test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

The WHOLE PROBLEM with Champions Online

13»

Comments

  • Options
    visionstorm01visionstorm01 Posts: 564 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    ashensnow wrote: »
    EDIT: To clarify, I do think that CO is pay to win, but do not find the matter to be all that problematic here. As you say, everything can be played successfully, without mind numbing grind, without the pay to win aspects.

    This^ is exactly my feeling on this issue.

    That being said, I do believe that some of the pay to win aspects in this game can be insurmountably expensive regardless of them not being required to do most of the game's content. The price of Catalysts, starting at $6 for a useless R2 mod and going up to $30 for a R9 is completely and utterly ridiculous, particularly if you take into account the fact that you can buy an ENTIRE game (several of them, actually) for less than you would need to spend to max out a toon with mods from the store. $50 for a single FF slot is excessive as well when we can get an entire new game for roughly that amount as well. Then you have the unspecified amounts you'd have to spend gambling to get the new vehicle stuff...

    Right now, CO's only saving grace as far as P2W is concerned is that its excessive focus on casual play has made the bulk of its content trivial to the point that isn't required. Which is another way of saying that if they ever made this game as challenging as it should be, we'd be screwed.
    ____________________________
  • Options
    haleakalahaleakala Posts: 449 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    This is of course nonsense. It's nothing but an excuse designed to deflect conversation and try to put an end to it.

    STO had the system being requested at release, and it had less than a year before it was released. That's on top of ground and space combat, the alien creation system, all the missions, the rather sizable amount of art assets that already existed at launch. It also had plenty of content being developed and released while the Foundry was still being worked on. The Foundry is a lot more complex, code and design wise, than customizable vehicles. At the time, it arguably had a smaller dev team than Champions has now.

    STO before its launch probably had a bigger team than CO has now, and it was worked on for about 18 months. It also has a more recognizable IP, Cryptic advertises it, and as a result it probably makes more money and has a larger current team. While I am no stranger to public-relations speak, just how much experience do you have coding using Cryptic's engine?
    _________________________________________________

    I been a long time leaving but I'm going to be a long time gone.

    Willie Nelson


    T.U.F.K.A.S. (the user formerly known as Scarlyng)
    Wrong on the CO forums since November, 2008
  • Options
    spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Posts: 383 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    smoochan wrote: »
    You think having more resources is winning? ...are you Donald Trump?

    Whoever dies with the most G, Q, and Zen wins? Nobody told me this!
    tumblr_moni7tHVoq1rzu2xzo1_500.gif
  • Options
    smoochansmoochan Posts: 2,564 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Whoever dies with the most G, Q, and Zen wins? Nobody told me this!

    Because it's not true. We all know whoever dies in the best looking costume wins.

    Champions Online: Be the hero you wish you could be in a better game.
  • Options
    zenzenarimasenzenzenarimasen Posts: 185 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    haleakala wrote: »
    STO before its launch probably had a bigger team than CO has now, and it was worked on for about 18 months. It also has a more recognizable IP, Cryptic advertises it, and as a result it probably makes more money and has a larger current team. While I am no stranger to public-relations speak, just how much experience do you have coding using Cryptic's engine?

    As for Cryptic's engine, pretty much none, I don't work for Cryptic and it's a proprietary engine. That's still beside the point. Unless the code is such an absolute mess that a simple task (and yes it really is simple) is rendered impossible, it's not difficult to do. For that matter, if the engine was such a poorly coded mess that it would be so difficult to do such a simple bit of code, they'd never release any new content at all. In fact, if it was that much of a mess, I'd go so far as to say that it would have to have been coded by a 14 year old following a "Game Engine Programming for Dummies" guide.

    I refuse to believe that the game works as well as it does, minor cosmetic bugs aside, and that the devs are so incompetent that they would need "months or years" as Trailturtle said to do something for which the code pretty much already exists in one form or another within the engine already. You simply define mount points for the components and make sure that the artists are making the artwork to be modular. They obviously already have the code required to keep unrigged meshes attached to other meshes. It's how weapons work.

    The code I did, it was a week's worth of work to get the code working and most of that was just writing the UI. I had the actual mounting of modular parts on vehicles going in about 5 minutes. The real problem would be the artwork. I said that before, I already said it again, I'm saying it a third time. The way they have it now, they have just a few, non-modular meshes. The artists would have to work a bit harder.

    The artist I'm working with is very well trained in making 3D movies. However, he has no experience doing game art, and it's a bit of a challenge for him. All the same, in the first week he's already made enough parts to make 81 different unique vehicle combinations. It's basically 4 sections to the vehicles which we're terming "fuselage, left pylon, right pylon, and engine." Each section currently has 3 different modules that could be used. That comes out to 3 to the power of 4 combinations. That's actually not many parts though, but we're still moving along nicely. Of course the 12 parts we have that make these 81 combinations don't have any textures, normal maps, specular maps, or anything of the sort done yet. It's just naked meshes at this point.

    I'm not saying it can be done well inside a week, only that a proof of concept shouldn't take much longer than that. If they give it their all, fully polished and debugged probably 2 months tops. I don't know about the artwork. I can't say how long that would take. I've never worked with more than 2 artists at any one time, and they were all doing it for the fun of doing it, not being paid. So I lack perspective on that aspect.

    1 artist
    1 coder
    81 possible combinations in 1 week's worth of work.

    While he's banging out more modules, I'm busy teaching the AI how to complete mission objectives and working on balancing the modules since each one confers different abilities and bonuses to its vehicle.
    __________________________________________________

    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → Ⓑ Ⓐ
  • Options
    zenzenarimasenzenzenarimasen Posts: 185 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    smoochan wrote: »
    Because it's not true. We all know whoever dies in the best looking costume wins.

    I concur. If I'm going to die, I want to look stylish doing it.
    __________________________________________________

    ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → Ⓑ Ⓐ
  • Options
    haleakalahaleakala Posts: 449 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    As for Cryptic's engine, pretty much none, I don't work for Cryptic and it's a proprietary engine. That's still beside the point. Unless the code is such an absolute mess that a simple task (and yes it really is simple) is rendered impossible, it's not difficult to do. For that matter, if the engine was such a poorly coded mess that it would be so difficult to do such a simple bit of code, they'd never release any new content at all. In fact, if it was that much of a mess, I'd go so far as to say that it would have to have been coded by a 14 year old following a "Game Engine Programming for Dummies" guide.

    I refuse to believe that the game works as well as it does, minor cosmetic bugs aside, and that the devs are so incompetent that they would need "months or years" as Trailturtle said to do something for which the code pretty much already exists in one form or another within the engine already. You simply define mount points for the components and make sure that the artists are making the artwork to be modular. They obviously already have the code required to keep unrigged meshes attached to other meshes. It's how weapons work.

    The code I did, it was a week's worth of work to get the code working and most of that was just writing the UI. I had the actual mounting of modular parts on vehicles going in about 5 minutes. The real problem would be the artwork. I said that before, I already said it again, I'm saying it a third time. The way they have it now, they have just a few, non-modular meshes. The artists would have to work a bit harder.

    The artist I'm working with is very well trained in making 3D movies. However, he has no experience doing game art, and it's a bit of a challenge for him. All the same, in the first week he's already made enough parts to make 81 different unique vehicle combinations. It's basically 4 sections to the vehicles which we're terming "fuselage, left pylon, right pylon, and engine." Each section currently has 3 different modules that could be used. That comes out to 3 to the power of 4 combinations. That's actually not many parts though, but we're still moving along nicely. Of course the 12 parts we have that make these 81 combinations don't have any textures, normal maps, specular maps, or anything of the sort done yet. It's just naked meshes at this point.

    I'm not saying it can be done well inside a week, only that a proof of concept shouldn't take much longer than that. If they give it their all, fully polished and debugged probably 2 months tops. I don't know about the artwork. I can't say how long that would take. I've never worked with more than 2 artists at any one time, and they were all doing it for the fun of doing it, not being paid. So I lack perspective on that aspect.

    1 artist
    1 coder
    81 possible combinations in 1 week's worth of work.

    While he's banging out more modules, I'm busy teaching the AI how to complete mission objectives and working on balancing the modules since each one confers different abilities and bonuses to its vehicle.

    So, TT's estimate of months might be accurate, but the year in parentheses might be an exaggeration. Now, if things that don't increase revenue are only allowed a (small) portion of your time to work on it, how long now?
    _________________________________________________

    I been a long time leaving but I'm going to be a long time gone.

    Willie Nelson


    T.U.F.K.A.S. (the user formerly known as Scarlyng)
    Wrong on the CO forums since November, 2008
  • Options
    angelphoenix12angelphoenix12 Posts: 313 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    i think the major problem in this game is the lack of dev. for it.
    my question is where is our money going from cstore and subs. becuase it sure isnt going into this game.
  • Options
    smoochansmoochan Posts: 2,564 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    i think the major problem in this game is the lack of dev. for it.
    my question is where is our money going from cstore and subs. becuase it sure isnt going into this game.

    Neverwinter Online. It's not even speculation at this point :frown:

    Champions Online: Be the hero you wish you could be in a better game.
  • Options
    angelphoenix12angelphoenix12 Posts: 313 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    smoochan wrote: »
    Neverwinter Online. It's not even speculation at this point :frown:

    thats the sad part, this game has so much potentail and its being wasted :(
Sign In or Register to comment.