Author Topic: What features to cut for round 2  (Read 21331 times)

Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2016, 07:46:24 pm »
Clearly I disagree with some other folks here on just how much of a selling point XML only modding is.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2016, 07:53:53 pm »


That's actually a problem, as it turns out. The previous game's music is licensed on a royalty basis. Using that music in AIW2 means paying royalties on every copy sold, which significantly eats into the amount of money from the KS. The arrangement on music going forward is a purchase one so it avoids that problem, but that isn't an option for Classic's soundtrack.

I think using the first group of music is almost a necessity with a revised royalty system. Chris stated that the tier for adding music, 5k, was virtually all for making the music after fees. Kickstarter charges 6% fees, chris said a stretch coal would cost 12%. So that comes out for somewhere around 4.5k a song. That means given the current level of funding one song costs 5% of the budget. That is just not sustainable. Either a new royalty system is in place or a new source of music is necessary.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2016, 08:02:10 pm »
Ah, yeah. That is definitely a problem.

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 986
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #33 on: November 04, 2016, 02:39:58 am »
@music, then again no music at all is kind of an issue. I would have thought that just having to pay for royalties for existing songs would cost less than making a new song (and paying the royalties), which is what was planned AFAIK (making new songs). So, while it's still a cost, it's less of a cost. That said, if the contract ain't like that, well. Sorry for the suggestion.


Quote
    Better perf ? There was perf issues with the current ship quantities ?
Yes.  Play Fallen Spire on higher difficulties and watch the AI spawn so much stuff that the game can turn into a slideshow on an i7.
Quote
    3d ? What was the problem with 2d ?
Ever tried playing Classic at 4k resolution? It doesn't work very well. 2d sprites don't scale, 3d graphics do. They also perform better, as modern hardware is designed around pushing polygons at insanely fast speeds. The game will still play in 2d overhead view, but internally it's doing things in 3d.
Quote
    Squads ? Seems like they're here to solve issues with large numbers of units.
Unless "large numbers of units" are going away, squads are solving a real problem.
Quote
    Those are in because of the "let's put 200000 ships moving at the same time in the game" objective. I see this objective as requiring a lot of work, and it's not what gets people excited from what I see in the KS comment thread. So, cutting part of it is in order.
People reacted badly to the mere hint of having ship scales smaller than what Classic has. Squads are the thing that let AIW2 keep that scale without the performance problems. Cut them, and either the scale has to get cut (which was met with hostility) or the performance problems stay (why do we need a sequel if it doesn't improve that?).

Please... the Spire campaign ain't a good argument. It's not planned to be in the sequel. By the time that it makes it back, IF, it needs to make it back, maybe modifications are needed, but for the base game ? Apart from there, I've not had perf issues at all and my computer's 4 years old.

Second, I'm being misunderstood here. One of the sequel's goal was to increase the number of units - and modifications have to be done to account for that. I don't suggest to reduce the number of units compared to the first game, just to reduce AI War II's goals it so perf issues don't come too much.

Third, the point about 3d is that all has to be recoded - even if it's more efficient. 2d does not have this issue. Granted, the existing code, from what is said, needs some rewrites... but a complete rewrite ? That said, maybe the point is moot because it's already in the prototype that the trailer's got images from. Another point which saddens me a lot though, it's way more easy for modders to make 2d sprites than 3d models.

Last, about 4k screens, other companies manage to have sprite scale and UI correctly on 4k screens. Why wouldn't Arcen be able to do in on a new game ?

Quote
They talked about "moddable tutorials", but never a full campaign, IIRC.
As far as I've known the system that made the tutorial was planned to be flexible enough to make campaigns. That said, it's probably a complex feature. I'm not sure about cut or not, AI War kind of need better tutorials in any case.


Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2016, 07:47:21 am »
Please... the Spire campaign ain't a good argument. It's not planned to be in the sequel. By the time that it makes it back, IF, it needs to make it back, maybe modifications are needed, but for the base game ? Apart from there, I've not had perf issues at all and my computer's 4 years old.

You can't build a game now not worried about performance, then just get performance later. That's not how software development works.

Also, it wasn't even necessary to run FS to get those issues. People got them in normal play too. FS just makes it easier, and since there's a Spire campaigned planned with a similar play style, it's going to come up again.

Quote
Second, I'm being misunderstood here. One of the sequel's goal was to increase the number of units - and modifications have to be done to account for that. I don't suggest to reduce the number of units compared to the first game, just to reduce AI War II's goals it so perf issues don't come too much.

Perf issues were a problem with the existing number of units. No increase is necessary to have problems. A decrease isn't planned, so the problem has to be dealt with. If your'e not doing that, why bother making AI War 2 at all? It's a lot cheaper to make an expansion to Classic.

Quote
Third, the point about 3d is that all has to be recoded - even if it's more efficient. 2d does not have this issue. Granted, the existing code, from what is said, needs some rewrites... but a complete rewrite ? That said, maybe the point is moot because it's already in the prototype that the trailer's got images from. Another point which saddens me a lot though, it's way more easy for modders to make 2d sprites than 3d models.

They're changing Unity versions drastically. Even keeping it 2d, it needs to be rewritten to take advantage of that and get things like a properly scaling UI. New artwork has to be done anyway.

Quote
Last, about 4k screens, other companies manage to have sprite scale and UI correctly on 4k screens. Why wouldn't Arcen be able to do in on a new game ?

Having sprites that look good on a 4k screen and also look good on a lame 720p laptop screen is a much bigger art job than just making low res sprites is. 3d eliminates the problem because being able to scale it up and down is a base function. The hardware will do it for you. You can't take a low res sprite and scale it up to high res without it looking like total crap, which means you need to make high res sprites instead... which take up more memory and are slower to process than 3d graphics.

This is all explained in the design document.

Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #35 on: November 04, 2016, 08:28:14 am »
Oh, talking about performance issues are we?
Multiplayer on low caps. Always turned into a slowdown-fest, even with aggressive threat-dismantling.

Also, modding...relies on people actually making the interesting mods. Modding alone is not an attractive feature, its just 'You can tweak game mechanics'.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 08:30:03 am by Aklyon »

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 986
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #36 on: November 04, 2016, 09:49:45 am »
Quote
You can't build a game now not worried about performance, then just get performance later. That's not how software development works.
Quote
Multiplayer on low caps. Always turned into a slowdown-fest, even with aggressive threat-dismantling.
Low-caps are gone too. Multi-homeworld start is stated to be changed. I don't know if it's here to stay, but ships are stated to be in shipyards now, so basically, the game does not have to track thousands of immobile ships everywhere like before. Thing is Chris actively removed most of the perf threats already. The current engine is capable of handling quite a few units, but AI war 2 was stated to be able to handle maybe 10 times more ? I don't think the 10 times multiplications is necessary.

In any case, you've not brought perf issues apart from edge cases which are already removed from the second game. Is there other perf issues in regular plays ? Frankly I ask because with normal caps, without abusing multiple homeworld starts, I never managed had a lag. And, as stated, my computer ain't really new. That said, I might have missed stuff. I didn't exactly try to make the game lag either.

In any case, there will always be limitations to the game performances. What I'm saying is you don't build a 8 lanes double road, and airport and a heliport if the base game requires a dual lane road, because hypothetical future expansions could require them.

@Tridus...
About the rest, again, I don't claim that 2d's more efficient than 3d. Solutions for the problem you're stating have been found by others, so I'm just supposing that things exist, and that Arcen can use them. I supposing (hoping ? Or not ?) that it's more work to redo everything from scratch, than to adapt better taking current recipes into account when making the new engine. That it's explained in the document is one thing, but the document was kind of written to sell us this idea... with a 2-300k budget in mind. It needs re-evaluating IMO - but I'm not claiming that I can say which is better. I'm a dev, but I haven't see Arcen's code. Also, the point might be moot because it's already been quite advanced. So yeah.

Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #37 on: November 04, 2016, 10:02:39 am »
Normal caps multiplayer was an exercise in unnecessarily slow campaigns. 2 people with good-ish computers, 3 people, 3 people and one with a not-that-great computer, high performance profiles, low performance profiles, FS on, FS off, champs/no champs, starting close together, starting split up, did not matter. Always slow by the end of the second session. Singleplayer worked fine but would occasionally lag because of having so many ships.

I'm not really sure how you managed to not ever lag, kasnavada.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #38 on: November 04, 2016, 10:29:58 am »
I'd probably also cut several of the early bird tiers at the higher levels.  There's like four of them.  At one point I was pretty sure I saw backing split between the EB and the regular at a near 1:1 ratio.

Just as a personal example I doubled my input on day 1 to ensure I could secure an early bird special because they went so fast. Without that incentive I may not have decide to increase my pledge.

I'm not saying there aren't down sides, but we ended up with A LOT of tiers, which can cause confusion. Also, I was probably wrong in my earlier statement (and stayed the nature thereof).

Offline Apathetic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #39 on: November 04, 2016, 10:34:52 am »
I'd be cautious of the main new feature being modability.  Personally, I don't want to rely on people to make the game complete.  I want to have a complete package out of the box, that has compelling reasons to make the switch to the new version.  Having a game that required mods to end up a great deep game I don't think will work.  Having an already great deep game that mods can make better is great.

Depending on required level of effort, it would be interesting if the default campaign was the spire version.

Offline NichG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #40 on: November 04, 2016, 10:47:43 am »
I think the key point is, what will sell the game? The ability to retain features and ideas is directly proportional to how much extra funding can be garnered, and that depends not on appealing to existing hardcore fans but rather to appeal to a wider set of strategy gamers.

Modding isn't going to do that, especially not at the stage of a Kickstarter. Modding is good for sustaining interest as a game ages, but it doesn't provide the initial surge (and it can backfire, if people see it as a way to try to get the customers to make most of the content and promote the game for cheap). I don't think 3D will be seen as a selling point either - at best, it might prevent negative impressions from people who don't like 2D, but it's not going to sell the game on its own. Large swarms of ships might pull on a certain segment, but its a bit shallow and this kind of game really aims more at deep, so I'm not sure that works as a core feature.

Whatever is cut, there has to be something left in the core of it that says 'this is really what AI War 2 is about, and why it makes sense for you to buy into promises and dreams towards creating a sequel to get this thing, rather than just grabbing AIW1 on sale'.

Offline tombik

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #41 on: November 05, 2016, 01:09:08 am »
What about cutting off 3D? I know 2D might look too indie to cause any profit, at the same time, AI War is targeting only outlier players who knows what they want. 3D will work only for screenshots mostly with no actual added value, let alone the performance issues. And no, I did not like how Raptor looked, so that might also be a shot in the feet there.

Offline Cinth

  • Core Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,527
  • Resident Zombie
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #42 on: November 05, 2016, 01:27:32 am »
actual added value, let alone the performance issues

The 3-D actually improves the performance of the game dramatically.  There's a whole section in the design doc that pretty much covers that whole explanation.

I did not like how Raptor looked
What about it?  I don't think it was any secret that most of what was used in Raptor was bought form the asset store.
Quote from: keith.lamothe
Opened your save. My computer wept. Switched to the ST planet and ship icons filled my screen, so I zoomed out. Game told me that it _was_ totally zoomed out. You could seriously walk from one end of the inner grav well to the other without getting your feet cold.

Offline tombik

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #43 on: November 05, 2016, 02:01:29 am »

The 3-D actually improves the performance of the game dramatically.  There's a whole section in the design doc that pretty much covers that whole explanation.

Did not know that, will take a look then.

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 986
Re: What features to cut for round 2
« Reply #44 on: November 05, 2016, 02:38:31 am »
Normal caps multiplayer was an exercise in unnecessarily slow campaigns. 2 people with good-ish computers, 3 people, 3 people and one with a not-that-great computer, high performance profiles, low performance profiles, FS on, FS off, champs/no champs, starting close together, starting split up, did not matter. Always slow by the end of the second session. Singleplayer worked fine but would occasionally lag because of having so many ships.

I'm not really sure how you managed to not ever lag, kasnavada.

Never tried multiplayer much longer than a session, maybe that's that. The people I tried to play with found the start of the game too boring to continue playing.

Modding isn't going to do that, especially not at the stage of a Kickstarter. Modding is good for sustaining interest as a game ages, but it doesn't provide the initial surge (and it can backfire, if people see it as a way to try to get the customers to make most of the content and promote the game for cheap)

That directly contradict reviews of games like Rimworld, X-Com2, Neverwinter Nights, Skyrim... and also, a large part of the new "exciting" features (at least to me) kind of exists with modding being there. Better tutorial (possibly campaign), ships, player races...
« Last Edit: November 05, 2016, 02:43:00 am by kasnavada »