pathetic sell-out (was Re: Warren Spector -Dev Diary at IGN ("only thebest parts"))

The "damage" is enough to dub Spector a sellout--it's that simple, Brandon.

DE2 has been compromised to run on the Xbox first, PC second. I suspect Thief 3 will also suffer from the same fate, unfortunately.

"Brandon J. Van Every" wrote:
>
> "mace" <mmace@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:e7aa252f.0312111928.152ed41c@posting.google.c om...
> > "Brandon J. Van Every" <try_vanevery_at_mycompanyname@yahoo.com> wrote in
> message news:<bralf5$17ue9$1@ID-207230.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > > Eep² wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "True confessions time - I'm not just a PC gamer. Never have been and
> > > > doubt I ever will be. I've always owned every gaming platform
> > > > available, always played both console and PC games. What's more, I've
> > > > always wanted to work on a console game. There. I said it."
> > > >
> > > > <blink>
> > >
> > > That doesn't make someone a "sellout," unless you define "sellout" to mean
> > > "someone who designs on more than just PCs." Personally I think that would
> > > be a poor definition, and I don't think it's your definition either. For
> > > the record, what is your definition of "sellout?"
> >
> > Dx 2 has been designed solely to meet the Xbox limitations, that's a fact.
> > So, DX 2 is a console game which has been ported to PC. But WS has been
> > claiming over a year now that DX2 would be the same game with or without
> > Xbox i.e. it's a pure PC game. And that's an outright LIE! So I think
> > that "sellout" is quite a kind experssion of him.
>
> But on a scale of 1 to 10, how bad is the damage to the game? Where 1 is
> "hardly any damage" and 10 is "this game has been rendered completely
> unplayable by the design compromises."

Um, Dennis, arrow-key mapping isn't a compromise but a basic design tennet. Duh.

Think, man, think...<eyeroll>

"Dennis M. Reichhold" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, [iso-8859-1] Eep² wrote:
>
> > Wow, you're good..."sell"..."budget"...they ARE related, you know. If
> > you compromise things in order to make more sales, you're a
> > sellout--it's QUITE simple.
>
> I'm just curious, Eep², if the designers of KOTOR added a fix that enabled
> someone to remap the controls to the arrow keys, would they be
> "compromising things in order to make more sales," or would they be
> "listening to comments of their customers and responding accordingly"?

"G.I.L" <not@all.com> wrote in message news:3fd9faf5$1@news.012.net.il...
>
> Is it me, or does it not seem childish, to relate to PCs as some sort of
> gaming holy grail, endangered by "console contamination"?

Without game design specifics, yes indeed it does. I think one should
define "selling out."

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

"Holden" <nothx@ihatespam.com> wrote \
> "G.I.L" <not@all.com> wrote in message news:3fd9faf5$1@news.012.net.il...
> >
> > Is it me, or does it not seem childish, to relate to PCs as some sort of
> > gaming holy grail, endangered by "console contamination"?
>
> It's not some abstract ideal or formless philosophy; PCs are considered
> superior for a reason. Better graphics and control schemes are concrete
> features in video gaming, to dumb them down is to lose the benefits that a
> more powerful and versatile platform has to offer.

I don't think you can "dumb down" graphics. You can make them less visually
appealing, but from a Game Design standpoint this matters very little, so
long as the graphics are "roughly in the ballpark" for a genre. Even PS2
graphics are plenty good enough.

PC control schemes are not a priori "better" than console ones. PCs have
got a keyboard, mouse, and 1024x768 screen. Consoles have got joypads with
a limited number of easily manipulated buttons, and a 640x480 TV screen.
For some gaming tasks, i.e. a beat 'em up, the joypad is clearly better.
For others, i.e. a FPS, some people swear by the accuracy of the mouse.
Although I've played Halo against a ridiculously good 12 year old who might
beg to differ with that.

PCs are much more capable of text input than consoles. However, the last
time I entered *text* as opposed to keystrokes was playing an interactive
fiction title. Text input is not relevant to the vast majority of genres.

It used to be that PCs had hard drives and consoles didn't, but that has
changed. Access to large amounts of storage is not a factor anymore.

Consoles are still memory poor. I hope that changes in the next generation
of consoles, because it definitely prevents certain kinds of simulationist
games from being implemented.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.

Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> "Holden" <nothx@ihatespam.com> wrote \
>> "G.I.L" <not@all.com> wrote in message
>> news:3fd9faf5$1@news.012.net.il...
>>>
>>> Is it me, or does it not seem childish, to relate to PCs as some
>>> sort of gaming holy grail, endangered by "console contamination"?
>>
>> It's not some abstract ideal or formless philosophy; PCs are
>> considered superior for a reason. Better graphics and control
>> schemes are concrete features in video gaming, to dumb them down is
>> to lose the benefits that a more powerful and versatile platform has
>> to offer.
>
> I don't think you can "dumb down" graphics. You can make them less
> visually appealing, but from a Game Design standpoint this matters
> very little, so long as the graphics are "roughly in the ballpark"
> for a genre. Even PS2 graphics are plenty good enough.
>
> PC control schemes are not a priori "better" than console ones. PCs
> have got a keyboard, mouse, and 1024x768 screen. Consoles have got
> joypads with a limited number of easily manipulated buttons, and a
> 640x480 TV screen. For some gaming tasks, i.e. a beat 'em up, the
> joypad is clearly better. For others, i.e. a FPS, some people swear
> by the accuracy of the mouse. Although I've played Halo against a
> ridiculously good 12 year old who might beg to differ with that.
>
> PCs are much more capable of text input than consoles. However, the
> last time I entered *text* as opposed to keystrokes was playing an
> interactive fiction title. Text input is not relevant to the vast
> majority of genres.
>
> It used to be that PCs had hard drives and consoles didn't, but that
> has changed. Access to large amounts of storage is not a factor
> anymore.
>
> Consoles are still memory poor. I hope that changes in the next
> generation of consoles, because it definitely prevents certain kinds
> of simulationist games from being implemented.

And I'm guessing here that none of what you mentioned will matter for that
game.

g

Eep² wrote:
> "Brandon J. Van Every" wrote:
>>
>> So, on this point apparently. I'll leave it to others to argue
>> about this one, I haven't played the game. At least it's a specific
>> discussible point.
>
> Ah, right, you haven't then. Why are you bothering arguing with me
> then? Sheesh...troll.

You need to look up the definition of the Usenet term "troll." It certainly
doesn't apply here. The main reason I'm arguing with you is to see if
you'll provide a more concrete basis for slagging on a well-known game
designer. Also to see if others will provide constructive comments for the
discussion.

>> Somehow I think your definition of
>> "sellout" has no budget attached to it.
>
> Wow, you're good..."sell"..."budget"...they ARE related, you know. If
> you compromise things in order to make more sales, you're a
> sellout--it's QUITE simple.

I don't think you've spent even a dime of your own money to make a game.
Meaning, not even the cost of eating and keeping a roof over your head. I
suppose you will contiune to believe it's "quite simple" until you've taken
responsibility for financing a game project yourself.

> I'll probably NEVER have a product for the simple reason that I can't
> stand coding and, hence, will most likely be the only one who could
> bring my game ideas to fruition. <shrug>

Is there any part of game development that you're potentially capable of?
Art, audio, writing, modding, level design, web pages, marketing, financing,
management, legal? Some kind of tangible skill that brings a game closer to
reality is required. Otherwise, how can you live with yourself, wasting
your whole life never even *attempting* to actually create a game? Just
fuming from the bench? I would feel very bitter if I got to be 40 years
old, had cared obsessively about games all my life, and had never so much as
attempted to create one.

>> As to why I post in general, not specifically talking to you: I aim
>> to improve the Art and Science of Game Design. Part of that means
>> dealing successfully with production realities. Budgets, finance,
>> marketing, that sort of thing.
>
> Man, you think too much...really. You say so much yet say nothing at
> all...

I don't try to say everything all at once. Understanding takes time and
experience. One of the difficulties of having no experience, is not
believing what experienced people tell you.

--
Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

Brandon's Law (after Godwin's Law):
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of
a person being called a troll approaches one RAPIDLY."

In news:brd024$21tk9$1@ID-91786.news.uni-berlin.de,
Holden <nothx@ihatespam.com> Quoth The Raven:
> "G.I.L" <not@all.com> wrote in message
> news:3fd9faf5$1@news.012.net.il...
>> Is it me, or does it not seem childish, to relate to PCs as some
>> sort of gaming holy grail, endangered by "console contamination"?
>
> It's not some abstract ideal or formless philosophy; PCs are
> considered superior for a reason. Better graphics and control schemes
> are concrete features in video gaming, to dumb them down is to lose
> the benefits that a more powerful and versatile platform has to offer.

in many ways the console is superior to the PC, dumbasses who have no tech
experience can enjoy a game on the TV by plugging colour coded cables into
colour coded holes in the TV and pressing 2 buttons on the console. the
dunbasses don't want to compromise their simplicity of a console for the
better quality picture and deeper game play of a pc, where they have to
continuously spend money to remain current for the latest games, and then
having to install the equipment. yes I have the latest pc I built myself,
but I wish I never had a PC life, I would be spending my money on out door
stuff and drinking. but my point is that there are more dumbasses out there
than pc users who want a quick game on a console rather than struggle with
many of the inherent bugs that pc's carry along with a superior game. they
don't want to know how to turn on a pc and install the latest drivers, or
figure out how to troubleshoot CTD's.

I don't believe we were sold out to console users, the developers are just
maximising their profits by selling to a larger market.

personally I wont buy DX2, I wont even play it


--
how straight is a straight line if the world, nay if the universe is
curved in an ever expanding circle?

Take out the CUSSIN to reply to me

"G.I.L" <not@all.com> looked up from reading the entrails of the porn
spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Dennis M. Reichhold wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, [iso-8859-1] Eep² wrote:
>>
>>> Wow, you're good..."sell"..."budget"...they ARE related, you know. If
>>> you compromise things in order to make more sales, you're a
>>> sellout--it's QUITE simple.
>>
>> I'm just curious, Eep², if the designers of KOTOR added a fix that
>> enabled someone to remap the controls to the arrow keys, would they be
>> "compromising things in order to make more sales," or would they be
>> "listening to comments of their customers and responding accordingly"?
>
>This reminds of people who love alternative music. Once their favorite band
>made anything beyond complete cacophonic noise (did anyone say "Metal
>Machine Music"?), they would scream "sellout".

Not just alternative. Metallica have had fans screaming sellout after
every single album they ever put out, since it's not exactly the same as
the previous one.

After this last one though, I think they should be screaming "burnt
out". God what a horrible cd - i've literally never been able to listen
to the whole thing in one sitting. I think Iggy's M.M.M. would probably
be easier on the ears.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

I'm pretty sure Holden was referring more to dumbing down controls than graphics, but graphics, too, can be quite easily dumbed down (lower poly counts, lower texture resolutions, etc). Surprising you don't seem to get that considering your "game developer" claim...especially since you acknowledged the lesser memory of consoles...

Oh but dumbed-downedness hardly stops with controls and graphics but also applies to gameplay as well. Take MechWarrior 2; on the PC it was AWESOME but on the Playstation it was utter shit because of the simplfied (dumbed-down) controls and shittier low-res graphics (not that it had great graphics, compared to today's standards, but at they time they were good--on the PC). MW2 turned from a simulation on the PC to an arcade game on the PS...and it NEVER recovered. Hence, consolitis of once-good PC games turned into short-attention-span, twitchy, dumbed-down, mindless console arcade-style games. Blech!

Right, back to gameplay. Well, gameplay is linked to controls and graphics, so dumb down those and gameplay is automatically dumbed-down as well. Deus Ex 2 is another example of this. I don't remember playing through DE1 this fast, but here I am already up to Germany in DE2 and I'm wondering where the hell the gameplay went. It's just a carbon copy of DE1 with better graphics. <yawn> Boh-fuckin'-ring. At least in DE1 having to deal with the inventory added to the gameplay. DE2's inventory actually DETRACTS from its gameplay. Where's the fun? There's nothing new here. It's the same shit, just dumbed-down to appeal to stupid consolers and suits.

I only hope Thief 3 isn't butchered too...but I can see Thief-style elements/look throghoug DE2 so far...and it disturbs me because the AI is stupid, the sound cues aren't there, and the "stealth" is a pathetic joke.

"Brandon J. Van Every" wrote:
>
> "Holden" <nothx@ihatespam.com> wrote \
> > "G.I.L" <not@all.com> wrote in message news:3fd9faf5$1@news.012.net.il...
> > >
> > > Is it me, or does it not seem childish, to relate to PCs as some sort of
> > > gaming holy grail, endangered by "console contamination"?
> >
> > It's not some abstract ideal or formless philosophy; PCs are considered
> > superior for a reason. Better graphics and control schemes are concrete
> > features in video gaming, to dumb them down is to lose the benefits that a
> > more powerful and versatile platform has to offer.
>
> I don't think you can "dumb down" graphics. You can make them less visually
> appealing, but from a Game Design standpoint this matters very little, so
> long as the graphics are "roughly in the ballpark" for a genre. Even PS2
> graphics are plenty good enough.
>
> PC control schemes are not a priori "better" than console ones. PCs have
> got a keyboard, mouse, and 1024x768 screen. Consoles have got joypads with
> a limited number of easily manipulated buttons, and a 640x480 TV screen.
> For some gaming tasks, i.e. a beat 'em up, the joypad is clearly better.
> For others, i.e. a FPS, some people swear by the accuracy of the mouse.
> Although I've played Halo against a ridiculously good 12 year old who might
> beg to differ with that.
>
> PCs are much more capable of text input than consoles. However, the last
> time I entered *text* as opposed to keystrokes was playing an interactive
> fiction title. Text input is not relevant to the vast majority of genres.
>
> It used to be that PCs had hard drives and consoles didn't, but that has
> changed. Access to large amounts of storage is not a factor anymore.
>
> Consoles are still memory poor. I hope that changes in the next generation
> of consoles, because it definitely prevents certain kinds of simulationist
> games from being implemented.

"Brandon J. Van Every" wrote:
>
> Eep² wrote:
> > "Brandon J. Van Every" wrote:
> >>
> >> So, on this point apparently. I'll leave it to others to argue
> >> about this one, I haven't played the game. At least it's a specific
> >> discussible point.
> >
> > Ah, right, you haven't then. Why are you bothering arguing with me
> > then? Sheesh...troll.
>
> You need to look up the definition of the Usenet term "troll." It certainly
> doesn't apply here. The main reason I'm arguing with you is to see if
> you'll provide a more concrete basis for slagging on a well-known game
> designer. Also to see if others will provide constructive comments for the
> discussion.

Um, Brandon, if you can't see the basis for why I'm dubbing Spector a sellout, you're an idiot and I'm not even going to bother with you anymore. Stop trolling...(look it up yourself, sport).

> >> Somehow I think your definition of "sellout" has no budget attached to it.
> >
> > Wow, you're good..."sell"..."budget"...they ARE related, you know. If
> > you compromise things in order to make more sales, you're a
> > sellout--it's QUITE simple.
>
> I don't think you've spent even a dime of your own money to make a game.
> Meaning, not even the cost of eating and keeping a roof over your head. I
> suppose you will contiune to believe it's "quite simple" until you've taken
> responsibility for financing a game project yourself.

Why should I? I don't HAVE to. Do movie critics need to make a movie before they can critique a movie or the people who make it? Hardly.

> > I'll probably NEVER have a product for the simple reason that I can't
> > stand coding and, hence, will most likely be the only one who could
> > bring my game ideas to fruition. <shrug>
>
> Is there any part of game development that you're potentially capable of?
> Art, audio, writing, modding, level design, web pages, marketing, financing,
> management, legal? Some kind of tangible skill that brings a game closer to
> reality is required. Otherwise, how can you live with yourself, wasting
> your whole life never even *attempting* to actually create a game? Just
> fuming from the bench? I would feel very bitter if I got to be 40 years
> old, had cared obsessively about games all my life, and had never so much as
> attempted to create one.

See above.