WAR (Warhammer Online)

Originally posted by Teiman

Hello Acaeus

1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise).

If a engine not scale, is a bug. If your engine spawn more particles at 60 FPS than at 30FPS, is a bug.  No?  And theres the OpenGL stuff to autodetect extensions. Most engines don't autodetect extensiones?
 

It's not so much about detecting them, it's about properly using them. To use them, the software, the game engine, must be written in a way to do the same things in many different ways, depending on the extensions (as you call them) detected. That's a lot more work to developers, which means increased costs. My point being, some may be OK with those costs others may not. Don't know how Mythic/EA stands on this.

Sweeney (below) mentions, simplistically, GPU power only, but it isn't just the FPSes that the card can put out (as some may believe).

Part of an interview of Unreal creator Tim Sweeney:

TG Daily: You have to admit, the margin is obviously there.

Sweeney: Agreed. But it is very important not to leave the masses behind. This is unfortunate, because PCs are more popular than ever. Everyone has a PC. Even those who did not have a PC in the past are now able to afford one and they use it for Facebook, MySpace, pirating music or whatever. Yesterday’s PCs were for people that were working and later playing games. Even if those games were lower-end ones, there will always be a market for casual games and online games like World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has DirectX 7-class graphics and can run on any computer. But at the end of the day, consoles have definitely left PC games behind.

TG Daily: In other words: Too big?

Sweeney: Yes, that is huge difference. If we go back 10 years ago, the difference between the high end and the lowest end may have been a factor of 10. We could have scaled games between those two. For example, with the first version of Unreal, a resolution of 320x200 was good for software rendering and we were able to scale that up to 1024x768, if you had the GPU power. There is no way we can scale down a game down by a factor of 100, we would just have to design two completely different games. One for low-end and one for high-end.
That is actually happening on PCs: You have really low-end games with little hardware requirements, like Maple Story. That is a $100 million-a-year business. Kids are addicted to those games, they pay real money to buy [virtual] items within the game and the game.


TG Daily: Broken down, that means today’s mainstream PCs aren’t suitable for gaming?

Sweeney: Exactly. PCs are good for anything, just not games.

More here: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36390/118/

Your talking more about screen resolution.  It is true that WoW only properly scales to a certain screen resolution range but screen resolution is as you see only part of the issue with their graphics.  They're using DX7 while we're up to DX10 now (even tho most games don't use 10). 

Special effects (such as lighting) could care less what your screen resolution is.  The over all look  of things like Geometry & 2D huds on the other hand are affected by resolution.   Which is why things will look blurred or distorted if you reach a resolution range that the game or your hardware don't support. 

The guy in the article is right it can be costly to account for every resolution range possible but not from an engine design point.  That all comes down to the artists, the engine itself really doesn't give crap what your resolution for most things is.  Don't get me wrong Graphics Engines are incredibly expensive but even now the prices are starting to drop more and more due to the overwhelming engine competetion. 

(Just for reference WAR is using the newest Gamebro or something like that, its all coming down to art content and actually turning ON the high res stuff which i doubt will happen during Beta since they aren't doing a tech beta they're doing a game play beta like Most MMO's do)

The further you scale down or up the more art for each scale you have to build.    PC Games are fubar'd in that respect it either looks really good because they have awsome Mid to High range ability or like crap because they only support Low to Mid like WoW.  WoW though has atleast figured out how to use special effects to their advantage to make things look shinier than they really are, plus they don't use any advanced rendering techinques past lighting & shadow which plays a huge factor for anyone running old GPU cards.

The article is right though as much as I love PC games...PC's just arent' friendly for Making games thanks to Microsoft, Intel, Nvidia and other companies involved in the PC component business.  They rush out more and more top stuff leaving all us poor developers & engineers in the dust as far as keeping up to speed.

I think WAR is dead on in its thinking.  

Look here is the reality.  People play WoW because of the community in large part.  Take away the community and you get.... a niche market game.

Here's the deal if people can't play the game on something like a 700-900 dollar laptop, which blow out the door all day long in places like BestBuy or online at NewEgg.com, then guess what?? You just lost 40 million perspective customers and just reduced your gaming pool down to 2-3 million people who call themselves "gamers."    Once you redefine yourself as a game for hardcore "gamers" then you are basically going to be a 100k subscription game.  Which is why WAR chose not to follow that strategy.

Hey the older I get the less I'll spend on an expensive computer.  If I can't play it on my 800 dollar ACER laptop, I just play something else.  I think it's hillarious going to the AoC forum and listen to their advice on what graphics cards to upgrade too.  You realy think women and casual gamers are going to go out and buy a graphics card and install it, just to play AoC? Give me a break. 

Going for the high end market is like making a tv show that only runs in HD.   Good luck with that.

Originally posted by wihtgar

If I can't play it on my 800 dollar ACER laptop, I just play something else. 

You realy think women and casual gamers are going to go out and buy a graphics card and install it, just to play AoC? Give me a break. 

Going for the high end market is like making a tv show that only runs in HD.   Good luck with that.

I love how you lump "women" and "casual gamers" in the same area. It's an great sexist insult.

As for the HD TV show, they already have quite a few, and they are doing well. Everyday the HD market grows. Now, if the rest of the TV shows would stop being lazy and upgrade to HD, we wouldn't have to be limited to 20 channels of HD and the rest normal TV.

Originally posted by wihtgar

I think WAR is dead on in its thinking.  

Look here is the reality.  People play WoW because of the community in large part.  Take away the community and you get.... a niche market game.

Here's the deal if people can't play the game on something like a 700-900 dollar laptop, which blow out the door all day long in places like BestBuy or online at NewEgg.com, then guess what?? You just lost 40 million perspective customers and just reduced your gaming pool down to 2-3 million people who call themselves "gamers."    Once you redefine yourself as a game for hardcore "gamers" then you are basically going to be a 100k subscription game.  Which is why WAR chose not to follow that strategy.

Hey the older I get the less I'll spend on an expensive computer.  If I can't play it on my 800 dollar ACER laptop, I just play something else.  I think it's hillarious going to the AoC forum and listen to their advice on what graphics cards to upgrade too.  You realy think women and casual gamers are going to go out and buy a graphics card and install it, just to play AoC? Give me a break. 

Going for the high end market is like making a tv show that only runs in HD.   Good luck with that.

BTW, you can get a PC for 800 or less that will run AoC just fine (according to their System Requirements), so your point is a little moot anyway.

But hey, nobody is forcing you to invest money in a PC. If you are happy with what you have and what you can play with it, then by all means.

Originally posted by singsofdeath

 

Originally posted by wihtgar

I think WAR is dead on in its thinking.  

Look here is the reality.  People play WoW because of the community in large part.  Take away the community and you get.... a niche market game.

Here's the deal if people can't play the game on something like a 700-900 dollar laptop, which blow out the door all day long in places like BestBuy or online at NewEgg.com, then guess what?? You just lost 40 million perspective customers and just reduced your gaming pool down to 2-3 million people who call themselves "gamers."    Once you redefine yourself as a game for hardcore "gamers" then you are basically going to be a 100k subscription game.  Which is why WAR chose not to follow that strategy.

Hey the older I get the less I'll spend on an expensive computer.  If I can't play it on my 800 dollar ACER laptop, I just play something else.  I think it's hillarious going to the AoC forum and listen to their advice on what graphics cards to upgrade too.  You realy think women and casual gamers are going to go out and buy a graphics card and install it, just to play AoC? Give me a break. 

Going for the high end market is like making a tv show that only runs in HD.   Good luck with that.

This post is full of great generalizations. My personal favorite is highlighted in red. But hey, maybe I'm just ignorant, and everything he said is true.

 

 

BTW, you can get a PC for 800 or less that will run AoC just fine (according to their System Requirements), so your point is a little moot anyway.

 

But hey, nobody is forcing you to invest money in a PC. If you are happy with what you have and what you can play with it, then by all means.

I'm guessing the woman part ruffled your panties.  :D Hey you know it's got some truth to it though or it wouldn't make ya mad. :D

I said 800-900 dollar LAPTOPS that are going out the door all day.  Most people don't even want to waste money on a BOX anymore.  Good luck getting a laptop for that price that will run AOC.  Who buys a box anymore except for geeks and housewives who sit in one spot all day?  :D

Originally posted by wihtgar

 

 

 

I'm guessing the woman part ruffled your panties.

I said 800-900 dollar LAPTOPS that are going out the door all day.  Most people don't even want to waste money on a BOX anymore.  Good luck getting a laptop for that price.  Who buys a box anymore except for geeks and housewives who sit in one spot all day?  :D

But, as I said in my previous post, feel free to generalize. I am just stating that you are doing so and that you might be off the mark. Or do you have market research data available on your little theories? And can you speak for the whole world? Or can you at least consent that it's just a theory of yours that involves a lot of generalizing?  Which is all I said.