Onyxmeth said:
I completely agree that the costs of HD game development is too astronomical at this point, but I put full blame on Sony and Microsoft for jumping the gun with too huge of a leap in advancement. What do you mean by making life very difficult for developers that can't utilize the engine? Are you speaking about the Silicon Knights incident? I still feel the presence of having UE3 in the industry has given developers great tools and have cut a good year at least(complete guess based on little knowledge on the subject) off development time. I do believe more should try to get into the business to offer competing engines because UE3 can usually be seen a mile away when being fully used. Games look very...shiny, I guess is the word. I would love to have RenderWare back as I feel it was a great set of tools, just by seeing what developers got out of it. I'll still never understand EA taking it off the market. There would have been huge money this generation in selling a new RenderWare if EA would have put money behind it instead of chickening out to Epic.
|
No the Silicon Knights incident unrelated to what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about the expectation of semiphenominal nearly-cosmic graphics in pretty much all games. Using and skinning the engine means you have more time to spend working on the other stuff, however those developers whose games are unable to benefit from the engine and cannot afford to handled the associated costs of all development themselves suffer. Essentially that's where the games with good graphics but poor gameplay/bugs will come from. It's speculation, but I'd wager if they hadn't had to spend so much money on graphics to "keep up with the Jones" the games would have turned out better. Epic is only making it easier for some to "keep up with the Jones."







