How a game is made. - Linux

This is a discussion on How a game is made. - Linux ; I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or two programmers still. Here's a real commercial game development office http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm -- If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: How a game is made.

  1. How a game is made.


    I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    two programmers still.

    Here's a real commercial game development office

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm

    --
    If you take both of those factors together then WinXP is a flop, selling
    *less* than Win 98 by a factor of two.
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they the lunacy in advocacy

  2. Re: How a game is made.

    Hadron wrote:
    > I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    > two programmers still.
    >
    > Here's a real commercial game development office
    >
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >


    I remember reading that the development cost was about a million quid
    for an average game and that was in the era of the original XBox,
    Gamecube and PS2. How many staff do you think a million quid buys?

    You only have to look at the credits portion of any game to see just how
    large the dev teams are these days.

    The only possible exception to this would be the Wii with its simplish
    gameplay but you'd still need reasonably sized dev teams for that as well.

  3. Re: How a game is made.

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >> two programmers still.
    >>
    >> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>

    >
    > I remember reading that the development cost was about a million quid
    > for an average game and that was in the era of the original XBox,
    > Gamecube and PS2. How many staff do you think a million quid buys?


    For one/two year development time? Quite a few. And thats if your
    numbers are right - but they are at least realistic. Some "adovcates"
    scoffed when I mentioned that teams for the bigger releases are often
    more than a 100 or so when you consider localizations etc.

    >
    > You only have to look at the credits portion of any game to see just
    > how large the dev teams are these days.


    Yup.

    >
    > The only possible exception to this would be the Wii with its simplish
    > gameplay but you'd still need reasonably sized dev teams for that as
    > well.


    No exception. The Wii has the big games too. Sure there are more
    "simplish" games but simplish games can be done for the others
    too. Where the Wii wins in many cases is the great deal of work done on
    the UI - certainly not its graphics and sound abilities.

    --
    "His asshole is so reamed out he has room for an oxygen
    tank, too."
    -- Tattoo Vampire in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  4. Re: How a game is made.

    Hadron wrote:
    >> The only possible exception to this would be the Wii with its simplish
    >> gameplay but you'd still need reasonably sized dev teams for that as
    >> well.

    >
    > No exception. The Wii has the big games too. Sure there are more
    > "simplish" games but simplish games can be done for the others
    > too. Where the Wii wins in many cases is the great deal of work done on
    > the UI - certainly not its graphics and sound abilities.
    >



    Some of the games coming out for the Wii have nowhere near the level
    complexity of some of the stuff coming out for other consoles. Not that
    the Wii doesn't have games like that of course, but more of the games
    are simpler affairs. That was by design. Miyamoto said about 5 years ago
    that he was dismayed by the complexity of the game design process and
    that simplifying it would be a major design goal for the then-codenamed
    revolution (Wii).

  5. Re: How a game is made.

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >>> The only possible exception to this would be the Wii with its simplish
    >>> gameplay but you'd still need reasonably sized dev teams for that as
    >>> well.

    >>
    >> No exception. The Wii has the big games too. Sure there are more
    >> "simplish" games but simplish games can be done for the others
    >> too. Where the Wii wins in many cases is the great deal of work done on
    >> the UI - certainly not its graphics and sound abilities.
    >>

    >
    >
    > Some of the games coming out for the Wii have nowhere near the level
    > complexity of some of the stuff coming out for other consoles. Not


    My point is that they dont have the complexity of OTHER games for the
    Wii either. And simple games exist for the other consoles too.

    > that the Wii doesn't have games like that of course, but more of the
    > games are simpler affairs. That was by design. Miyamoto said about 5
    > years ago that he was dismayed by the complexity of the game design
    > process and that simplifying it would be a major design goal for the
    > then-codenamed revolution (Wii).


    Well, cuteness or whatever, the Wii certainly got the best SW and the
    audience (best being SW people wanted to use). The sports compendium is
    what made it take off IMO with their unique remote control.

    --
    "Maybe he knows where the body is because he saw where
    it was put." -- "Rick" defending Hans Reiser (his hero) in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  6. Re: How a game is made.

    Hadron wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >> that the Wii doesn't have games like that of course, but more of the
    >> games are simpler affairs. That was by design. Miyamoto said about 5
    >> years ago that he was dismayed by the complexity of the game design
    >> process and that simplifying it would be a major design goal for the
    >> then-codenamed revolution (Wii).

    >
    > Well, cuteness or whatever, the Wii certainly got the best SW and the
    > audience (best being SW people wanted to use). The sports compendium is
    > what made it take off IMO with their unique remote control.


    Most of the really successful Wii software came about from lots of
    little dev teams within nintendo messing about with the capabilities of
    the controller. Wii sports was basically a compendium of different
    motion-sensing techniques with some backdrops dropped in. Wii play was
    the "left-overs" which didn't have quite the same polish applied.

    Some others didn't quite make it to market as well. In particular there
    was a "cooking simulator" whereby you move veg n stuff around in the wok
    which (as far as I know - I haven't checked in a while) never made it to
    market. Not surprising - anyone that'd drop 20 notes for that wants
    their head examined.

  7. Re: How a game is made.

    "Phil Da Lick!" writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
    >>> that the Wii doesn't have games like that of course, but more of the
    >>> games are simpler affairs. That was by design. Miyamoto said about 5
    >>> years ago that he was dismayed by the complexity of the game design
    >>> process and that simplifying it would be a major design goal for the
    >>> then-codenamed revolution (Wii).

    >>
    >> Well, cuteness or whatever, the Wii certainly got the best SW and the
    >> audience (best being SW people wanted to use). The sports compendium is
    >> what made it take off IMO with their unique remote control.

    >
    > Most of the really successful Wii software came about from lots of
    > little dev teams within nintendo messing about with the capabilities
    > of the controller. Wii sports was basically a compendium of different
    > motion-sensing techniques with some backdrops dropped in. Wii play was
    > the "left-overs" which didn't have quite the same polish applied.


    Those were the early days. And not by any means do new games HAVE to use
    the controller.

    But I think we agree that the controller triggered a lot of
    innovations. See the new exercising titles out now for it.

    >
    > Some others didn't quite make it to market as well. In particular
    > there was a "cooking simulator" whereby you move veg n stuff around in
    > the wok which (as far as I know - I haven't checked in a while) never
    > made it to market. Not surprising - anyone that'd drop 20 notes for
    > that wants their head examined.


    One would have thought that for Barbie simulator and "Duck Hunting" or
    "World Fishing" type titles ... but there are people who buy just that
    kind of thing!

    --
    "Well we know Quack is an inveterate liar & troll with no credibility, so
    you cannot take *anything* he says as being true."
    -- William Poaster showing his love for Hadron despite claiming never to read his posts in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  8. Re: How a game is made.

    On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    > two programmers still.
    >
    > Here's a real commercial game development office
    >
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm


    All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.

    It doesn't run on Linux BTW.
    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  9. Re: How a game is made.

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >> two programmers still.
    >>
    >> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm

    >
    > All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    > Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >
    > It doesn't run on Linux BTW.


    Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

  10. Re: How a game is made.

    On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>> two programmers still.
    >>>
    >>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>
    >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm

    >>
    >> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>
    >> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.

    >
    > Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.


    I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.

    I've always been a bit odd that way...

    Opting for the much larger display.

    After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    always was a bit disturbing...

    --
    If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
    hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  11. Re: How a game is made.

    On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:45:01 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one
    >> or two programmers still.
    >>
    >> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm

    >
    > All the Linux loons...


    Not worth reading ....



    --
    Rick

  12. Re: How a game is made.

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>>> two programmers still.
    >>>>
    >>>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>>
    >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >>> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>>
    >>> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.

    >> Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

    >
    > I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.
    >
    > I've always been a bit odd that way...
    >
    > Opting for the much larger display.
    >
    > After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    > always was a bit disturbing...


    FPS games on a console controller are rubbish in the main so I wasn't
    expecting much from Halo but I gave up because it was sooooo repetitive
    and boring.

  13. Re: How a game is made.

    JEDIDIAH writes:

    > On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>>> two programmers still.
    >>>>
    >>>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>>
    >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>>
    >>> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >>> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>>
    >>> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.

    >>
    >> Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

    >
    > I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.
    >
    > I've always been a bit odd that way...
    >
    > Opting for the much larger display.
    >
    > After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    > always was a bit disturbing...


    As usual a Linux "advocate" talks rubbish. You do realise that video
    cards on modern machines all have tv out these days? And the games play
    at MUCH higher resolutions than most console games.

    --
    XP is a flop and when users are still asking for W98 it shows that they
    aren't all taken in with the MS hype.
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  14. Re: How a game is made.

    On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:49:23 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>> two programmers still.
    >>>
    >>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>
    >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm

    >>
    >> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>
    >> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.

    >
    > Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.


    Sure....
    Long live TuxRacer!!!


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: How a game is made.

    On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:52:50 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>>> two programmers still.
    >>>>
    >>>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>>
    >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>>
    >>> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >>> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>>
    >>> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.

    >>
    >> Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

    >
    > I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.
    >
    > I've always been a bit odd that way...
    >
    > Opting for the much larger display.
    >
    > After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    > always was a bit disturbing...


    Buy an Xbox....duhhhhhh.......


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  16. Re: How a game is made.

    On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >> On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>>>> two programmers still.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>>> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >>>> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>>>
    >>>> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.
    >>> Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

    >>
    >> I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.
    >>
    >> I've always been a bit odd that way...
    >>
    >> Opting for the much larger display.
    >>
    >> After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    >> always was a bit disturbing...

    >
    > FPS games on a console controller are rubbish in the main so I wasn't


    ....I've always thought right the reverse about PC controllers including
    FPS.

    > expecting much from Halo but I gave up because it was sooooo repetitive
    > and boring.



    --
    Oracle... can't live with it... |||
    / | \
    can't just replace it with postgres...

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  17. Re: How a game is made.

    On 2008-06-18, Hadron wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH writes:
    >
    >> On 2008-06-18, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:18:59 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I still chuckle at Jeb thinking that modern games were created by one or
    >>>>> two programmers still.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Here's a real commercial game development office
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7460359.stm
    >>>>
    >>>> All the Linux loons have to do is watch the trailer on the Halo Special
    >>>> Edition DVD and they can see how a top tier video game is played.
    >>>>
    >>>> It doesn't run on Linux BTW.
    >>>
    >>> Halo sucks. Most overrated game ever.

    >>
    >> I'd rather play games on the 60" TV.
    >>
    >> I've always been a bit odd that way...
    >>
    >> Opting for the much larger display.
    >>
    >> After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    >> always was a bit disturbing...

    >
    > As usual a Linux "advocate" talks rubbish. You do realise that video
    > cards on modern machines all have tv out these days? And the games play


    ....looks at PC.

    NOPE, no TV output.

    With a Windows PC there's all sorts of BS involved with outputing to a
    TV. You have to seriously wonder if you will get the most out of the
    experience or if Microsoft will cripple itself in order to satisfy it's
    media overlords in Hollywood.

    > at MUCH higher resolutions than most console games.
    >


    So? Eyecandy != gameplay.

    Lots of pixels doesn't even necessarily equate to good eyecandy.

    --
    Oracle... can't live with it... |||
    / | \
    can't just replace it with postgres...

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  18. Re: How a game is made.

    JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >> JEDIDIAH writes:
    >>>
    >>> After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    >>> always was a bit disturbing...

    >>
    >> As usual a Linux "advocate" talks rubbish. You do realise that video
    >> cards on modern machines all have tv out these days? And the games play

    >
    >...looks at PC.
    >
    >NOPE, no TV output.
    >
    >With a Windows PC there's all sorts of BS involved with outputing to a
    >TV. You have to seriously wonder if you will get the most out of the
    >experience or if Microsoft will cripple itself in order to satisfy it's
    >media overlords in Hollywood.


    As usual, the "true Linux advocate" Quack makes a jackass of himself,
    just so he could fling some snot at one of his superiors.

    Even if your PC does have "TV" outputs, doesn't mean that there's a TV
    within practical reach of the PC/keyboard/mouse.


  19. Re: How a game is made.

    On 2008-06-19, chrisv wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> JEDIDIAH writes:
    >>>>
    >>>> After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    >>>> always was a bit disturbing...
    >>>
    >>> As usual a Linux "advocate" talks rubbish. You do realise that video
    >>> cards on modern machines all have tv out these days? And the games play

    >>
    >>...looks at PC.
    >>
    >>NOPE, no TV output.
    >>
    >>With a Windows PC there's all sorts of BS involved with outputing to a
    >>TV. You have to seriously wonder if you will get the most out of the
    >>experience or if Microsoft will cripple itself in order to satisfy it's
    >>media overlords in Hollywood.

    >
    > As usual, the "true Linux advocate" Quack makes a jackass of himself,
    > just so he could fling some snot at one of his superiors.
    >
    > Even if your PC does have "TV" outputs, doesn't mean that there's a TV
    > within practical reach of the PC/keyboard/mouse.


    ....there's that too.

    PC's are obviously not designed with TV's in mind. They never have been.

    They're ultimately terminals for minicomputers and mainframes.

    --
    How did irc manage to get so pretentious about civility |||
    of discourse when it doesn't even allow for the free and / | \
    open exchange of ideas?

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  20. Re: How a game is made.

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, JEDIDIAH

    wrote
    on Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:36:28 -0500
    :
    > On 2008-06-19, chrisv wrote:
    >> JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>> JEDIDIAH writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> After starting out on non-PCs, being stuck using tiny monitors
    >>>>> always was a bit disturbing...
    >>>>
    >>>> As usual a Linux "advocate" talks rubbish. You do realise that video
    >>>> cards on modern machines all have tv out these days? And the games play
    >>>
    >>>...looks at PC.
    >>>
    >>>NOPE, no TV output.
    >>>
    >>>With a Windows PC there's all sorts of BS involved with outputing to a
    >>>TV. You have to seriously wonder if you will get the most out of the
    >>>experience or if Microsoft will cripple itself in order to satisfy it's
    >>>media overlords in Hollywood.

    >>
    >> As usual, the "true Linux advocate" Quack makes a jackass of himself,
    >> just so he could fling some snot at one of his superiors.
    >>
    >> Even if your PC does have "TV" outputs, doesn't mean that there's a TV
    >> within practical reach of the PC/keyboard/mouse.

    >
    > ...there's that too.
    >
    > PC's are obviously not designed with TV's in mind. They never have been.
    >
    > They're ultimately terminals for minicomputers and mainframes.
    >


    Not anymore they're not. ;-) The humble PC (4.77 MHz, 8
    bit buss, 63 watts) has mutated into a veritable bunch of
    models, of varying capabilities, from the ultra-cheapies
    to power-hungry monsters perfectly capable of displaying
    HDTV output, with the right software.

    Bear also in mind it's not the PC generating the TV
    output; it's the graphics chip/card, which have mutated
    far beyond *their* humble beginnings (320 x 400 x 4 or
    640 x 400 "monochrome") as well, sporting such things as
    3D capabilities (OpenGL or DirectX10, depending on OS)
    and high resolutions.

    Of course to be fair, supercomputers aren't what they
    used to be either; a Cray YMP-1 would be pretty sad today
    compared to Big Blue or a Connection machine, speedwise.

    Also, who'd really want Never The Same Color output nowadays?

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Conventional memory has to be one of the most UNconventional
    architectures I've seen in a computer system.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast