maximium profits. Why spend a ton of money writing PC games for less then 2% of the market (Linux+Mac), when you make your most profits from the other 98% (windows)? Of course cross-platform code has it's benefits (find more hidden bugs), but it's seen as "too expensive", with very little returns, by most game developers / publishers, unfortunately.

      Cheers

      --
      Maybe there is a reason why the cliché "Turn off the TV, turn on your life" is true:
      Television: Opiate of the masses [dyndns.org]
  • On a related note, my research has shown that even years of daily pornography viewing does not result in abberant sexual behavior. I mean with others.
  • Shure Jon Doe is a good person, but could he have been better, if not subjected to X,Y,Z.

  • Middleware companies (I work for one) - produce solutions for game programmers in areas that are traditionally "hard". Few game developers nowadays produce their own graphics engine (opengl, directx, renderware are used). Physics middleware is establishing itself (havok and mathengine), and there is a feeling that AI middleware will be big when it comes.
    Game developers think "why should I put 6 months programming into something that probably won't look as good as what the dedicated guys can do?" Game players nowadays don't want "just" good graphics or AI or sound or physics, they want a completely immersive experience, and this is often impossible for a single team of developers to produce in any realistic time-frame

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Close