Comments on "Episode 5 of Operation: Make Faster Game"

After having watched the SOE video "Episode 5 of Operation: Make Faster Game", I have a few comments:

* Thank you SOE for putting together this "behind the scenes" look at your optimization efforts.

* Maybe SOE shouldn't have created so many camo patterns, that, you know, don't really camouflage anything.

* The SOE coders don't look happy or excited. They should be - they still have their jobs.

* So if optimization is a matter of reducing the number of unique, static objects in the game, then we'll be left with the old classic game "Battlezone".

* Why waste the time to create so many unique objects in PS2 if you knew that all it would do is slow it down? Common sense isn't so common after all.

* Those large numbers of unique, static objects DID serve a purpose. They served as protective cover from enemy fire. But with so many players leaving PS2, I suppose protective cover isn't as important now as it used to be.

* So SOE coders end their day with beer. Some of the decisions made in PS2 do appear to be the work of highly intoxicated persons, so I suppose this all makes sense now.

* Some of the EQ Next coders are HOT (the blonde in particular). The PS2 coders, not so much.

Makes we also wonder why they don't get fired. The only guys not failing miserably on PS2 are the sound guys.

?


The only thing i'm sad about is that bases might just be copy pasted structures. Imagine having the same box & crate in every single base as cover

It's all in the name of optimization, right??

Sure, BF4 may not have hundreds of gamers fighting in the same battle, but at least the game looks great and the maps/terrain are interesting.

Come to think of it, I haven't played a PS2 battle that had hundreds of gamers fighting in the same battle for some time either.

You're overdramatizing. Does it ever matter to you if it's a pack of barrels or a box you're hiding behind during a fight?

Did you not listen? They said they are trying to make it as efficient as possible without sacrificing or changing the cover area.

Where did you extract that they do this exactly everyday? It seems unrealistic to me.

i was dumbstruck when he revealed that in some parts of the map each floor tile is its own object...
thats seriously not what you should expect from a comercial game like this,
maybe some students college project but not a game belonging to one of the largest game companies in the world,
anyways, glad they're fixing it

i cant see how they dont fail. most guns in the game sound like toy guns. there's no environmental reverb of sounds. sounds that originate from afar dont travel, they instantly play which is unrealistic. there's no doppler effect or any other sound modulation in the engine either, like guns fired inside a room sound exactly like they are fired outside. then again, voice commands are useless for actual team coordination. the only sounds that are decent in the game are explosion sounds and engine noises, but that's actually it.

i'm not saying PS2 need top-notch realistic sounds like BF4. but at least they could have tried making the game a bit more immersive

There is doppler in the game, or at least there was. It was very noticeable if a player jumped on a grav pad and moved away from you.

As for the simplification of scenery, I am conflicted about that, the game is already quite bland in terms of variety of structures and objects but then again having two ammo crates instead of an ammo crate and a barrel shouldn't really matter much.

People should stop trying to compare this game to other games because they are fundamentally different. Having thousands of people on huge maps means there has to be sacrifices in terms of processing of sounds, number of objects loaded into memory, player ragdoll physics etc etc.

All good points. However, as far as PC gaming is concerned, I don't think we'll have thousands of gamers on one map to worry about the way this game is going.

Have you heard TR guns?

Yeah I was baffled as well. Someone forgot their common sense at some point down the development road that's for sure.

Wow, I'm not sure what to say. Probably best I keep it to myself.

I just hope that camos retain their quality for ultra and high settings and also hope that the smaller number of objets doesn't make PS2 boring as sh*t.

Step 1 - you make things work.
Step 2 - you optimize them.

Someone just decided to have the game be released between those two steps, but I doubt it was those guys.

to be fair on the staff O:MFG is a huge task so its a team effort. i really think many of you underestimate how much of a pain in the butt this task really is.

As for the sounds i think the NC weapons sound too generic

OP I am also amazed that people doing incredibly tedious work at their jobs aren't enthusiastic. If I were at SOE and working on this revamp I would walk in every morning and scream at the top of my lungs "OH BOY I AM REALLY EXCITED TO DELETE BARRELS AND THEN REPLACE THEM WITH BOXES FOR EIGHT HOURS TODAY!"

Most coders don't have glowing personalities. Do you also believe that person handing you the heart attack burger is genuinely smiling? You're also dissing them when they are working on a product that was released way before it was ready.

Maybe they always film on mondays?

I am baffled at having each individual tile a separate piece. Not only was it terrible for performance but had to be time consuming placing in the first place.

My guess is these guys arent seasoned veterans and were hired at base salaries to do the job, 'the job' being their first commercial product.

Also, you have to build the maps with optimization in mind. You cant shoehorn it in later and expect stellar results without losing a lot of content. Something tells me this simply wasnt done.

The alternative is that they get downsized and laid off, much like their former colleagues.

Which still falters compared to decent hardware accelerated titles about a decade ago. Surround and distortion effects were vastly superior with the right DSP system.

PC sound quality regressed several years ago due to changes in NT6, done for the purposes of system stability and reliability, and has yet to recover.