Game On?

SamuraiCoder

Shared on Wed, 08/22/2007 - 14:25

I'm in the software biz.

I wish it was game development but I have to settle for more business-centric fare. Despite that fact, games are software and require the same processes as developing an accounting package or photo sharing web site.

I oversee a few development teams working on different products. One QA team handles testing of all these products. Thanks to varying degrees of delay, we are looking at three MAJOR releases in QA at the same time. My QA Manager's wife is also so pregnant that if she doesn't have the baby by Thursday's doctor's appointment, the doc will schedule an induction. Within seven days I am going to lose my QA Manager for two weeks.

Have you taken the time to look over the credits for your favorite game?

You should.

Developing software these days is a bitch! Windows XP vs Vista vs OS X. IE vs Firefox vs Safari. 1.2 GHz vs 2.8 GHz vs 3.46GHz Dual Core.

360 vs PS3 vs PC.

I'm feeling sympathetic to the 2K Boston guys and the firestorm kicked up about the BioShock widescreen issue. I don't agree with how 2K handled the cropping, I just sympathize with a team that worked their ass off to build one hell of a game.

The same with the Silicon Knights vs Epic lawsuit. I've worked with licensed technology before and good code and support are critical to its successful use. I feel for both sides on this one. There is so much pressure to get more done in a shorter time frame while spending less money.

So I guess my point here is to show love to the folks working in the trenches. If you love a game, send email to the developer. Write a nice long letter about what you like. Those things get printed and pinned on bulletin boards and taped on cubical walls. It helps that animator or tester or designer or engine programmer put their best into the next game.

And aren't we all about the next great game?

Comments

SamuraiCoder's picture
Submitted by SamuraiCoder on Wed, 08/22/2007 - 15:05
TANK, if you've seen certain "making of" docs for any of your favorite movies, they sometimes show the monitor the director uses while reviewing the shot. These monitors are 4:3 with black lines across the monitor to show where the letterboxing for 16:9 will be. I don't think it was about the res. I think it was about a certain point of view. A camera with a 50mm lense is supposed to be close to the FOV experienced by the human eye. I think they were going for that and the 4:3 aspect ratio cramped to much to the left and right. If they went that way it would be the 4:3 users bitching. I don't think it was ineptitude. I think it was a considered decision. I happen to agree with many that it was the wrong one.
Kyosogi's picture
Submitted by Kyosogi on Wed, 08/22/2007 - 14:27
Well said.
ATC_1982's picture
Submitted by ATC_1982 on Wed, 08/22/2007 - 14:30
So if I wanted to say write a letter to Rare and cuss them out. I mean say thank you how would I go about doing that. J/K Nice write and if any of your guys need moral support let me know I'll write A letter that is more than a paragraph.
TANK's picture
Submitted by TANK on Wed, 08/22/2007 - 14:43
I don't know how 2K could have done something liek that and thought they could get away with it. That kind of stuff doesn't fly anymore, just like when COD3 was upresed from 530p or whatever it was rendered at. Gamers figure this stuff out today and they're vocal about it across the internet. Developers can't get away with this kind of stuff anymore. That being said, my guess is they couldn't get the frame rates up supporting the higher res 720p screen so they did what they needed to in order to keep the game visually stunning but the frame rates at or above 30fps.

Join our Universe

Connect with 2o2p