Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine • Hacker News Board

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#81

Post by tornadoboy55 » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:08 PM UTC

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #22

The link should probably be updated to point directly to Venturebeat [0] instead of the AMP version. I think submitting the AMP version might break the guidelines, which ask you to submit the original source. I preordered Star Citizen a few years ago, but I stopped keeping track of all updates after a while. To be honest, I kinda assumed it'd just become vaporware. Although I'd heard about Amazon Lumberyard before, I…

Upwards to 70% of the XBOX360/PS3 generation AAA games ran on the Unreal Engine. For the XBONE/PS4 gen its 60% Unreal 30% Unity 10% stuff like CryEngine. It'd be very hard to knock Unreal off its throne since it's very, very well written and essentially free (you pay 5% of profits for commercial use when you go above a certain threshold). So no, there aren't any real openings for disruption unless Epic does something massively stupid.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#82

Post by blakeyrat » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:24 PM UTC

bm3719 wrote: post #40

After getting my refund, I've been watching the SC narrative unfold from the sidelines with interest. There's enough things that've gone awry in this project to write a book about (and I guess if you were to collect all of Derek Smart's writings, that's what you'd have). For me, the main deal breakers and why I got out were that I felt substantively bait-and-switched when you compare the current "game" to what was or…

While I'm sensitive to people who gave money to this project, I have to ask:

If Chris Roberts, with his name and reputation in the games industry, were still capable of making quality games, wouldn't he have been able to find a publisher to fund Star Citizen instead of having to beg thousands of his fans?

My attitude towards crowdfunding is to never contribute. If the product's successful, I can just buy it off-the-shelf when it's finished. (Like the new Elite, for example.) If it fails, I'm not out anything. (Sure, there's a small chance I might miss out on some Kickstarter exclusive deal, but I'd rather miss out on that then have an Ouya collecting dust in my living room.)

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#83

Post by aninhumer » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:34 PM UTC

blakeyrat wrote: post #82

bm3719 wrote: post #40

After getting my refund, I've been watching the SC narrative unfold from the sidelines with interest. There's enough things that've gone awry in this project to write a book about (and I guess if you were to collect all of Derek Smart's writings, that's what you'd have). For me, the main deal breakers and why I got out were that I felt substantively bait-and-switched when you compare the current "game" to what was or…

While I'm sensitive to people who gave money to this project, I have to ask: If Chris Roberts, with his name and reputation in the games industry, were still capable of making quality games, wouldn't he have been able to find a publisher to fund Star Citizen instead of having to beg thousands of his fans? My attitude towards crowdfunding is to never contribute. If the product's successful, I can just buy it off-the-s…

I could believe that a talented game designer was capable of getting money from publishers, but not for the game the actually want to make (at least without substantial compromise).

And the downside of sitting out on crowdfunding is the reduced chance that something you like will get funded/made. Whether that matters to you depends on how excited you are by a project, and how likely you think it is to produce something matching your expectations.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#84

Post by blakeyrat » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

scrollaway wrote: post #67

ssully wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blizzard actually puts on new games, content for their games, and turns an enormous profit. So no they are not. I am really curious if you are either an employee at CIG or just a really passionate backer of the project based on your unrelenting defense here. I am not sure why you are surprised by the candor of the comments here - CIG is seen as a running train on fire and is quite literally a joke in the gaming indus…

I'm not affiliated with CIG (edit: I am an early backer as I mentioned elsewhere), but I am passionate because I work in the games industry and I see what CIG is doing as incredibly beneficial to the industry; open development is huge for both studios and consumers but it needs all the love it can get. So I'd really love a source for your "is seen as a joke in the gaming industry", because that is not at all what it'…

I agree it's beneficial but not for the reasons you think: it's turning thousands of people away from the ill-conceived crowd-funding model of game development.

BTW it has roughly about $140 MILLION of "all the love it can get". Does it really need any more than that? It has enough. That's well more than Skyrim's budget.

> They're the reason Kickstarter got so popular in the gaming industry: everybody wants to be them.

If you're backing Star Citizen because you think it proves the crowd-funding model, I'm sorry to break this to you, but it's more likely people in the know are rejecting the crowd-funding model due to Star Citizen, not signing up for it.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#85

Post by halomru » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:48 PM UTC

caseysoftware wrote: post #8

gulaschadasical wrote: post #7

Apparently "The most open game development in history" involves briefly mentioning an engine / platform switch at 5pm on a Friday before christmas

Did you see their EULA change a while back? If you upgraded to the latest beta, you absolved them of all liability if they never deliver the actual product. This is a sinking ship, they just won't (publicly) admit it yet.. though a bunch of their staff jumped ship, so they realize it.

>If you upgraded to the latest beta, you absolved them of all liability if they never deliver the actual product.

What kind of liability? I'm an early backer and I'm pretty sure I never had terms that gave me any kind of leverage. I got standard Kickstarter terms: I give them money, they promise by their honor to make a best-effort attempt to deliver a good product.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#86

Post by blakeyrat » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 8:52 PM UTC

aninhumer wrote: post #83

blakeyrat wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm sensitive to people who gave money to this project, I have to ask: If Chris Roberts, with his name and reputation in the games industry, were still capable of making quality games, wouldn't he have been able to find a publisher to fund Star Citizen instead of having to beg thousands of his fans? My attitude towards crowdfunding is to never contribute. If the product's successful, I can just buy it off-the-s…

I could believe that a talented game designer was capable of getting money from publishers, but not for the game the actually want to make (at least without substantial compromise). And the downside of sitting out on crowdfunding is the reduced chance that something you like will get funded/made. Whether that matters to you depends on how excited you are by a project, and how likely you think it is to produce somethi…

In the field of video games, there's already far more good games than I can play in a lifetime. I'm willing to let someone else do the vetting in my stead.

EDIT: to respond to your first sentence, I get your point, but it seems like that particular market has been severely under-served recently (as demonstrated by, well, Star Citizen's funding campaign for example). It shouldn't be a hard-sell to a publisher to make a game for a market that's been badly under-served for a decade or so.

And it's not like Chris Roberts is a game design savant who isn't capable of doing the wheeling and dealing-- the cast he got for Wing Commander 3 demonstrates he can deal.

I find it hard to believe if he had taken his pitch to, for example, EA, that they'd just brush him off unless they had good reason. I think now what we're seeing with Star Citizen development is the reason.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#87

Post by scrollaway » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 9:07 PM UTC

blakeyrat wrote: post #84

scrollaway wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not affiliated with CIG (edit: I am an early backer as I mentioned elsewhere), but I am passionate because I work in the games industry and I see what CIG is doing as incredibly beneficial to the industry; open development is huge for both studios and consumers but it needs all the love it can get. So I'd really love a source for your "is seen as a joke in the gaming industry", because that is not at all what it'…

I agree it's beneficial but not for the reasons you think: it's turning thousands of people away from the ill-conceived crowd-funding model of game development. BTW it has roughly about $140 MILLION of "all the love it can get". Does it really need any more than that? It has enough. That's well more than Skyrim's budget. > They're the reason Kickstarter got so popular in the gaming industry: everybody wants to be the…

> it's more likely people in the know are rejecting the crowd-funding model due to Star Citizen, not signing up for it.

And your source for that nonsensical statement is?

Star Citizen is the most successful crowdfunded project to date and second most successful kickstarter project at the time of its completion (after Oculus Rift). The two successes together that year were what made Kickstarter famous and turned it from a niche site to "the american dream 2.0" where anyone's greatest ideas can be funded.

I don't care about the crowdfunding model and you're completely mistaken about my reasons on why I backed Star Citizen. I don't particularly like or dislike it and I do appreciate your stance that you prefer buying the finished product - I think it's a healthy stance.

But your comment on people rejecting the crowd funding model "due to star citizen" is absolute nonsense. And so is your comment on budgeting, by the way - You should keep in mind that the number on there isn't "Star Citizen's budget", it's CIG's budget. There's no particular point in time where anyone says "Alright guys, time to pack up, stop making sales, we'll do with the money we have right now because it's more than enough to finish the game".

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#88

Post by scrollaway » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 9:13 PM UTC

tornadoboy55 wrote: post #81

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #22

The link should probably be updated to point directly to Venturebeat [0] instead of the AMP version. I think submitting the AMP version might break the guidelines, which ask you to submit the original source. I preordered Star Citizen a few years ago, but I stopped keeping track of all updates after a while. To be honest, I kinda assumed it'd just become vaporware. Although I'd heard about Amazon Lumberyard before, I…

Upwards to 70% of the XBOX360/PS3 generation AAA games ran on the Unreal Engine. For the XBONE/PS4 gen its 60% Unreal 30% Unity 10% stuff like CryEngine. It'd be very hard to knock Unreal off its throne since it's very, very well written and essentially free (you pay 5% of profits for commercial use when you go above a certain threshold). So no, there aren't any real openings for disruption unless Epic does something…

That's assuming that all game engines are created equal.

I'll give you that Unreal and CryEngine are similar enough to make that comment, but there's plenty of space for innovation within engines. Amazon seems to be trying their hand at it with twitch integration for example.

In general, game development is filled with archaic processes, boilerplate, inefficient workflows etc. Unity3d was the jQuery of game development in that regard, and we're nowhere near peak.

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#89

Post by izacus » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 9:19 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #66

bm3719 wrote: post #40

After getting my refund, I've been watching the SC narrative unfold from the sidelines with interest. There's enough things that've gone awry in this project to write a book about (and I guess if you were to collect all of Derek Smart's writings, that's what you'd have). For me, the main deal breakers and why I got out were that I felt substantively bait-and-switched when you compare the current "game" to what was or…

>> compare the current "game" to what was originally promised That's a real issue with crowdfunding. More often than not, the devs truly have no idea what the final game will look like. Much of the early funding goes into what are essentially extended market research projects. Alphas are released, feedback taken, and changes made. Everyone expects that devs have some final version of "done" in their heads, but the tr…

What about Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity and quite a few other crowdfunded games that were released and are good?

Re: Star Citizen and Squadron 42 are using Amazon’s Lumberyard game engine

#90

Post by scrollaway » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 9:21 PM UTC

pandaman wrote: post #78

scrollaway wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A bunch of their staff" jumped ship? What are we talking there? 5 people? 10? 50? Unless you're talking about a mass exodus, more high ranking employees left Blizzard Entertainment the past couple of years than that. Is Blizzard a sinking ship as well?

A simple linkedin search returns about a hundred. With the total number of employees about two hundred and the company having been around for about five years, it's hardly comparable to Blizzard, which has thousands of employees and contractors and had been there for decades.

The point I failed to make is that high (double digit) employee turnover is extremely common in game dev, especially at low ranks; and unlike Blizzard, CIG is not an exceptional place to work at.

If you want to see what "people jumping ship" looks like, you should be directing your eyes towards Zynga: Constant layoffs, extremely high turnover including the executive level and plummeting revenue. Nothing like CIG.