Spurn the computer game industry • Hacker News Board

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#21

Post by KellAG » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:24 PM UTC

The graphics card fetish point was valid 10 years ago, but not now. It used to be that all developers were requiring new and high end features--often simply because they weren't optimizing their renderers--but now any cheap graphics card is good enough for everything except a handful of triple-A games with all the knobs turned to 10. Especially if you buy indie stuff on Steam, you'll have no worries with a 5 year old video card, and you can play so many great games.

The graphics card comparers and obsessors are paying lots of money for higher power requirements, more noise, and higher failure rates. They can be safely ignored as a market.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#22

Post by tomdeal » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:26 PM UTC

The author seems to want to return to "Create games as a hobby" instead of having an industry that creates the best creative jobs involving a computer. There has been so much development in the last 10 years in computer games that would not have been possible if there wasn't an industry. Of course there is some unnecessary hardware and depending on your income, there are parts that you can't afford. On the other hand, thanks to current game engines (which would not be affordable for indie developers if there wasn't an industry), there are so many possible hardware configurations to play the game you want on, you just don't have to buy the newest stuff every two years anymore. Especially for indie developers, the current games industry landscape is a big opportunity. Yes it is very hard to be successful, but it was never easier to create a game, and that would not be possible if we stick to open source games and old hardware.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#23

Post by overgard » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:27 PM UTC

I don't really get the advantage of open source games. Operating systems and productivity stuff sure -- you want to know what's running on your computer and ideally you want a community that can improve it. But games? First off, the vast majority of games have a pretty short lifespan of relevancy, by the time you're up to speed on the code base there's a decent chance people have moved on. Also a lot of the code isn't even reused among those who have it. If you want the reusable bits for new games, you can already go get an engine like Unity or Unreal, or if you're building your own engine, thousands of great libraries. For the most part source code to games is interesting on an educational level, but not much else.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#24

Post by magicalist » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:30 PM UTC

aaron-lebo wrote: post #15

jim-greer wrote: post #12

Why does it matter if games are free software? I don't see why they should free as in beer - developers need to get paid. As for being open source, it depends on why you think that’s important. To me, the goals of open source are: - Make sure that you aren't building your business on top of proprietary software. This isn’t relevant for gamers. - To increase the productivity of all software developers. This is achieve…

Because it makes for better games. To me the golden era of gaming was about 10 years ago. Game engines weren't designed to make Hollywood blockbusters (see the current Battlefield engine and series). They were easily moddable. Maybe not surprisingly from that era came Team Fortress Classic, Counter-Strike, Desert Combat (the precursor to Battlefield 2) and mods you've never heard of like Tribes Football which anticip…

10 years ago people were saying the same thing (Team Fortress Classic is getting to be more like two decades ago). There is still a ton of modding going on, maybe even more in absolute terms, but a lot of people who would have gotten into modding back then are making their own games in Unity (and occasionally UE) instead.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#25

Post by detaro » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:31 PM UTC

aaron-lebo wrote: post #15

jim-greer wrote: post #12

Why does it matter if games are free software? I don't see why they should free as in beer - developers need to get paid. As for being open source, it depends on why you think that’s important. To me, the goals of open source are: - Make sure that you aren't building your business on top of proprietary software. This isn’t relevant for gamers. - To increase the productivity of all software developers. This is achieve…

Because it makes for better games. To me the golden era of gaming was about 10 years ago. Game engines weren't designed to make Hollywood blockbusters (see the current Battlefield engine and series). They were easily moddable. Maybe not surprisingly from that era came Team Fortress Classic, Counter-Strike, Desert Combat (the precursor to Battlefield 2) and mods you've never heard of like Tribes Football which anticip…

I would propose that you just don't remember all the games that weren't changeable, didn't have interesting mods, and that just the place where you find those games has shifted. I don't know a moddable recent shooter (possibly because I don't care about shooters, possibly because none exists), but other games, outside the shooter AAAs, have tons of mods.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#26

Post by na85 » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:32 PM UTC

Trying to sell people on FLOSS games by using Wesnoth as an example is like trying to sell cars by pointing to the Ford Pinto.

It's ugly and not very fun.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#27

Post by aaron-lebo » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:37 PM UTC

detaro wrote: post #25

aaron-lebo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it makes for better games. To me the golden era of gaming was about 10 years ago. Game engines weren't designed to make Hollywood blockbusters (see the current Battlefield engine and series). They were easily moddable. Maybe not surprisingly from that era came Team Fortress Classic, Counter-Strike, Desert Combat (the precursor to Battlefield 2) and mods you've never heard of like Tribes Football which anticip…

I would propose that you just don't remember all the games that weren't changeable, didn't have interesting mods, and that just the place where you find those games has shifted. I don't know a moddable recent shooter (possibly because I don't care about shooters, possibly because none exists), but other games, outside the shooter AAAs, have tons of mods.

There's always going to be garbage, but at least if all those mods that nobody remembers were open source, either the games or features could have new life instead of sitting in an empty room somewhere.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#28

Post by xabotage » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:38 PM UTC

detaro wrote: post #19

xabotage wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with a focus on open tools. Luckily, there seems to be quite a few OSS game development tools out there, which is why Unity and Unreal now give away their full platforms for "free". That being said, I'm highly skeptical of the "openness" of those platforms, which is why I can't quite bring myself to abandon Blender as a game engine, even though it is somewhat inferior. The problem is, now that Unreal and Unit…

> game developers and artists are paradoxically so willing to shackle themselves to proprietary software Why is that paradoxical?

By that I mean, given that artists and game developers are often underpaid and exploited, proprietary tools only exacerbate the situation because the artists are forced to pay whatever price the vendor names (even if the company buys the licenses, it just means less resources left to hire more people to alleviate the insane overtime). Independent shops or freelancers are especially at a disadvantage when they have to rely on expensive tools. Just because the business model for using Unreal is favorable now, that may change (and it certainly isn't favorable for people hooked on Autodesk products).

I understand that if no decent alternatives to tools exist, there is a cost-benefit justification for buying good software. But if artists and game developers are so passionate about what they do that they accept more work for less pay, why can't they be more passionate about FOSS? I'm passionate about FOSS precisely because it allowed me to explore and hone my creativity at a time when professional tools seemed well out of reach.

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#29

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:40 PM UTC

aaron-lebo wrote: post #27

detaro wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would propose that you just don't remember all the games that weren't changeable, didn't have interesting mods, and that just the place where you find those games has shifted. I don't know a moddable recent shooter (possibly because I don't care about shooters, possibly because none exists), but other games, outside the shooter AAAs, have tons of mods.

There's always going to be garbage, but at least if all those mods that nobody remembers were open source, either the games or features could have new life instead of sitting in an empty room somewhere.

[deleted]

Re: Spurn the computer game industry

#30

Post by eximius » Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 7:43 PM UTC

I'm more interested in collapsing a few layers of our abstractions to avoid wasting the increases in hardware speed we've achieved. Our computers are so fast but they don't FEEL (as) fast with all the bloat we have on them.