AMD Delays Battlefield 4 Mantle Patch

[spat55]

AMD should never of gone anywhere near EA, and gave Nvidia their blessing 🙁

 

[rolli59]

Well and all those people that I have seen on the forum talking about how big an advance mantle is giving AMD cards in BF4!
Lets see benchmarks when it is out!

 

[ShavedApe]

@ magnetite2 the gaming industry used to regularly postpone games it was actually common practice to push back release dates. The current way of doing things is new and is of detriment to the industry.

I really do hope Mantle succeeds but I will be swapping out my 2 7970's for a 780 ti before the patch gets here. If Mantle is good and gets supported I will happily switch back in the future but for now I want things like shadowplay.

 

[redeemer]

Let´s see if AMD starts on the right foot this new year.

Well they are already on the back foot with both this and their driver fix phase thing, so... 😗

i dont understand the fanyboy cutting down... this isn't fanboy, mantel will be available to everyone including nvidia and intel. ignorance.

Pretty sure It only benefits GCN video cards even the older 6000 series cards wont get support. Yea you will still be able to run games that use mantle but you wont get any benefit from optimizations.

That's because AMD is choosing to only support GCN cards with Mantle, but they made the API freely available so intel or Nvidia could support mantle with any of there cards if they want too.

So you are saying that an API written specifically for the GCN architecture will also work on the Kepler and Maxwell architecture? That would mean that they are one and the same would it not?

The way mantle is programmed currently only supports GCN and its proprietary at the moment. Again AMD stated that Mantle will be open, meaning Nvidia and Intel can take advantage of low level programming using dev tools.

 

[Keivz]

AMD might want to focus on the litecoin mining business given how incredibly well their cards seem to be selling. It'd make sticking with nvidia that much easier.

 

[rwinches]

New Years Resolutions For Toms Commenters:
Knock Off the Full Quotes. ( Especially the Full Quotes of Full Quotes )
Knock off The Mini Blogs ( Nobody Special comes to mind but there are others )
Knock Off the Condemnation of New Tech.
Knock Off Responding to How-to Queries. (That belong in the Forum )

 

[rdc85]

I'm gonna said... I would happly wait ... (not only at BF4)....

It's better to get it right after delayed launch, than rushed launch and try patch everything later.. (include DLC/expansion money milking)

todays game so much broken and plagued by greedy minds, it's sad.....

 

[pogsnet]

They delay it coz of some much bug to fix on BF4 now. It is much important to fix the problem before any bling bling added for display.

 

[Mousemonkey]

What? A problem with getting something right for Battlefield 4? No, it couldn't be. Say it ain't so. Actually, what is really surprising is that they didn't just release it when promised even though it doesn't work and let the paying customers be guinea pigs / test subjects / beta testers... like EA did with the rest of the game... on every platform. I'm sure if it was up to EA or DICE the Mantle patch would be out right now and there would be millions of angry AMD GPU owners.

I just want to see a with and without comparison, the whole wait and see approach was to be expected.

 

[goodguy713]

mining will only be profitable for a few more months and then things will go back to normal. As the difficulty rises people will stop making as much money and then there will be a flood of used amd cards on the market.. as every one will end up trying to recoup their investment. Plus side i will say that amd video cards tend to hold value longer than previously.

 

[iatemyelf]

I really hope this big graphics+10hr game play era dies soon. I'd rather have 2010 graphics but with 2000 game play as opposed to what we get now with 2013 graphics and next to nothing game play (which I label as anything under 20hrs of single player play). I'm not sure who keeps deciding my game play should be $6/hr but this sucks. Bring back less graphics and 3x the play time with more engrossing stories etc.

I hope EA goes bankrupt soon, along with all other devs that make games that are ~$6/hr of fun. I'm tired of $60 games that are finished in a saturday. They are worth $15 tops and microtransactions should be illegal. Literally you go to jail for it...LOL - all of that crap should be IN the game already at $60.

then you can buy a jrpg, no? or a civ game? or read reviews before you buy a game and see if it's up to your standards for length of play time? did you buy games in the 80s/90s where games would get up to $80 or $90 and you could finish them in a few hours, sometimes less? games finally leveled out in the late 90s at about $60 each... games are STILL $60 (funny, huh?), yet now we have games that are developed by hundreds of people and cost millions of dollars, meanwhile that $60 game in '94 you could beat in an afternoon and was made by maybe a dozen people and cost in the thousands. we are already getting wayyyyy more than we used to for less money. the more you know...

 

[COLGeek]

Off topic submissions have been deleted from the thread. Please stick to the subject folks. Thanks.

 

[castl3bravo]

Please someone just give me something that's a viable alternative to DirectX, for gaming on the Intel desktop, and I'll buy your stinking hardware.

Windows7 doesn't do DirectX 11.2 unless you to Windows8 (Grrrrr). Add to this mess the Microsoft Advantage crap (if my motherboard dies so will my install of Windows and any software CDs I can't find GGGGGGggggrrrrrrr). I want to be done with Microsoft's anti-competitive and "stick it to the consumer" practices. If you're a Microsoft lover then expect them to lighten your wallet for you.

Mantle is a beacon of light leading me out of Microsoft's dark tunnel of evil dependencies.

 

[somebodyspecial]

I really hope this big graphics+10hr game play era dies soon. I'd rather have 2010 graphics but with 2000 game play as opposed to what we get now with 2013 graphics and next to nothing game play (which I label as anything under 20hrs of single player play). I'm not sure who keeps deciding my game play should be $6/hr but this sucks. Bring back less graphics and 3x the play time with more engrossing stories etc.

I hope EA goes bankrupt soon, along with all other devs that make games that are ~$6/hr of fun. I'm tired of $60 games that are finished in a saturday. They are worth $15 tops and microtransactions should be illegal. Literally you go to jail for it...LOL - all of that crap should be IN the game already at $60.

then you can buy a jrpg, no? or a civ game? or read reviews before you buy a game and see if it's up to your standards for length of play time? did you buy games in the 80s/90s where games would get up to $80 or $90 and you could finish them in a few hours, sometimes less? games finally leveled out in the late 90s at about $60 each... games are STILL $60 (funny, huh?), yet now we have games that are developed by hundreds of people and cost millions of dollars, meanwhile that $60 game in '94 you could beat in an afternoon and was made by maybe a dozen people and cost in the thousands. we are already getting wayyyyy more than we used to for less money. the more you know...

In the 80's I bought games for $29.99 (wizardry's, ultima's, bard's tale games etc...never paid over $35). I don't remember that changing much in the 90's either (maybe late 90's). In 2003 I bought Wiz8 day 1 retail for $53 at Frys, but others were hitting $60 then IIRC. I don't remember any $80-90 launch prices (maybe some collectors editions or something, I'm not talking about those - I'd never pay that crap). I don't remember finishing any game before 2000 even in one night. I take that back, Rome Pathway to Power I think was in there and I finished in 3hrs and promptly returned it that night for a refund..LOL ('93 or so). It was also $35.

We are NOT getting more than we used to (better looking maybe, but less game time). Anyone thinking we are not getting milked these days ($150 car in GT6? I thought I got the whole game for the initial $60...ROFL - you used to get all cars or unlock free) is ignoring all the evidence or working at a BIG dev like EA. Now if we're talking Steam/Gog etc, then yes, I CAN get more by being far smarter about WHEN I buy the games 😉 It doesn't require 100 people and 100mil to make a game today. Torchlight was made with 20, and just a few mil. Witcher 2 was made for $7mil each (I think they had around 40-50 working on it). Legends of Grimrock (which can be beat in 13hrs or so) was made by 4 guys. Grimrock2 is made by 6 guys now. The last one sold for $13-15 day one. I doubt 2nd will be over $20 even thought they say they're doubling the game size/length. Do the math Big devs need to go so we can get back to what smaller devs used to do. I used to get games that lasted 30-100+hrs. I used to have to read a manual to understand how to effectively play the games (because so much more was going on under the hood than just graphics). Today things are dumbed down for casual crap and short attention spans.

You don't earn the worst company in USA 2yrs in a row by giving people great stuff they want. You get it by SCREWING them and then they give you the award you so deserve 😉 I really hope they get done soon so we may actually see Mantle soon, but I don't think you'll see more than 20% if we're lucky as only one dev said it's possible. The sales of the games you seem to think are giving us MORE, are selling 20-80% less than last year, because they people clearly understand they are NOT getting what they paid for now.

 

[BorgOvermind]

BF4 engine/optimization is a disaster compared to the latest CoD.
CoD works infinitely better on any configuration.

 

[somebodyspecial]

mining will only be profitable for a few more months and then things will go back to normal. As the difficulty rises people will stop making as much money and then there will be a flood of used amd cards on the market.. as every one will end up trying to recoup their investment. Plus side i will say that amd video cards tend to hold value longer than previously.

Yes it will end in ~6 months with Asics for LTC (current AMD buyers) or less. I did the math on my 5850, electricity costs, etc and can pocket ~12-13 coins in a year running solid 24/7. I wouldn't make much unless it was far above today's price. If all things stayed the same and it was $100ea, I'd be happy in a year ($1200-1300 - the electricity, AC to cool the heat as it puts off a lot maxed all day-would buy me a new card or something). But if the price stays at ~30, I would be wasting my year for a few bucks and it will get more and more competitive during that year so I'm thinking reality is I'd bag maybe 7-9 coins making it worse. Of course if they go to $1000 next year, I may be crying..ROFL.

I wouldn't buy a used AMD card this year or next. They will be run into the ground by 24/7 OC'ed to max use grinding out coins. I will be kind of like buying a used car a year after an event like Katrina. Tons of cards rusted etc and just worthless for quality by then unless you're so poor you have to buy one of these junkers. We are talking cards that will run maxed out and probably at 94c since that is the shipping temps (and all you get right now is REF) and these will be OC'ed to max for faster perf mining. It isn't good to redline your car for a year either...LOL. This would have to shorten the cards lifespan some.

 

[iatemyelf]

In the 80's I bought games for $29.99 (wizardry's, ultima's, bard's tale games etc...never paid over $35). I don't remember that changing much in the 90's either (maybe late 90's). In 2003 I bought Wiz8 day 1 retail for $53 at Frys, but others were hitting $60 then IIRC. I don't remember any $80-90 launch prices (maybe some collectors editions or something, I'm not talking about those - I'd never pay that crap). I don't remember finishing any game before 2000 even in one night. I take that back, Rome Pathway to Power I think was in there and I finished in 3hrs and promptly returned it that night for a refund..LOL ('93 or so). It was also $35.

We are NOT getting more than we used to (better looking maybe, but less game time). Anyone thinking we are not getting milked these days ($150 car in GT6? I thought I got the whole game for the initial $60...ROFL - you used to get all cars or unlock free) is ignoring all the evidence or working at a BIG dev like EA. Now if we're talking Steam/Gog etc, then yes, I CAN get more by being far smarter about WHEN I buy the games 😉 It doesn't require 100 people and 100mil to make a game today. Torchlight was made with 20, and just a few mil. Witcher 2 was made for $7mil each (I think they had around 40-50 working on it). Legends of Grimrock (which can be beat in 13hrs or so) was made by 4 guys. Grimrock2 is made by 6 guys now. The last one sold for $13-15 day one. I doubt 2nd will be over $20 even thought they say they're doubling the game size/length. Do the math Big devs need to go so we can get back to what smaller devs used to do. I used to get games that lasted 30-100+hrs. I used to have to read a manual to understand how to effectively play the games (because so much more was going on under the hood than just graphics). Today things are dumbed down for casual crap and short attention spans.

You don't earn the worst company in USA 2yrs in a row by giving people great stuff they want. You get it by SCREWING them and then they give you the award you so deserve 😉 I really hope they get done soon so we may actually see Mantle soon, but I don't think you'll see more than 20% if we're lucky as only one dev said it's possible. The sales of the games you seem to think are giving us MORE, are selling 20-80% less than last year, because they people clearly understand they are NOT getting what they paid for now.

you are simply factually wrong. you really don't have to take my word for it... a quick google search will tell you that games were just as much as today ($60) or did go up to $80 - $90 for NES, SNES, Genesis, N64. regardless, it took you 30+ hours to beat mario games? sonic? metal gear? castlevania? zelda? goldeneye? tomb raider? etc. etc. etc.

nobody is forcing you to pay $150 to get that car so that entire argument is invalid and absolutely should be ignored. no, it doesn't require 100 people or 100 million, where did i say that? i didn't. thank you for proving my point that they cost millions though. and the witcher 2 only had a dev team of 40 - 50? then why does it take almost a half hour for the credits to finish rolling? i'm sure if i looked up grimrock and torchlight, i'd find more than 4 and 20 names on each respective credits, too. i'm not sure you understand how a production works. you do know the typical movie is not made by just a camera and an actor, right? same goes for games. you can't just cherry pick a select few small production companies and say "this is how it is and should be for every game ever made". that's ridiculous.

EVERY game has more going on "under the hood" than just graphics. you can still get games that last 30 - 100+ hours, so i have no idea what you're talking about. sure, if you exclusively only bought those kinds of games back in the day, like, say jrpg's as i originally stated, and then all of a sudden you decided "i'm gonna start playing modern warfare".... you can't compare. are you going to say that skyrim is a casual, ~10 hour game? where did bethesda backtrack and make the elder scrolls games super short? if you're going to jump into another genre that has NEVER had such game lengths and compare it to adventure and rpg games that traditionally have always had super long game lengths, you're going to be as sorely disappointed as you've made it clear you already are.

so let's sum it up... if a game 20 years ago cost $60 and you could beat it in 10 hours, hell, even if it cost $30... and today a game with wayyyyyy more production value (graphics, music, design, etc) still costs $30 and takes you 10 hours, you are ABSOLUTELY getting more for your money. i'm also not sure you understand inflation, cost or even how money works.

 

[somebodyspecial]

In the 80's I bought games for $29.99 (wizardry's, ultima's, bard's tale games etc...never paid over $35). I don't remember that changing much in the 90's either (maybe late 90's). In 2003 I bought Wiz8 day 1 retail for $53 at Frys, but others were hitting $60 then IIRC. I don't remember any $80-90 launch prices (maybe some collectors editions or something, I'm not talking about those - I'd never pay that crap). I don't remember finishing any game before 2000 even in one night. I take that back, Rome Pathway to Power I think was in there and I finished in 3hrs and promptly returned it that night for a refund..LOL ('93 or so). It was also $35.

We are NOT getting more than we used to (better looking maybe, but less game time). Anyone thinking we are not getting milked these days ($150 car in GT6? I thought I got the whole game for the initial $60...ROFL - you used to get all cars or unlock free) is ignoring all the evidence or working at a BIG dev like EA. Now if we're talking Steam/Gog etc, then yes, I CAN get more by being far smarter about WHEN I buy the games 😉 It doesn't require 100 people and 100mil to make a game today. Torchlight was made with 20, and just a few mil. Witcher 2 was made for $7mil each (I think they had around 40-50 working on it). Legends of Grimrock (which can be beat in 13hrs or so) was made by 4 guys. Grimrock2 is made by 6 guys now. The last one sold for $13-15 day one. I doubt 2nd will be over $20 even thought they say they're doubling the game size/length. Do the math Big devs need to go so we can get back to what smaller devs used to do. I used to get games that lasted 30-100+hrs. I used to have to read a manual to understand how to effectively play the games (because so much more was going on under the hood than just graphics). Today things are dumbed down for casual crap and short attention spans.

You don't earn the worst company in USA 2yrs in a row by giving people great stuff they want. You get it by SCREWING them and then they give you the award you so deserve 😉 I really hope they get done soon so we may actually see Mantle soon, but I don't think you'll see more than 20% if we're lucky as only one dev said it's possible. The sales of the games you seem to think are giving us MORE, are selling 20-80% less than last year, because they people clearly understand they are NOT getting what they paid for now.

you are simply factually wrong. you really don't have to take my word for it... a quick google search will tell you that games were just as much as today ($60) or did go up to $80 - $90 for NES, SNES, Genesis, N64. regardless, it took you 30+ hours to beat mario games? sonic? metal gear? castlevania? zelda? goldeneye? tomb raider? etc. etc. etc.

nobody is forcing you to pay $150 to get that car so that entire argument is invalid and absolutely should be ignored. no, it doesn't require 100 people or 100 million, where did i say that? i didn't. thank you for proving my point that they cost millions though. and the witcher 2 only had a dev team of 40 - 50? then why does it take almost a half hour for the credits to finish rolling? i'm sure if i looked up grimrock and torchlight, i'd find more than 4 and 20 names on each respective credits, too. i'm not sure you understand how a production works. you do know the typical movie is not made by just a camera and an actor, right? same goes for games. you can't just cherry pick a select few small production companies and say "this is how it is and should be for every game ever made". that's ridiculous.

EVERY game has more going on "under the hood" than just graphics. you can still get games that last 30 - 100+ hours, so i have no idea what you're talking about. sure, if you exclusively only bought those kinds of games back in the day, like, say jrpg's as i originally stated, and then all of a sudden you decided "i'm gonna start playing modern warfare".... you can't compare. are you going to say that skyrim is a casual, ~10 hour game? where did bethesda backtrack and make the elder scrolls games super short? if you're going to jump into another genre that has NEVER had such game lengths and compare it to adventure and rpg games that traditionally have always had super long game lengths, you're going to be as sorely disappointed as you've made it clear you already are.

so let's sum it up... if a game 20 years ago cost $60 and you could beat it in 10 hours, hell, even if it cost $30... and today a game with wayyyyyy more production value (graphics, music, design, etc) still costs $30 and takes you 10 hours, you are ABSOLUTELY getting more for your money. i'm also not sure you understand inflation, cost or even how money works.

ROFL. I was talking PC games. I've never been in favor of console's ripping us off. I am a console hater (see all my many posts stating this). Sorry, you are making stuff up. Google them. Grimrock was made by 4 people, grimrock 2 has another 2 hires last I checked. Torchlight people claimed it was made with 20 people in an interview you can google that too. Instead of claiming I'm wrong prove it.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/18/torchlight-ii-faces-giant-rival-diablo-iii?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ign%2Farticles+%28IGN+All+Articles%29
Direct from the CEO, you can sell a game for $20 and make the same $14 you do on a $60 box...NO need for these prices if you kill the big dogs and go small dev which mobile will help force this to happen. As he says, remove the BS marketing etc, just use word of mouth and make a great game and ship direct (meaning download etc). That cuts out a lot of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runic_Games
Jeez, lets just make it simple for you.
"As of mid-2009, the company employed no fewer than 26 people."
Torchlight was an 11 month project
"Runic Games was founded in August 2008 by Travis Baldree, Max Schaefer, Erich Schaefer and Peter Hu.[5] The company formed specifically for the purpose of keeping the Mythos team together to develop a new action RPG video game as a "spiritual successor" to their previous project.[6] Following the dissolution of Flagship Studios in 2008, all 14 members of the Seattle team that developed Mythos signed onto Runic Games."

So basically 20 people made it right? The top 4, another 14, and even at the end only had 26 employees (probably some tech support etc added near launch got them to 26, but they don't make the game). Further illustrating the point, the entire Flagship studios was 14 people...LOL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torchlight
"Full production on the game started around November 2008, giving the entire project a development period of approximately 11 months.[33] As of July 2009, 25 team members were working at Runic Games."
The sound composer was 26th, Matt Uelmen from Diablo fame. It costs millions to make a game, but not anywhere near 100mil when you axe all the fat. I'm guessing the 21-25 are tech support added near end as the game came in oct.

BTW...both torchlights were only $20. See the point? Same profits for them, 2mil units+ sold on torchlight2, so basically they could all be millionaires now, even after giving 9mil to steam etc (avg $15 a copy most likely after early sales at 20, get 30mil-9mil to steam etc after the 30% cut)...LOL. Whatever. Keep paying ridiculous pricing and enjoy it. I won't do either. None of the crap you say is true if you remove the big devs from the process as shown many times.

Shroud of Avatar is being made for ~4mil by Richard Garriot and friends. The torchlight guys are mostly old diablo guys. I want the game MAKERS to sell me my games, instead of publishers which screws us on pricing, DRM etc.
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?page_id=29385
ENTIRE team 24 people. And you don't have to believe me, the pic says happy holidays from the ENTIRE TEAM...ROFL. Scroll down for the pic. It will cost between 3-4mil, with 3mil funded from crowdfunding raised.
https://d2sx9mrt4zumaq.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SotA_Team_HappyHolidays_small1.png


http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23442
Max Schaefer RUNIC GAMES CEO interview:
"The Torchlight team, comprised largely of Mythos vets "plus several new people," is up to about 22 staffers, says Schaefer, and the team size helps with efficiency, focus, and making good tools."
"All the staff works together in the same open room: "Instead of having to schedule a meeting, you just kind of turn around and talk," Schaefer explains. "You can really only do that with a small team -- with 30 or 40 people, it'd be too chaotic. But it keeps everyone tight, keeps everyone really engaged and involved, and we save a lot of time." "

You getting the message yet? I didn't say it HE DID! 30-40 is CHAOTIC! Hmm....well then...

Grimrock used family members for beta testing and voices etc...LOL. You are barking up the wrong tree.
http://www.grimrock.net/
Feel free to go to their forums and actually talk to the 6 people making the game Same 4 members from the first game + 2 new guys. But I think they have 7 now...LOL. You can check out the Xmas cards from them all on their site, names included on each The first was done with 1yr as temp work while the 4 guys had jobs, then in the last 6 months they quit work to finish full time. WOW. Millionaires now
http://www.grimrock.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/reset_20K_thanks-300x207.jpg
Xmas snap of all members...Yep...SEVEN. We done yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inexile_Entertainment
11-50 employees...Surely you know who brian fargo is? Bards Tale etc ring a bell? Fallout? Interplay ring a bell?
Wasteland2 (2014), Tides of Numeria(2015) (so 50 people, two games being made now, 25 each?).
Basically the team that did wasteland 1, is totally on board for wasteland 2 (small teams back then, like these now). I'm sure many of their 50 were hired recently, but they've been around since 2002.

I can credit my mother in a book I write. It doesn't mean she had anything to do with writing it...LOL. You can buy stock in CDProject (warsaw exchange) and find they make witcher 2 for ~7.5mil about the same for 1, from their financial statements. The 3rd coming up is clearly expanding but it's going for 3 versions I think so cost is ~15mil for the game and amazingly they're publisher will pay 25mil for marketing. But that's not the price of the game, and on a PC this marketing is silly, all of us KNOW what the 3rd is so most of that is aimed at consoles no doubt. I'd argue today it's largely a waste of money. You can market online very cheap or free. Heck give it to the review sites and if you have a great game buyers will come. Grimrock for instance, no ad campaign from Almost Human at all. Forums, reviews, Gog etc did it all for them. Word of mouth. CDPR is trying to go too big IMHO for stuff like cut scenes etc. One guy does those at almost human for grimrock2 Most wish they'd spend 25mil on the GAME, 15 on marketing. The costs were much cheaper the first time as it was PC. Witcher 2 went up due to xbox. Witcher 3 due to ps4 being added (maybe even a xbox360/ps3 also?). Witcher 1 was made by a small team (but for PC only so easier). Witcher 2 added a console so of course you need some xbox360 guys added to port it all. More needed for 3. But if we're talking a PC game (like I was) it's a small team as noted many times here. I could name more teams doing this but you should see you're wrong already.

Wii-Wiiu/Vita/3DS games are made for under 5mil with 3ds/vita coming in at under 2mil. Lower res, smaller assets, easier to make etc. But again, I couldn't care less about consoles, I want them dead and don't buy their games. All the games you mentioned are what I call part of the problem (consoles)... They give away hardware at losses mostly, then have to screw you on the games to make it up. Bad model and a dying one.

I shouldn't have to PAY for any car in a car game. I shouldn't have to grind for 2 years to get it either (which is what they did in GT6, you can read everywhere you grind forever or pay up). This is milking your customers plain and simple. I never had to buy cars in Nascar, GT, etc before, why now? Nobody is forcing me to buy this crap, but when I pay $60 why am I charged for stuff already in there? MILKING. Clearly from above you don't need to spend 100mil to make a great game and make great money.

I'd much rather see all the big boys die, and the teams go off themselves and make great games like the ones mentioned above. Take the marketing out, milking out, remove shareholders pushing games out early to satisfy them and we will get better games. The game MAKERS get rich then instead of some CEO's who make nothing in games (kotick makes nothing right? EA's ceo etc make nothing in a game). Can you make a game that is really expensive? Yeah, but why when clearly you don't have to if done right? Today you don't even have to make your own engine, and the ones they have (unreal 3/4 etc) do most of the heavy lifting for you allows much smaller teams. You can download the SDK for unreal and make your whole game before giving up a dime (or pay a lic fee up front to avoid a percent of your game at the end) with any size team you want or can afford. If memory serves if you go this way, you pay them 20% of sales. Making games is easier than ever with today's tools.

 

[slimething]

Chivalry Medieval Warfare uses the Unreal engine and it is a complete joke. Anything over 32 players and it lags horribly. After BF2, no SDK has been available for Battlefield games preciously because the tools are NOT easier. In fact, they don't exist for open source use.

 

[iatemyelf]

ROFL. I was talking PC games. I've never been in favor of console's ripping us off. I am a console hater (see all my many posts stating this). Sorry, you are making stuff up. Google them. Grimrock was made by 4 people, grimrock 2 has another 2 hires last I checked. Torchlight people claimed it was made with 20 people in an interview you can google that too. Instead of claiming I'm wrong prove it.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/18/torchlight-ii-faces-giant-rival-diablo-iii?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ign%2Farticles+%28IGN+All+Articles%29
Direct from the CEO, you can sell a game for $20 and make the same $14 you do on a $60 box...NO need for these prices if you kill the big dogs and go small dev which mobile will help force this to happen. As he says, remove the BS marketing etc, just use word of mouth and make a great game and ship direct (meaning download etc). That cuts out a lot of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runic_Games
Jeez, lets just make it simple for you.
"As of mid-2009, the company employed no fewer than 26 people."
Torchlight was an 11 month project
"Runic Games was founded in August 2008 by Travis Baldree, Max Schaefer, Erich Schaefer and Peter Hu.[5] The company formed specifically for the purpose of keeping the Mythos team together to develop a new action RPG video game as a "spiritual successor" to their previous project.[6] Following the dissolution of Flagship Studios in 2008, all 14 members of the Seattle team that developed Mythos signed onto Runic Games."

So basically 20 people made it right? The top 4, another 14, and even at the end only had 26 employees (probably some tech support etc added near launch got them to 26, but they don't make the game). Further illustrating the point, the entire Flagship studios was 14 people...LOL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torchlight
"Full production on the game started around November 2008, giving the entire project a development period of approximately 11 months.[33] As of July 2009, 25 team members were working at Runic Games."
The sound composer was 26th, Matt Uelmen from Diablo fame. It costs millions to make a game, but not anywhere near 100mil when you axe all the fat. I'm guessing the 21-25 are tech support added near end as the game came in oct.

BTW...both torchlights were only $20. See the point? Same profits for them, 2mil units+ sold on torchlight2, so basically they could all be millionaires now, even after giving 9mil to steam etc (avg $15 a copy most likely after early sales at 20, get 30mil-9mil to steam etc after the 30% cut)...LOL. Whatever. Keep paying ridiculous pricing and enjoy it. I won't do either. None of the crap you say is true if you remove the big devs from the process as shown many times.

Shroud of Avatar is being made for ~4mil by Richard Garriot and friends. The torchlight guys are mostly old diablo guys. I want the game MAKERS to sell me my games, instead of publishers which screws us on pricing, DRM etc.
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?page_id=29385
ENTIRE team 24 people. And you don't have to believe me, the pic says happy holidays from the ENTIRE TEAM...ROFL. Scroll down for the pic. It will cost between 3-4mil, with 3mil funded from crowdfunding raised.
https://d2sx9mrt4zumaq.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SotA_Team_HappyHolidays_small1.png


http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23442
Max Schaefer RUNIC GAMES CEO interview:
"The Torchlight team, comprised largely of Mythos vets "plus several new people," is up to about 22 staffers, says Schaefer, and the team size helps with efficiency, focus, and making good tools."
"All the staff works together in the same open room: "Instead of having to schedule a meeting, you just kind of turn around and talk," Schaefer explains. "You can really only do that with a small team -- with 30 or 40 people, it'd be too chaotic. But it keeps everyone tight, keeps everyone really engaged and involved, and we save a lot of time." "

You getting the message yet? I didn't say it HE DID! 30-40 is CHAOTIC! Hmm....well then...

Grimrock used family members for beta testing and voices etc...LOL. You are barking up the wrong tree.
http://www.grimrock.net/
Feel free to go to their forums and actually talk to the 6 people making the game Same 4 members from the first game + 2 new guys. But I think they have 7 now...LOL. You can check out the Xmas cards from them all on their site, names included on each The first was done with 1yr as temp work while the 4 guys had jobs, then in the last 6 months they quit work to finish full time. WOW. Millionaires now
http://www.grimrock.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/reset_20K_thanks-300x207.jpg
Xmas snap of all members...Yep...SEVEN. We done yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inexile_Entertainment
11-50 employees...Surely you know who brian fargo is? Bards Tale etc ring a bell? Fallout? Interplay ring a bell?
Wasteland2 (2014), Tides of Numeria(2015) (so 50 people, two games being made now, 25 each?).
Basically the team that did wasteland 1, is totally on board for wasteland 2 (small teams back then, like these now). I'm sure many of their 50 were hired recently, but they've been around since 2002.

I can credit my mother in a book I write. It doesn't mean she had anything to do with writing it...LOL. You can buy stock in CDProject (warsaw exchange) and find they make witcher 2 for ~7.5mil about the same for 1, from their financial statements. The 3rd coming up is clearly expanding but it's going for 3 versions I think so cost is ~15mil for the game and amazingly they're publisher will pay 25mil for marketing. But that's not the price of the game, and on a PC this marketing is silly, all of us KNOW what the 3rd is so most of that is aimed at consoles no doubt. I'd argue today it's largely a waste of money. You can market online very cheap or free. Heck give it to the review sites and if you have a great game buyers will come. Grimrock for instance, no ad campaign from Almost Human at all. Forums, reviews, Gog etc did it all for them. Word of mouth. CDPR is trying to go too big IMHO for stuff like cut scenes etc. One guy does those at almost human for grimrock2 Most wish they'd spend 25mil on the GAME, 15 on marketing. The costs were much cheaper the first time as it was PC. Witcher 2 went up due to xbox. Witcher 3 due to ps4 being added (maybe even a xbox360/ps3 also?). Witcher 1 was made by a small team (but for PC only so easier). Witcher 2 added a console so of course you need some xbox360 guys added to port it all. More needed for 3. But if we're talking a PC game (like I was) it's a small team as noted many times here. I could name more teams doing this but you should see you're wrong already.

Wii-Wiiu/Vita/3DS games are made for under 5mil with 3ds/vita coming in at under 2mil. Lower res, smaller assets, easier to make etc. But again, I couldn't care less about consoles, I want them dead and don't buy their games. All the games you mentioned are what I call part of the problem (consoles)... They give away hardware at losses mostly, then have to screw you on the games to make it up. Bad model and a dying one.

I shouldn't have to PAY for any car in a car game. I shouldn't have to grind for 2 years to get it either (which is what they did in GT6, you can read everywhere you grind forever or pay up). This is milking your customers plain and simple. I never had to buy cars in Nascar, GT, etc before, why now? Nobody is forcing me to buy this crap, but when I pay $60 why am I charged for stuff already in there? MILKING. Clearly from above you don't need to spend 100mil to make a great game and make great money.

I'd much rather see all the big boys die, and the teams go off themselves and make great games like the ones mentioned above. Take the marketing out, milking out, remove shareholders pushing games out early to satisfy them and we will get better games. The game MAKERS get rich then instead of some CEO's who make nothing in games (kotick makes nothing right? EA's ceo etc make nothing in a game). Can you make a game that is really expensive? Yeah, but why when clearly you don't have to if done right? Today you don't even have to make your own engine, and the ones they have (unreal 3/4 etc) do most of the heavy lifting for you allows much smaller teams. You can download the SDK for unreal and make your whole game before giving up a dime (or pay a lic fee up front to avoid a percent of your game at the end) with any size team you want or can afford. If memory serves if you go this way, you pay them 20% of sales. Making games is easier than ever with today's tools.

wow. what a disaster. perhaps if you actually read what i wrote instead of going off on tangents about nothing related to the topic at hand and proposing straw man arguments you'll understand how ridiculous you sound. i sincerely doubt you'll do that, though. you keep saying i'm "wrong" by arguing points i didn't even make and completely ignoring the points that i've made that have already proved you wrong. it's quite obvious any kind of discourse with you will just be an exercise in frustration. good day.

 

[wh3resmycar]

funny how these kids don't understand development cost and time. those costs (a lot of) money.