The Future of Gaming
nvembar writes: "The International Game Developers Association has the text of the lead designer at ION Storm, Harvey Smith's keynote address. In it he addresses "high fidelity similulations" entering games, making them more flexible and realistic. It's an interesting read on the future of gaming."
this sort of thing with me the other day... he just quit his job as a programmer with a large accounting software maker to go to work for a gaming company. They're working on new tech for MMRPGs these days.
We had a rather *long* conversation about new stuff coming down the pipe, wherein we discussed different models for the I.T. infrastructure to support this sort of thing. Basically, we ended up going back and forth on the merits of p2p tech when it comes to reducing primary server loads and increasing playability.
The biggest obstacle we could see at the moment is (of course) still the latency on a p2p network. While users with high-bandwidth connections would whiz along fine, those on modems would have a tough go of things. Another point we covered was the continuing advances in PC power we're seeing (Moore is still right
The problem with that, of course, is that gamers will always want to play with the highest detail, color depth, etc setting as possible. This would tend to "max out" most gamers' boxes, reducing that particular advantage of the p2p structure.
What sort of thoughts do others around here have about this stuff? C'mon, I need some ammo to go back to my friend with
Penny Arcade had some interesting things to say about the 'future' of gaming as well. I have to agree with him.. where exactly did the whole VR concept go? I can relate to the specific VR game he's talking about, I stood in line for an hour to get up on a platform and be confused for about one minute.
Penny Arcade News (VR)
Deus Ex was a GREAT game, and has a lot of factors that you won't find in big name releases; how about the incessant crap from Romero and Daikatana? and it turned out the less hyped game whupped it and most other games of 2000 collective asses.
End the tyranny of arcade shoot-em-ups! Death to the FPS and bring back a decent PLOT structured game to the PC!
How about C&C Renegade or whatever it is. It's another FPS, just like ANY other standard fare shootemup, but woohoo you can blow up a stealth tank or an obelisk of Nod because it's in C&C land so that obviously makes it the "biggest" game of the year.............fucking cretins. And Peter Molyneux and that 15 year old bloke from Theme Park have gone nuts. Black & White was a big tamagotchi, and this Republic just stinks of utter un-gameness.
Fuck this, I'm off to play Speedball 2. Wake me when Speedball Arena comes out - now THAT will be the way future games will go.
Acting stupid isn't much fun when there's someone around who knows better
For those unaware, Spector is the genius behind the Ultima Underworld games as well as System Shock, Thief and Deus Ex. If anyone can bring true entertainment and flexibility into next generation computer games, Spector is the man.
This is also ironic because Spector's previous development house, Looking Glass Entertainment, had to fold because Eidos couldn't prop them up with necessary short term cash ... probably because they gave all their money to ION Storm for Daikatana development. And now Spector is a leading figure there. This is an interesting turn of events indeed.
This is a continued problem in some forms of game design, an alternate version of the one million monkeys typing. Any huge number of gamers will find holes in the system.
I think that eventually you'll have to have some system that can be used to implement an indefinitely large world.
My own idea / fantasy project is to have an earth type planet that would have the suerface area of Jupiter. Then you could effectively block off areas, at least for lower levels by having vast areas of ocean or desert or whatever.
The point being is that you would have to have a completely different system to manage something that is that large scale
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Yeah, Daikatana sucked. (I hear that it rocked in multiplayer, though...) ION Storm also released two of the best PC games i've ever played, Deus Ex and Anachronox.
:p
And if you want to stick to monopoly, check my sig.
The bottom line: Is a better world model and more detailed graphics going to make the game better to play? I know plenty of people who still play the original Doom, despite the fact that it's graphics are blown away by its antecedents, such as Quake III. Why? Gameplay. Quake III is an awful game, despite the graphics. Quake III could be photorealistic and get 600 fps on my P3, but that wouldn't make it a good game. If you want a photorealistic, simulationist game, take a step outside. You could probably use some sun, anyway.
Haven't all their games flopped miserably despite all the hype?
This is a serious question, btw...
no matter how 'realistic' graphics and AI get, if you're dealing with a flat screen and a mouse/keyboard it's not much of a 'simulation'.. Even pedal/wheel controllers are better, but whatever happened to the headset/glove controller idea? Surely we can approach something 'affordable' soon on this front..
air and light and time and space
Is a proximity mine with a strong magnet not cabable of such a feat in real life? is it not at least somewhat realistic.
I witness Urban Terror - Rommel.. this map has a number of interesting locations that possibly the designer did not intend for people to reach.. but through, say, standing on another player's shoulders, you can reach them. This is not unrealistic.. it simply requires teamwork.
Now.. using the shotgun to 'launch' someone really high... that's not realistic.. but still.
It's exactly this mix of things that can make a good game GREAT. Witness Streetfighter 2... yes, it was well designed... but was everything in it intended? Some of the combinations? The timing that made certain combinations of movements unbeatable? I know in later games they were intentional.... There were also a few 'elite' tricks with a few characters.. essentially bugs in the game, but they simply made it that much more interesting.
I think a realistic game engine MUST allow for things the game designer didn't intend.
Deus Ex is by no means mediocre; it's one of the best computer games that I've ever played. And I'm one of those people who hates most new games and drones on and on about how great wasteland and bard's tale and zork were...
Here is something that I have been saying to friends for some time but haven't seen come about.
Mix the generas!
Think about it. You could have Joe RTS playing his game, making marines, orcs, cataphracts, krogoths, whatever, and commanding his armies like he likes best. Then also you have Jane FPS running along as a sniper or commando in the same game just that everything appears 3d first person. Then Bob flightsim could even join in. Or Nicole Harpoon. or...
Different clients, different engines all interpretting the same data.
Potentially P2P could be used to eleviate problems with needing a massive pipe and uberservers.
Make it a massively online game with a persistant world.
Mix well and you get an awesome game!
Just imaao, of course.
Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
Well, not the corner of game developers I watch...Bliizard Entertainment certainly seems to be doing well...every single title since warcraft 2 (maybe even warcraft) has been a wild success, and sold an amazing amount for its time period...Diablo2, for instance, had something like 2 million units pretty close to the release date (it had some huge number of pre orders). What's 2*10^6 * 50? one hundred MILLION dollars...and a significant number of people also bought the $35 expansion...
w ww.diabloii.net/+diablo+2+sales+figures&hl=en
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:gPH2eeM6r70:
"Guinness, Anyone? - Gaile [20:38:PST]
The 2002 Edition of the Guinness Book of World Records includes two pretty remarkable entries:
Battle.net is listed as the World's Largest Free On-Line Gaming Service. The entry features a lovely image of the Sorceress, and states that since opening in 1997, more than 8.2 million active accounts log more than six million games daily. Peak concurrent usage tops more than 210,000 players per day.
Diablo II is listed as the Fastest Selling Computer Game, having sold more than one million copies within the first two weeks of being released in June 2000, and with 2.75 million sold worldwide. (Yes, both figures are lower then the true sales figures, but hey, even then it made the book!) Additionally, they cite Diablo as having sold in excess of 2.3 million copies since its release in 1997.
Thanks to Prysym for the note."
That's just diablo 2! Then you can factor in starcraft, the starcraft expansion, diablo 1, even the warcraft series. Warcraft 3 is going to sell extremely well too it looks like, and the new game, World of Warcraft, will probably provide an assured source of monthly income for the company (assuming these sales figures continue).
"Your game is going to be late, overbudget, buggy and outdated, or really, really short." Late, sure, but that's np...later and better is better than never. Overbudget? Maybe, depends how realistic you planned it. Buggy? there may be a few bugs...Starcraft was extremely late but also 1. hardly buggy at all and 2. very VERY well balanced. Was it outdated? sure a few RTS's used 3d engines (Total Annihilation for ex.), but it's still wildly popular even today, years after its release. It may even out do quake 1 for longevity (depends when starcraft 2 is released, hehe). As for shortness, well...depends on the game type...Quake 3 single player is extremely short...but it's not supposed to be played for that. Max Payne is also short (it took me ~15 hours to beat the first difficulty level...didn't bother doing New York Minute or the other ones after I finished) but it's single player only so that's less acceptable (but it was so fun to play I didn't really care).
So...what? imho the future of gaming is rosy for the companies that 'get it'...electronic darwinism or something...As for consoles well, I don't follow consoles at all so I don't really care what happens to 'em...
--Jubedgy
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
People forget what made these games great when they start focusing on making the next 3D Engine.
It ultimately wasn't the graphics.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
I wanted to relay a post that came up during a Slashdot discussion about the Anarchy Online release a few months ago, and share some of my comments regarding the gaming industry.
I left my job at an ISP as an engineer and systems administrator last year and started seeking a new job. I found myself working for a gaming company that was to release a new persistent online environment role playing game (I hate calling them MMORPGs or whatever). They brought me on board because they had needs in regards to technical infrastructure, like server hardware, server software, networking equipment configurations, collocation staging needs, etc. Basically, they had nobody there who knew how to open up a computer, nobody that knew a thing about networking outside of the TCP/IP stack for Windows, nobody who knew a thing about collocation, telecommunications technologies, security of any kind, and they were to release their first public beta in three days.
Least to say, they were five days late launching that first beta.
Now, you think that they would have learned their lesson -- that their schedule was over accelerated and that they had severely neglected a critical part of the product. They had neglected to consider back end technical infrastructure completely and totally, and yet they seemed to not even care. Time after time I pressured about how they were heading for serious problems, and it came down to my job being threatened because they thought I was being a negative influence upon the company, "bringing down their vibes," "being a nay-sayer."
This gaming company just does not get it. They are going to have a miserable launch, like Anarchy Online, like Ultima Online, like all other online gaming companies that have totally failed to consider the "online" part of their game. Their online game is going to turn very offline when they realize that their server side application efficiency is so bad that it brings down the whole server with as little as 200 people on it. I know this -- I have seen these modern dual processor systems at 40% utilization with no clients, and with an additional +5% linear increase in load per additional client.
Why don't they get it? What is keeping these people from paying attention to this very serious oversight? Why is this epidemic?
As best as I can tell, management is more concerned with meeting their media provided launch date than providing the customers with a good ready product launch. They want to meet this holiday season selling time frame, and they do not want to delay the game a single day due to any problem. The quote, "we can release it now and patch it later" has been used multiple times by individuals in management and some of the developers. Some of these patches were the ENTIRE CD! 400+ MB, no kidding. They got upset when their whole 20+ beta players stopped playing, they just could not understand why.
Lack of qualified personnel is a problem. They are more concerned with hiring their friends than hiring qualified people to do work. Former bus boys, DJs, fast food and gas station attendants (NOT kidding!) all make up graphical artists, testing, customer service, and other departments. Most of the staff are younger people, like myself, but many of them had not previously held jobs, coming straight out of college or high school. Management is not much better off, just older and lamer. Only one has any real previous managerial experience, and none of them have any technical qualifications in coding, design, multimedia, sysadmin, netadmin, or anything technical -- they are all sales, paper pushers, HR managers, etc.
Drug usage is rather high. Pot and alcohol are the drugs of choice here, and they have no problem getting out the bottle or the smokes in the office. Think that is a problem with management? The CEO is a pot head himself! Think about this the next time you pick up a title.
Finally, after over two years of development, this company is running out of cash I suspect, and will be releasing their product to the public, ready or not.
You may wish to check out reviews before you buy any games this holiday season. I know at least one that is going to make a lot of people very upset.
Below is a post made some time back. I highly recommend it for reading. Cinnamon has it right on.
________________________________________
My experience in working for a game company... (Score:5, Informative)
by Cinnamon on Thursday July 12, @06:02PM EST (#274)
(User #15309 Info) http://www.pft.com/~cinnamon
I speak with some authority here, having worked for a multiplayer game company (Who shall remain nameless) for four years. We didn't write games ourselves, but ran a service that multiplayer games could run their matchmaking on, as well as wrote network code for some major developers and did full-blown hosting for some games.
One of the things that always amazed those of us who worked there (Both sysadmins and engineers) was that game companies *do not get it*. For whatever reason, the whole concept of online gaming is completely foreign to the developers, producers, directors, and distributors. It entails engineers having knowledge in areas that most game companies do not hire for, and require a dedication to quality assurance that most software companies in general eschew in favor of 'getting it out the door, we'll patch it later.'
As far as we could tell, these companies thought online gaming consisted of:
Write game
Tack on network code
Write sloppy matchmaking interface
Set up in a WinNT server at corporate HQ
Release game
We'd sit down with these people and try to make them understand the requirements that online gaming have, the almost-unsolvable problems of cheating, the necessity that if you want people to stay you need as close to 24x7 uptime as you can, but it fell on deaf ears. Why? Because most often, *even for the online games*, the network/server requirements portion were an afterthought. Despite writing these games with the full expectation that they would be played exclusively online, they worried for weeks about game play, and usually didn't even bother to hire a network programmer, just usually got some dude who did the sound or something to whip up a quick interface.
I have game developer friends who work for Blizzard who worked on Diablo II, who complained constantly about the stupidity of the battle.net people. Anytime they wanted to do anything the so-called engineers there said their code couldn't handle it. Wonder why until this expansion pack the stash was so small? Sorry, their stuff can't handle more than that. Major code rewrites were necessary to handle it in the expansion. They wrote poor, non-reusable code that crippled the game's online experience, a common problem.
This sort of thing is endemic in the game developer community. We were approached by the Ultima Online people before UO was released, asking us what it would cost for us to host UO for them. We came up with a price, gave it to them, and they ran screaming. "No no, we'll do it ourselves!" they yelled, resulting in months of instability, server overloading, user complaints, and their being outshined by EverQuest (Which has it's own problems.)
Why? Because the price we quoted them was for 24x7 uptime on enough servers to handle their expected load 3x, knowing full well they'd fill that capacity and explaining this to them. Even if they didn't get that many users, network code is often buggy in ways that swallows system resources on servers at an insane rate (Memory leaks being the number one culprit), requiring a factor of at least 2x more resources than was anticipated during testing. Don't try to tell that to the beancounters, though. Or even the developers! They seem to think their code would NEVER EVER break, and would NEVER take more memory/cpu/disk than they expect.
What really shocks me is that this problem is still around! When Quake came out and we saw the network code problems we thought that would have made companies realize how critical the network/server portions of their online game was. Year after year we'd have these meetings, talking in dumbfounded tones that they *still didn't get it*. Suckass game after suckass game was released and CONTINUES to be released, with massive strides being made in better realism, graphics, speed and gameplay -- And they can't get the frickin' network code right. It's not that it's impossibly difficult, talks with developers at these companies proved that time after time the managers never saw fit to hire anyone with server or network coding experience, instead relying on programmers with no knowledge in that area to write probably the second most critical portion of the game. (Gameplay being first.)
When is it going to get better? I don't know. Perhaps experience will amass, despite evidence to the contrary, and companies will be able to/willing to hire experienced programmers who've done online games before and can benefit from their mistakes. I'm just floored that it's still not happened.
-- If we were in any other industry they would've shot us a long time ago.
Yeah right - and in a similar light, the low cost and high quality of digital video cameras everywhere will have people producing free movies that rival Hollywood quality.
Gets me to thinking though. Is it a parallel scenario that game-designers seem to just wanna push the eye-candy envelope ignoring aspects of gameplay, as Hollywoord has abandoned thoughtful movies to cranking out dick-flicks, chic-flicks and teen/highschool/first-lay movies?
If so - god help us.
There were several branches to Ion Storm. The Dallas office was home to Romero, Todd Porter, Jerry Flaherty, and was responsible for the execrable Daikatana.
The Austin office of Ion Storm, however, was where Deus Ex was made, headed up by Warren Spector who has made some of the best games ever produced. Harvey Smith, the author in question, came from the Austin office.
It may have taken them several years and tens of millions of dollars, but Ion's publisher Eidos finally showed some sense when they closed down Ion Dallas, but kept Ion Austin running. They're making Thief 3 and the sequel to Deus Ex. For the most part, they know what they're talking about
Waren Spector is a very smart man, with many fine accomplishments to his credit. I'm not sure I'd go so far as "genius", but I'll grant that he has a good eye for successful games. I'm looking forward to his next projects quite eagerly.
That said, his involvement with the first Ultima Underworld game was quite small (Origin's liaison with Looking Glass), and his involvement with Thief, while not actually nil, was extremely close to it. And, of course, there were a lot of other people who helped make all these projects happen.
Warren's job includes talking to the press, so his name gets out there a lot, but if you actually pay attention to what he *says*, he's always trying to spread the credit around, because he *knows* that he tends to get way more than he deserves. To call Warren "THE genius behind" [emphasis mine] the games he worked on is both inaccurate, and an insult to the dozens of other brilliant people who contributed to those games.
Warren is certainly due a lot of credit. But you do him (and other readers) a disservice if you try and give him so much more credit than he is due.
Remember other people?
In the article, the author doesn't mention Counter-strike, Everquest, or any other MPG. In the entire 7 page article, he makes only a one paragraph mention of MP games at all: Frankly we aren't even close to achieving AI that is 1/100th as sophisticated as a dog. And when AI entities are as smart as people, we'll have solved the single greatest problem in the history of computer science. Wake me up when that happens. Here in the real world however, the numbers seem to show that people want living breathing opponents/allys. Gamers know the difference, and will continue to know the difference for a very long time.
But that's just the playability side. What about the design side? The author wants the users to enjoy an ever widening space of possibilites in the game environment. He wants gamers to be able to express themselves by thier play-style, but they are in HIS sandbox. Now don't get me wrong, we need things like physical simulation and standard constants of gravity, and we need an underlying engine to hold it all together. But what about the creative side? What makes game designers think that they are the experts?
Luckily, not all of them do. There are a few shops who are taking a different approach (Bioware, Lucas Arts, etc). Building environments like Neverwinter Nights, and Star Wars: Galaxies. Games which welcome all kinds of possibilites in terms of empowering the gamer. At places like Bioware, there is tremendous focus on building tools. NWN will include a very advanced scripting language which is freely available to everyone. Users can create thier own dungeons, thier own quests, and thier own cultures in NWN. Star Wars: Galaxies takes this a step further, and includes an intricate system of commerce/trade/barter in which players can assume the roles of shop-keepers, smugglers, pirates, dignitaries, or even state officials.
The point is, if a game designer is truly interested in expanding possibilites of play, let the users in the door! Tired of "canned" conversations and predictable NPC's? Let us role-play! Gamers provide AI that you will never be able to fabricate(not in our lifetime). Tired of power players? Let us assume different roles! We gamers love to build, enrich, and contribute to the world in which we play. And now, for the first time in the history of computer gaming...it looks like we will soon be in a position to do just that.
http://www.sflit.com/novaexpress/13/embraceyourwei rd.html
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I didn't play System Shock, but I did play Thief, and while I enjoyed the latter, it just wasn't as fun. What I liked about Deus Ex was that it seemed more open; there were several ways to surpass each obstacle, rather than two or three. Plus, it just seemed to handle better.
I think a big deal is load times actually. If you've seen Red Faction for PS2 (which I just rented yesterday) the load times (or more specifically the frequency of disc accesses) is pathetic.
I've read on IGN that Halo on XBOX has very little load time and had a freind tell me that XBOX has zero load time because of the RAM. I think people might be getting confused about load time though, Load time (as far as I am concerned) is the amount of time it takes to copy the data from the CD to the RAM, alot of RAM would affect the frequency of the load time, but that is still a good thing.
That is the biggest barrier to realism for me though. I was very impressed by the size of the levels in many PS2 games and the continuity makes a really big difference, in the heat of real battle you don't have to wait for your game to load.
The same can be said for QuakeIII and such, the load times even from the hard drive are very very long to enter an arena. The key difference between QuakeIII and Red Faction is that Red Faction makes you wait to load a new section of the arena you are already in. So I would say at this point the biggest thing I would want if for developers to either load the whole level in at once or give some consideration to load time.
Of course if XBOX really has the "Zero load time" that IGN and others are talking about it might go a long way to solve the problem, but somehow I doubt a DVD drive (or hard drive for that matter) is really going to give zero load time for large levels.
"You need to make demos for Game Boy and PlayStation as well"
They are currently talking about doing mmrpgs... I hardly think the GBA and Playstation are the best platforms for massively multiplayer online games are they?
"And the Xbox is not the #1 console"
Until it is released, it is not a console at all, just an upcoming product. Waiting until it is released before you make your determination of whether or not it is #1 is probably a good idea.
Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
For years, people in the mac gaming community have raved about Marathon, citing its entertaining plot and playability. And they were told by the PC gaming community to shut up about some game made in 1994 and to stop screaming about innovation and creativity and get a "real gaming machine" that would be taken seriously at a gaming party. Now all the same people who said this are deluged with an armful of FPS's that are basically doom with better graphics and its *them* who are complaining about a lack on innovation. The macintosh is the future of gaming--it's users expect things from their games today that PC users learn the hard way to expect 5-6 years from now.
Was it just me or did everyone else find level III of Thief to be a total cop out. Here we are playing this cool game that isn't about slashing and killing everything and then wham, we're shoved down a mine shaft shooting at zombies and stumbling around mazes. Lame lame lame.
How we know is more important than what we know.