InsaneAnomalyJoin Date: 2002-05-13Member: 605Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Developer, Pistachionauts, Future Perfect Developer
edited July 2010
Large scale tests like this are necessary because when we were testing on a much smaller scale, a lot of the issues that crop up now weren't apparent.
Yes, there are problems, but the game will improve much more quickly now that there are a lot of players.
It's also worth noting that the people working on the engine/netcode aren't the same people as those working on the game content, so it's not a case of working on only one and not the other.
I would like to point out that the last iteration of the engine test literally would not render on my computer, and my rig is a bit of a beast. The alpha renders great and with much higher FPS than the original engine test. So to say that they have done nothing in the way of improving the engine itself since the ET just is not true based on my experience.
<!--quoteo(post=1786470:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM:name=Winko)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Winko @ Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786470"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->regarding the topic of this thread, id say no source engine just wouldnt of givin the freedom that UWE wanted/needed, i also remember when they first announced that they were using/creating the new engine spark which would help them in the long run and make everything easier for them as a small team of which UWE is.
im very happy they went this route, while trying out the alpha last night i already fell in love, the textures and detail are amazing for an alpha, way better then source IMO and like alot of people are saying it still has a grity feeling.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah the graphics are really nice that is definitely the main pro at the moment and the nice models they have come up with.
I am not a "game developer" so I do not know what is and is not possible as far as taking Source/Orange Box engine or UT engine and building off their base. Could they not have used their engine but built functionality and graphics on top of it? I mean Aion a MMO based their engine off a modified Cry engine.
All Points Bulletin also built their game off a modified Unreal engine etc.
<!--quoteo(post=1786471:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM:name=Prefix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prefix @ Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786471"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Defiantly not, this is an alpha of a pretty feature full engine. Think about it, they have been working on all these features and tools for the engine they haven't had a lot of time for optimization, now that they have the alpha released they will be working on performance full time before adding more features.
Also, they haven't had anywhere near the sort of testing the got last night. Think about it, they would be testing LAN with a limited playerbase so the server problems from last night are brand new to them, and that's why we are here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a full "engine" as far as graphical and we tested the "Engine" as stand-alone a while ago now so they have had time to iron that out. The issue is going to be looking at how long it's going to take them to build/optimize their netcode and server components.
<!--quoteo(post=1786478:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:32 AM:name=Ricashi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ricashi @ Jul 28 2010, 03:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786478"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My suggestion after last nights experience: 1) Add a maximum player count to the server browser
It will stop the majority of folks who continually hammer a server and do not know its already full.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah the server browser needs a lot of work to be "nice" but hopefully they will fix that over time. Having numerical pings and the ability to get more information like player details, IP address and port etc but yeah hopefully that will come with time.
<!--quoteo(post=1786509:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:55 AM:name=VeNeM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VeNeM @ Jul 28 2010, 03:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786509"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->especially since the much heralded first poster was complaining about performance and RCON in a friggin alpha release. seriously. ignore list is gonna get pretty full this week.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again it was just pointing out feature that are going to need to be developed versus Source/Orange Box that has all this incorporated.
<!--quoteo(post=1786541:date=Jul 28 2010, 04:21 AM:name=Nacht)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nacht @ Jul 28 2010, 04:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786541"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've been having a blast with the Alpha.
Even without optimization, the Alpha build is running quite smooth for me, and the detail is absolutely gorgeous; hands down one of the best looking games I've played.
As for sticking with the Source Engine, I'm really pleased that they didn't, this engine has so much potential, and in my opinion it's going to give Source a run for its money.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No doubt if it gets to a stage they can get it optimized and the netcode working good and build up the required server administration interfaces I'd say it could definately give Source/OB a run for it's money but I guess so could any engine. It's getting to that stage which is the questionable concern.
<!--quoteo(post=1786569:date=Jul 28 2010, 04:48 AM:name=rein4ce)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rein4ce @ Jul 28 2010, 04:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786569"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Judging from what I have seen already it's not looking all that well. The engine reminds me of a pretty map and model viewer with rushed core functionality. And that is a common mistake among new engine developers (no offence intended), because it is very difficult to further "fix" the networking if the whole engine isn't designed around this insignificant-looking bit. It might even require a total refactorization of the code, but lets leave that to Max (perhaps the designed system is very flexible, just not yet throughtly tested)
Source engine has mastered two things: - netcode flexibility (backwards server prediction, lag compensation, complex extrapolation and lots of tweaking options) - performance configurability (source games could run on lots of different specs, reliability)
The price was mediocre graphics (even compared to other games at the time HL2 was released)
And for example Crysis was on the contrary developed with looks in mind and networking added later - the result was catastrophic I'd say.
Apart from that: the game itself looks very good, I'm just concerned about the engine part, which might hold back release of the finished product for quite a significant time :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is basically spot on what I was inferring on the original post.
Source/Orange Box are established and mature as far as netcode, functionality and in ways performance.
Looking at the NS netcode/engine currently for Internet games is not looking so good. Hopefully they can optimize and fix things but yeah I am also concerned that they have spent so much time on getting the engine looking nice graphically and working in mostly single player environments and have not really delved too much into well now we have a number of players all of whom need to talk together and do it in a way that will be efficient and not too reliant on latency differences.
<!--quoteo(post=1786685:date=Jul 28 2010, 06:18 AM:name=rein4ce)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rein4ce @ Jul 28 2010, 06:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786685"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read more carefully - I said "insignificant-looking" which means that many developers tend to disregard it and push designing the netcode to the further plan, because they think "when everything is done, adding multiplayer will be just a formality" - and my statement is not unfounded - I've seen dozens of indie projects fail due to this very reason. I believe that for a game, where the key element is multiplayer, the whole engine should be based off the well designed networking architecture.
Why do you ask about refactoring? The context it was used in makes perfect sense.
And lastly, Source engine ran pretty well when it was released (of course if someone pushed the setting to the max while not having the latest video cards would have experienced less fluent gameplay) + the networking was extraordinary at the time, event without server side lag compensation, which they added later if I remember correctly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This makes sense to me.
<!--quoteo(post=1786692:date=Jul 28 2010, 06:25 AM:name=XainGM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (XainGM @ Jul 28 2010, 06:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786692"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What the hell is wrong with you people?
It took Valve 6 years and $40,000,000 to make the engine for half-life 2 with 200+ employees. Hell Valve coined a new term after Half-Life 2 "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation" target="_blank">Valve Time</a>" (Bottom of the page). And you guys are complaining about the state of this game in it's VERY first alpha release? You are even lucky to see any footage of the alpha stages, no less be able to participate in it.
What do you want to bet, that the first stage of alpha for the source engine was way worse than this?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, this was kind of along the lines or my questioning when I posted. That figure is massive, the time it took was long and I can see where NS2 is at now, but how long before they get to that final stage of a engine that has netcode that will be optimized to be similar in performance to what other FPS's run.
<!--quoteo(post=1786739:date=Jul 28 2010, 06:49 AM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CanadianWolverine @ Jul 28 2010, 06:49 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786739"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think questions like this thread is about just demonstrate a gamer learning possibly the hard way about the development process their games endure for better or worse. I think just trying to code something up in language like Basic or trying to use an existing game's freely released map editor can do wonders for the understanding of a gamer into just how monumental a task their games can be when viewed from the beginning concept to finished result. Perhaps there is opportunity in trying to map or mod something free like Alien Swarm for some here? Or if one desires something applicable to NS2, surely there are some LUA tutorials available.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, I paid for SE to support a developer that had previously provided me with untold hours of goodtimes, FOR FREE. Alpha access is just a kewl bonus.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The above two quotes:
I have played a number of games and been in some fairly dodgy games and I am not "complaining" or "moaning". I also have some general programming experience even though that is fairly irrelevant in this thread as it's not enough to be an "expert" in designing engines or optimization for games.
I did however pay for my SE as soon as it was released. Why? Because I wanted to support UWE and I had played NS1 and had a lot of fun with it. I didn't even really care about the due date at that point.
I am not asking for my money back or a discount or that this "Alpha" is not playable, I am just posing a question as to whether they have the time and resources to devote into optimizing the netcode and engine for multiplayer which is the core of Natural Selection. People could spend years and a lot of money building an engine and optimizing it to get it to a state where it can handle a significant number of players and objects all requiring synchronization between every player.
cat, needs to chill. I know you paid +$20 to play the alpha. And you will, but problems and bugs ARE to be expected and not everyone will get to play the first day (or even week). You can report bugs and register your problem, but when you complaint that you're not getting your moneys worth, THEN your understanding of what an Alpha is comes into question.
As a software developer in spe i admire the courage of UWE, as a gamer I WANT NS2 quickly. sure if they would have used the source/orange box engine it would be done faster. Downsides are NS2 won 't be nearly as flexible as it it will be now. NS2 will be a modders dream.
As flayra said this is not a completed game yet. Think of it like a taste of whats to come. Enjoy the aspects you like right now, and focus less on the glaring problems. Remember if it is a huge problem a lot of people are noticing it, and it will most likely get fixed sooner rather then later.
My suggestion wait a little bit to play alpha. Let them iron out some of those bugs that drive you nuts. Then start to enjoy the game =)
go try out that newly released mod firearms:source and you'll rethink about wanting NS2 on the same engine. they spent years making the source mod and it goes to show just how bad that engine can be. the original firearms was way better.
<!--quoteo(post=1786278:date=Jul 27 2010, 10:35 AM:name=Saj)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Saj @ Jul 27 2010, 10:35 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786278"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I base it on results of valve porting CS and DoD the 2 games I played cometitivily before NS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd agree with that DoD/CS was ruined when it went to source (but that's probably the gameplay mechanics they f'd up), but for tf2/l4d etc.. it's perfectly fine.
On-topic, alphas are generally very unoptimized, what were you expecting they're a small studio with limited resources? Comparatively, I tested F&F wow alpha (not beta) years ago, there were random crashes, FPS drops; not what you'd expect of Blizzard, but it was alpha. Blizzard had (even before the Activision merger) infinitely more resources than UWE, and these 'issues' hold true regardless of the company.
What I'm trying to say is alpha tests are generally not released to the public because it would give them a false representation of the game. Just feel lucky that you can be a part of the development of NS2.
You have to admit though that engine choice makes a huge difference and I understand the skepticism at taking that fork. I can only assume as was suggested that licensing made this a business decision more than a technical one. I'm impressed at parts of the engine so far but these days it takes a huge budget just to craft a good engine (assumption) and I'm worried they will spend more time chasing down engine and not game issues. I'm a bit worried as well after the alpha last night but...
<!--quoteo(post=1787355:date=Jul 27 2010, 11:22 PM:name=Dash-El)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dash-El @ Jul 27 2010, 11:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787355"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->these days it takes a huge budget just to craft a good engine (assumption)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LOL You read my mind! But seriously, look at the RAGE engine issues with iD's budget coming from someone who did write one in a cave with papyrus and sticks.
Don't pull a DNF though, you gotta stick with your choice. Gawdspeed.
To all the people ###### about problems just for the sake of ######: HOW'S <b>YOUR</b> 3D FPS ENGINE COMING ALONG?
It's an alpha. Sweet jesus shut the hell up. Is this your first time testing software? All games are like this at one point. The HL2 alpha was WORSE when it was leaked. The game might not work for you. This is normal. Your mouse might not work. This is normal. The game might not run at all on all hardware. This is normal. The fps will be terrible. This is normal. The game will not be playable in any epic enjoyable sense of the word. This is normal. Focus your ###### when it goes to beta.
To all the people ###### about problems just for the sake of ######: HOW'S <b>YOUR</b> 3D FPS ENGINE COMING ALONG?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1786278:date=Jul 27 2010, 11:35 AM:name=Saj)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Saj @ Jul 27 2010, 11:35 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786278"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I base it on results of valve porting CS and DoD the 2 games I played cometitivily before NS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
More bad logic is even worse. CS:S and DoD:S being different than their original versions had little to do with the engine.
<!--quoteo(post=1787376:date=Jul 28 2010, 12:34 AM:name=cmc5788)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cmc5788 @ Jul 28 2010, 12:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787376"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What does logic have to do with this thread?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Few people in this thread seem to have any sense of it.
I hope you will at least grant me the liberty of this rant against certain mind numbingly stupid parts of this thread, because it's given me a headache.
As for the actual original topic of the thread, I think UWE developing their own engine really gave them a chance to grow as game developers. Making NS2 off the Source engine would be like making a mod, and they've already done that before.
schkorpioI can mspaintJoin Date: 2003-05-23Member: 16635Members
edited July 2010
to answer OP : no i dont think source engine would have been any better.
just because the game is lacking polish now doesnt mean it wont have polish later.
while the source engine had the server code and joining games etc already in place, it would have meant that they would need to remove features from the game in order to make NS2 compatible with source engine.
not to mention how bad the dev tools are for source.
UWE saw plenty of faults with source, which is why they made SPARK.
i think you will be suprised to see how quickly the game becomes playable, and then becomes awesome as the dev tools are much much better now.
To add some perspective, the issues we're seeing now are 24 hours after the first large-scale release. They've already fixed a lot of the problems in an internal build and we'll be getting the patch "very soon." I don't understand why anyone would take this as an opportunity to assume that the engine is fundamentally "less efficient" than using Source. If anything, the fact that they've isolated and fixed the problems so quickly speaks to the strength of the engine and the benefits of knowing what you're working with inside and out (because guess what? They made it!)
It's easy to just say source engine would have been better but what do you really know? Do you know all the possible technical and development related issues they would have had to deal with on the source engine? Would you have been happier with outdated graphics? Who knows maybe release would have been quicker but the technical flaws could have handicapped the game for years.
Kind of a pointless conversation since the game isn't even done.
Also to the poster above me, yes. Unfortunately a lack of understanding of the game development system and impatience seem to go hand in hand
I think one of the other factors with developing their own engine is becoming more intimate with the engine. That is; time spent interpreting source to try get it to do something they wanted in the game is instead spent developing a new engine.
In terms of an equation;
time developing the engine might be greater than source tweaking, but I understand the benefits in technical/bug/gameplay tweaks that can be realised quickly when the developers have made their own code. It can essentially by designed for what they intended from the start, given they had a good plan of what they wanted.
And I think they've had a good amount of time to preplan what they wanted the engine to do.
Overall, its pretty sad that this thread derailed into such a flame war. As the original premise did have some merit for discussion.
I'll remind all those people that say "I paid $20 to play now". It was clearly stated that it was more a supporting donation with a couple of perks (black armour, early alpha access). You didn't PAY for early alpha access, you paid to support the devs as stated in the shop page.
They could very well iron out a lot more bugs this way as they have a much larger test pool, you could have a much smoother running beta for this.
People do have the right to talk about what isn't working, bombarding everyone with "alpha!!!!11!!" isn't any more helpful, there are problems, everyone knows this, best to get them out on the table. I admit I was a little nervous at the performance of the Alpha, but have faith, they'll pull through and deliver.
<!--quoteo(post=1787380:date=Jul 28 2010, 02:37 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Jul 28 2010, 02:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787380"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Few people in this thread seem to have any sense of it.
I hope you will at least grant me the liberty of this rant against certain mind numbingly stupid parts of this thread, because it's given me a headache.
As for the actual original topic of the thread, I think UWE developing their own engine really gave them a chance to grow as game developers. Making NS2 off the Source engine would be like making a mod, and they've already done that before.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree there was a massive flame-war start-mid way through this thread. Was almost like watching a short clip over and over again.
In relation to the engine well that is true as a perspective I guess building their entire game from scratch will definitely give them more flexibility and allow them to achieve "building a game" and not a mod as you stated. However it is creating a lot of extra workload.
I guess the concerning part will be how well they will be able to optimize the netcode, lag compensation, anti-cheat mechanisms and all the rest that go with these gaming engines in a timely manner so they can reach a release.
Now dealing with a paid game I think there are going to be a number of people who are expecting a finished product in final build since they have paid say $50 or so. Release date was pushed back but hopefully these multiplayer engine issues are not going to cause a huge hurdle.
<!--quoteo(post=1787390:date=Jul 28 2010, 02:46 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Jul 28 2010, 02:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787390"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->to answer OP : no i dont think source engine would have been any better.
just because the game is lacking polish now doesnt mean it wont have polish later.
while the source engine had the server code and joining games etc already in place, it would have meant that they would need to remove features from the game in order to make NS2 compatible with source engine.
not to mention how bad the dev tools are for source.
UWE saw plenty of faults with source, which is why they made SPARK.
i think you will be suprised to see how quickly the game becomes playable, and then becomes awesome as the dev tools are much much better now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well lets hope that is true. I don't know enough about building a game on someone else engine to understand why people can't still use all the same models/content but parse it through another engine which could be modified. But I do remember them saying the time it would take to customize the Valve engine versus making their own was going to be significant and building their own engine gives them flexibility. The only issue will be having to build now all those tools and features that would of come included such as the core network functionality.
<!--quoteo(post=1787417:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:16 PM:name=alphz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (alphz @ Jul 28 2010, 03:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787417"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think one of the other factors with developing their own engine is becoming more intimate with the engine. That is; time spent interpreting source to try get it to do something they wanted in the game is instead spent developing a new engine.
In terms of an equation;
time developing the engine might be greater than source tweaking, but I understand the benefits in technical/bug/gameplay tweaks that can be realised quickly when the developers have made their own code. It can essentially by designed for what they intended from the start, given they had a good plan of what they wanted.
And I think they've had a good amount of time to preplan what they wanted the engine to do.
Overall, its pretty sad that this thread derailed into such a flame war. As the original premise did have some merit for discussion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep the flame war was demoralizing. All true points though and I do know that if they can achieve the optimizations and fixes in a short time-frame the engine they have build would provide much more flexibility and allow them to basically add/remove/modify any feature they wanted as they have now built everything themselves and own full rights to the code. So lets hope that the issues are not as big as they seem at the moment.
I am loving this engine now and I am very glad they went this route as long as the performance and networking of it soars. Like someone else said, since they've built it they know how ti works, so if a problem arises it is much easier to identify it and to implement new features, know what is and isn't possible all that stuff.
There is just something about the fact that it was all built from scratch that gives it even more of this sense of.. victory and accomplishment even though we had nothing to do with it, we've supported it and this engine was MADE for NS2, as well as dynamic infestation which, that alone is purely worth them using this engine over the source.
Some people may be neglecting that making an engine is a financial investment. Once it's all ready they can license it to other studios and that money is going to help fund Unknown Worlds' next project.
<!--quoteo(post=1787051:date=Jul 28 2010, 01:56 AM:name=XainGM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (XainGM @ Jul 28 2010, 01:56 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787051"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wish I could say this was a fair assessment, but I can tell you rein4ce is just comparing results of this game to another game. A game in which he did NOT alpha or beta test. Obviously most people here are first time testers.
What you need to understand is this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle</a>
Now, NONE of you have a rite to complain at this point. You can be frustrated, but if you are going to criticize anything at this point it must be constructive and helpful for the devs. Tell them you think the game is no where near completion is NOT helpful and only serves to piss people off. This will NOT speed the process along. Please proved them with details about what's its lacking or missing that would make it more up to par. This is the only way anything you say can become helpful. Otherwise if you can't do this, then please uninstall the game, and wait for it to go gold.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I know how the release life cycle work since I'm a developer myself aswell, but if this many people are having trouble with the performance of the engine, I would say this release is still pre-alpha. Since there's no way that you're going to get that much FPS change/increase in one release, unless you're talking about having tons of alpha releases, which like I said, shifts the the playable release date to next year. I know the advantage of having many people testing this, but the alpha-release might have gave some people too much expectations of this game, unless you really thought this release was performance-worthy for the public.
Comments
Yes, there are problems, but the game will improve much more quickly now that there are a lot of players.
It's also worth noting that the people working on the engine/netcode aren't the same people as those working on the game content, so it's not a case of working on only one and not the other.
im very happy they went this route, while trying out the alpha last night i already fell in love, the textures and detail are amazing for an alpha, way better then source IMO and like alot of people are saying it still has a grity feeling.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah the graphics are really nice that is definitely the main pro at the moment and the nice models they have come up with.
I am not a "game developer" so I do not know what is and is not possible as far as taking Source/Orange Box engine or UT engine and building off their base. Could they not have used their engine but built functionality and graphics on top of it? I mean Aion a MMO based their engine off a modified Cry engine.
All Points Bulletin also built their game off a modified Unreal engine etc.
<!--quoteo(post=1786471:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM:name=Prefix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prefix @ Jul 28 2010, 03:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786471"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Defiantly not, this is an alpha of a pretty feature full engine. Think about it, they have been working on all these features and tools for the engine they haven't had a lot of time for optimization, now that they have the alpha released they will be working on performance full time before adding more features.
Also, they haven't had anywhere near the sort of testing the got last night. Think about it, they would be testing LAN with a limited playerbase so the server problems from last night are brand new to them, and that's why we are here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a full "engine" as far as graphical and we tested the "Engine" as stand-alone a while ago now so they have had time to iron that out. The issue is going to be looking at how long it's going to take them to build/optimize their netcode and server components.
<!--quoteo(post=1786478:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:32 AM:name=Ricashi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ricashi @ Jul 28 2010, 03:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786478"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My suggestion after last nights experience:
1) Add a maximum player count to the server browser
It will stop the majority of folks who continually hammer a server and do not know its already full.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah the server browser needs a lot of work to be "nice" but hopefully they will fix that over time. Having numerical pings and the ability to get more information like player details, IP address and port etc but yeah hopefully that will come with time.
<!--quoteo(post=1786509:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:55 AM:name=VeNeM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VeNeM @ Jul 28 2010, 03:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786509"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->especially since the much heralded first poster was complaining about performance and RCON in a friggin alpha release. seriously. ignore list is gonna get pretty full this week.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again it was just pointing out feature that are going to need to be developed versus Source/Orange Box that has all this incorporated.
<!--quoteo(post=1786541:date=Jul 28 2010, 04:21 AM:name=Nacht)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nacht @ Jul 28 2010, 04:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786541"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've been having a blast with the Alpha.
Even without optimization, the Alpha build is running quite smooth for me, and the detail is absolutely gorgeous; hands down one of the best looking games I've played.
As for sticking with the Source Engine, I'm really pleased that they didn't, this engine has so much potential, and in my opinion it's going to give Source a run for its money.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No doubt if it gets to a stage they can get it optimized and the netcode working good and build up the required server administration interfaces I'd say it could definately give Source/OB a run for it's money but I guess so could any engine. It's getting to that stage which is the questionable concern.
<!--quoteo(post=1786569:date=Jul 28 2010, 04:48 AM:name=rein4ce)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rein4ce @ Jul 28 2010, 04:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786569"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Judging from what I have seen already it's not looking all that well.
The engine reminds me of a pretty map and model viewer with rushed core functionality.
And that is a common mistake among new engine developers (no offence intended), because it is very difficult to further "fix" the networking if the whole engine isn't designed around this insignificant-looking bit. It might even require a total refactorization of the code, but lets leave that to Max (perhaps the designed system is very flexible, just not yet throughtly tested)
Source engine has mastered two things:
- netcode flexibility (backwards server prediction, lag compensation, complex extrapolation and lots of tweaking options)
- performance configurability (source games could run on lots of different specs, reliability)
The price was mediocre graphics (even compared to other games at the time HL2 was released)
And for example Crysis was on the contrary developed with looks in mind and networking added later - the result was catastrophic I'd say.
Apart from that:
the game itself looks very good, I'm just concerned about the engine part, which might hold back release of the finished product for quite a significant time :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is basically spot on what I was inferring on the original post.
Source/Orange Box are established and mature as far as netcode, functionality and in ways performance.
Looking at the NS netcode/engine currently for Internet games is not looking so good. Hopefully they can optimize and fix things but yeah I am also concerned that they have spent so much time on getting the engine looking nice graphically and working in mostly single player environments and have not really delved too much into well now we have a number of players all of whom need to talk together and do it in a way that will be efficient and not too reliant on latency differences.
I believe that for a game, where the key element is multiplayer, the whole engine should be based off the well designed networking architecture.
Why do you ask about refactoring? The context it was used in makes perfect sense.
And lastly, Source engine ran pretty well when it was released (of course if someone pushed the setting to the max while not having the latest video cards would have experienced less fluent gameplay) + the networking was extraordinary at the time, event without server side lag compensation, which they added later if I remember correctly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This makes sense to me.
<!--quoteo(post=1786692:date=Jul 28 2010, 06:25 AM:name=XainGM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (XainGM @ Jul 28 2010, 06:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786692"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What the hell is wrong with you people?
It took Valve 6 years and $40,000,000 to make the engine for half-life 2 with 200+ employees. Hell Valve coined a new term after Half-Life 2 "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation" target="_blank">Valve Time</a>" (Bottom of the page). And you guys are complaining about the state of this game in it's VERY first alpha release? You are even lucky to see any footage of the alpha stages, no less be able to participate in it.
What do you want to bet, that the first stage of alpha for the source engine was way worse than this?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, this was kind of along the lines or my questioning when I posted. That figure is massive, the time it took was long and I can see where NS2 is at now, but how long before they get to that final stage of a engine that has netcode that will be optimized to be similar in performance to what other FPS's run.
<!--quoteo(post=1786739:date=Jul 28 2010, 06:49 AM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CanadianWolverine @ Jul 28 2010, 06:49 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786739"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think questions like this thread is about just demonstrate a gamer learning possibly the hard way about the development process their games endure for better or worse. I think just trying to code something up in language like Basic or trying to use an existing game's freely released map editor can do wonders for the understanding of a gamer into just how monumental a task their games can be when viewed from the beginning concept to finished result. Perhaps there is opportunity in trying to map or mod something free like Alien Swarm for some here? Or if one desires something applicable to NS2, surely there are some LUA tutorials available.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1786928:date=Jul 28 2010, 08:42 AM:name=Seikeden)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Seikeden @ Jul 28 2010, 08:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1786928"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This.
Actually, I paid for SE to support a developer that had previously provided me with untold hours of goodtimes, FOR FREE. Alpha access is just a kewl bonus.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The above two quotes:
I have played a number of games and been in some fairly dodgy games and I am not "complaining" or "moaning". I also have some general programming experience even though that is fairly irrelevant in this thread as it's not enough to be an "expert" in designing engines or optimization for games.
I did however pay for my SE as soon as it was released. Why? Because I wanted to support UWE and I had played NS1 and had a lot of fun with it. I didn't even really care about the due date at that point.
I am not asking for my money back or a discount or that this "Alpha" is not playable, I am just posing a question as to whether they have the time and resources to devote into optimizing the netcode and engine for multiplayer which is the core of Natural Selection. People could spend years and a lot of money building an engine and optimizing it to get it to a state where it can handle a significant number of players and objects all requiring synchronization between every player.
sure if they would have used the source/orange box engine it would be done faster.
Downsides are NS2 won 't be nearly as flexible as it it will be now.
NS2 will be a modders dream.
My suggestion wait a little bit to play alpha. Let them iron out some of those bugs that drive you nuts. Then start to enjoy the game =)
I'd agree with that DoD/CS was ruined when it went to source (but that's probably the gameplay mechanics they f'd up), but for tf2/l4d etc.. it's perfectly fine.
On-topic, alphas are generally very unoptimized, what were you expecting they're a small studio with limited resources? Comparatively, I tested F&F wow alpha (not beta) years ago, there were random crashes, FPS drops; not what you'd expect of Blizzard, but it was alpha. Blizzard had (even before the Activision merger) infinitely more resources than UWE, and these 'issues' hold true regardless of the company.
What I'm trying to say is alpha tests are generally not released to the public because it would give them a false representation of the game. Just feel lucky that you can be a part of the development of NS2.
Water under the bridge right?
JOHN CARMACK BUILT THIS IN A CAVE
...
WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!
Don't pull a DNF though, you gotta stick with your choice. Gawdspeed.
<img src="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e47/mynameisme12/QUITYOBTCH.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Face palm deployed<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seconded.
To all the people ###### about problems just for the sake of ######: HOW'S <b>YOUR</b> 3D FPS ENGINE COMING ALONG?
It's an alpha. Sweet jesus shut the hell up. Is this your first time testing software? All games are like this at one point. The HL2 alpha was WORSE when it was leaked. The game might not work for you. This is normal. Your mouse might not work. This is normal. The game might not run at all on all hardware. This is normal. The fps will be terrible. This is normal. The game will not be playable in any epic enjoyable sense of the word. This is normal. Focus your ###### when it goes to beta.
But now that they got this far I must say I like this engine, with it being easy to mod with lua (alot like gmod), and such.
To all the people ###### about problems just for the sake of ######: HOW'S <b>YOUR</b> 3D FPS ENGINE COMING ALONG?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bad logic is bad.
What does logic have to do with this thread?
More bad logic is even worse. CS:S and DoD:S being different than their original versions had little to do with the engine.
Few people in this thread seem to have any sense of it.
I hope you will at least grant me the liberty of this rant against certain mind numbingly stupid parts of this thread, because it's given me a headache.
As for the actual original topic of the thread, I think UWE developing their own engine really gave them a chance to grow as game developers. Making NS2 off the Source engine would be like making a mod, and they've already done that before.
just because the game is lacking polish now doesnt mean it wont have polish later.
while the source engine had the server code and joining games etc already in place, it would have meant that they would need to remove features from the game in order to make NS2 compatible with source engine.
not to mention how bad the dev tools are for source.
UWE saw plenty of faults with source, which is why they made SPARK.
i think you will be suprised to see how quickly the game becomes playable, and then becomes awesome as the dev tools are much much better now.
Kind of a pointless conversation since the game isn't even done.
Also to the poster above me, yes. Unfortunately a lack of understanding of the game development system and impatience seem to go hand in hand
In terms of an equation;
time developing the engine might be greater than source tweaking, but I understand the benefits in technical/bug/gameplay tweaks that can be realised quickly when the developers have made their own code. It can essentially by designed for what they intended from the start, given they had a good plan of what they wanted.
And I think they've had a good amount of time to preplan what they wanted the engine to do.
Overall, its pretty sad that this thread derailed into such a flame war. As the original premise did have some merit for discussion.
They could very well iron out a lot more bugs this way as they have a much larger test pool, you could have a much smoother running beta for this.
People do have the right to talk about what isn't working, bombarding everyone with "alpha!!!!11!!" isn't any more helpful, there are problems, everyone knows this, best to get them out on the table.
I admit I was a little nervous at the performance of the Alpha, but have faith, they'll pull through and deliver.
I hope you will at least grant me the liberty of this rant against certain mind numbingly stupid parts of this thread, because it's given me a headache.
As for the actual original topic of the thread, I think UWE developing their own engine really gave them a chance to grow as game developers. Making NS2 off the Source engine would be like making a mod, and they've already done that before.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree there was a massive flame-war start-mid way through this thread. Was almost like watching a short clip over and over again.
In relation to the engine well that is true as a perspective I guess building their entire game from scratch will definitely give them more flexibility and allow them to achieve "building a game" and not a mod as you stated. However it is creating a lot of extra workload.
I guess the concerning part will be how well they will be able to optimize the netcode, lag compensation, anti-cheat mechanisms and all the rest that go with these gaming engines in a timely manner so they can reach a release.
Now dealing with a paid game I think there are going to be a number of people who are expecting a finished product in final build since they have paid say $50 or so. Release date was pushed back but hopefully these multiplayer engine issues are not going to cause a huge hurdle.
<!--quoteo(post=1787390:date=Jul 28 2010, 02:46 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Jul 28 2010, 02:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787390"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->to answer OP : no i dont think source engine would have been any better.
just because the game is lacking polish now doesnt mean it wont have polish later.
while the source engine had the server code and joining games etc already in place, it would have meant that they would need to remove features from the game in order to make NS2 compatible with source engine.
not to mention how bad the dev tools are for source.
UWE saw plenty of faults with source, which is why they made SPARK.
i think you will be suprised to see how quickly the game becomes playable, and then becomes awesome as the dev tools are much much better now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well lets hope that is true. I don't know enough about building a game on someone else engine to understand why people can't still use all the same models/content but parse it through another engine which could be modified. But I do remember them saying the time it would take to customize the Valve engine versus making their own was going to be significant and building their own engine gives them flexibility. The only issue will be having to build now all those tools and features that would of come included such as the core network functionality.
<!--quoteo(post=1787417:date=Jul 28 2010, 03:16 PM:name=alphz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (alphz @ Jul 28 2010, 03:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1787417"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think one of the other factors with developing their own engine is becoming more intimate with the engine. That is; time spent interpreting source to try get it to do something they wanted in the game is instead spent developing a new engine.
In terms of an equation;
time developing the engine might be greater than source tweaking, but I understand the benefits in technical/bug/gameplay tweaks that can be realised quickly when the developers have made their own code. It can essentially by designed for what they intended from the start, given they had a good plan of what they wanted.
And I think they've had a good amount of time to preplan what they wanted the engine to do.
Overall, its pretty sad that this thread derailed into such a flame war. As the original premise did have some merit for discussion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep the flame war was demoralizing. All true points though and I do know that if they can achieve the optimizations and fixes in a short time-frame the engine they have build would provide much more flexibility and allow them to basically add/remove/modify any feature they wanted as they have now built everything themselves and own full rights to the code. So lets hope that the issues are not as big as they seem at the moment.
If Max is as good as they say he is, than his engine should be able to achieve brilliance too.
There is just something about the fact that it was all built from scratch that gives it even more of this sense of.. victory and accomplishment even though we had nothing to do with it, we've supported it and this engine was MADE for NS2, as well as dynamic infestation which, that alone is purely worth them using this engine over the source.
What you need to understand is this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle</a>
Now, NONE of you have a rite to complain at this point. You can be frustrated, but if you are going to criticize anything at this point it must be constructive and helpful for the devs. Tell them you think the game is no where near completion is NOT helpful and only serves to piss people off. This will NOT speed the process along. Please proved them with details about what's its lacking or missing that would make it more up to par. This is the only way anything you say can become helpful. Otherwise if you can't do this, then please uninstall the game, and wait for it to go gold.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know how the release life cycle work since I'm a developer myself aswell, but if this many people are having trouble with the performance of the engine, I would say this release is still pre-alpha. Since there's no way that you're going to get that much FPS change/increase in one release, unless you're talking about having tons of alpha releases, which like I said, shifts the the playable release date to next year.
I know the advantage of having many people testing this, but the alpha-release might have gave some people too much expectations of this game, unless you really thought this release was performance-worthy for the public.