inherit
3367
0
Jul 6, 2019 7:04:45 GMT -6
7
ben2749
9
Jun 25, 2019 16:13:25 GMT -6
June 2019
ben2749
|
Post by ben2749 on Jun 27, 2019 10:02:21 GMT -6
ben2749 And if the Switch version HAD been canceled guess what there would have been a huge backlash of criticism and accusations of theft or wasting of money. They tried to make it work... they are STILL trying to make it work. You invested in a project meaning you gambled that this would turn out the way you wanted it too. It's easy to look back on what is and say you should have done this and this differently but whether you realize it or not no decision would have made everyone happy. You are mistaken when you say it's not your responsibility to understand what your hardware is and isn't capable of, if you buy a car your responsible if you put the wrong type of fuel in it. The Switch version was a replacement of the Wii U version and that's where the money came from, they never originally intended to go on the Switch but they made a good faith effort to use the money for the Wii U in the way it was intended for. I agree from what I've seen that it hasn't worked out so well so far but again that was always a possibility, and they are at least still trying to fix it. If you want to talk compensation you need to understand that you got what you requested and that changing everyone's orders post launch is pulling money they don't have to spend out of their pockets, you may feel entitled to that but your not legally entitled to it. You feel bitter about that, I can understand and sympathize with you but realistically nothing's gonna change. If you wanna talk other forms of compensation then those concerns are best directed directly at 505/fangamer by tagging them, as simply putting them on the form won't express your concerns to anyone that can actually change anything. Either way I suspect you will have to deal with the selection you made in the end. Fair points, and I concede that there's likely nothing they could have done without displeasing some people. However, the point I made in my thread still stands; that being that people who experienced a shipping delay received free Steam keys, and Switch backers deserve them more. Switch backers experienced a delay in the form of a release date delay, and received a product that does not run as well as it should even with the Unreal engine. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction though; do you happen to know how I can get in direct touch with 505/fangamer, and which of the two I should be actually reaching out to?
|
|
roguedragon05
Loyal Familiar
[TI1]"In his own right he is a God yet he tries to be a man and in that denies his own greatness"
Posts: 489
inherit
170
0
May 8, 2022 8:48:04 GMT -6
383
roguedragon05
[TI1]"In his own right he is a God yet he tries to be a man and in that denies his own greatness"
489
Jun 17, 2015 20:05:38 GMT -6
June 2015
roguedragon05
|
Post by roguedragon05 on Jun 27, 2019 10:11:15 GMT -6
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction though; do you happen to know how I can get in direct touch with 505/fangamer, and which of the two I should be actually reaching out to? Tagging Question or Angel of 505 and adressing your concerns and desires is the best advice I can give personally.
|
|
inherit
2838
0
Aug 11, 2021 14:51:18 GMT -6
78
rav4ishing
179
Jul 13, 2018 11:54:26 GMT -6
July 2018
rav4ishing
|
Post by rav4ishing on Jun 27, 2019 11:32:37 GMT -6
apop I wouldn't hold my breadth for a more optimized version, but I wouldn't come out and call DiCO incompetent programmers, either. For one thing, programming games is very difficult, and requires really good programmers with special knowledge and skills to begin with; if you're gonna say they're not competent, you better put up or shut up - show you can do better, or don't call them incompetent at all. More to the point, though, when a game is not built from the ground up as an exclusive for a given platform, it's almost a given that the game won't be able to tap that platform's real potential. Why? Well, you can look at game's performance being determined by three separate but related elements: 1. The assets (graphics and sound data) the game uses. 2. How those assets are moved around in system memory. 3. How those assets and the game logic are processed. When you're making a game as an exclusive for a given platform, like the new Yoshi game, and you're targeting a specific frame rate (say, 60 fps), what you're gonna do is you're going to 1. Create assets that are easy for the platform to handle, considering things such as memory bandwidth, GPU features and clock speed, etc. 2. Build your asset management logic around those assets and the system's limitations. 3. Not include any assets or logic that constitute a bottleneck for reaching your target frame rate. Here's the kicker, though - sometimes, not even doing this is enough. Sometimes you need a programmer who's really good at optimization - and I mean fricking genius level good at optimization - to meet your target frame rate. I know because the well-known company I worked for was stacked with brilliant programmers (who've gone on to illustrious careers at the likes of Square Enix), but there was one who was really good at optimization, and you'd hear about how he'd just double to frame rate of the games he worked on; so if he hadn't been on board, lots of really brilliant programmers would not have been able to get the level of performance the retail versions of the games shipped with. But wait, there's more! You know why games like Yoshi run at 60fps on Unreal 4? It's not because of the developer, it's because of the publisher. You see, a company like Nintendo has the financial resources to hire some freelance genius to optimize a game; but they won't do that, because they don't really need to do that, because they can just pay Epic to send one of their top engineers, someone who knows the Unreal Engine like the back of his hand, and optimize the game for the developer - it's what Square Enix did when developing Dragon Quest XI, actually. So can you get Bloodstained to run on Switch at 60 fps? Maybe, but you'd probably need to redo the assets, redo the program's architecture, drop the resolution to 720p and then have someone from Epic come and look at it. None of these things are realistic, and so the game will probably be locked at 30 fps forever. That said, if Nintendo does release an improved version of the Switch, and if it's possible for the system to identify itself to the software it runs as distinct from the original Switch, and if the performance increase is good enough that reaching a stable 60 fps is feasible without redoing assets and major portions of code, then 505 might be inclined to provide a patch to game at a later point in time. But those are a lot of ifs. This is a pretty good assessment of some of the intricacies of software development of ANY kind, whether for gaming or business use. Has anyone on here had experience working with UE 4? The impression I get is that it's a high level tool to simplify game creation, and for a lack of a better phrase, it's like "game programming for dummies." Is this perception somewhat correct? From my experience, these tools rarely do a good job in terms of performance because of too many layers. Anyways, just curious on the topic, so putting it out there knowing I might be completely wrong. BTW, optimization is a real thing in software. For me, one of the most impressive optimized games was Street Fighter Alpha 3 for the PSX!
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 27, 2019 12:10:20 GMT -6
Has anyone on here had experience working with UE 4? The impression I get is that it's a high level tool to simplify game creation, and for a lack of a better phrase, it's like "game programming for dummies." Is this perception somewhat correct? From my experience, these tools rarely do a good job in terms of performance because of too many layers. Anyways, just curious on the topic, so putting it out there knowing I might be completely wrong. Well, I haven't worked on it directly, but UE4's not a simple to use tool; something like Unity, which I have worked with, is like game programming for dummies, but even then you really need to know your away around things like shaders to get the most of it. What UE4 does is basically provide developers with high-level programming libraries that have different implementations for each platform, as well as development tools that work with those libraries. It offers ways to access graphic features in modern GPUs that developers know how to implement and use, but not necessarily how to incorporate into a single game engine that's also flexible. Doing this takes a lot of time, money, and people who really know what they're doing, and it's basically a requisite for modern game development. So UE4 essentially alleviates this issue, saving companies like 5 years worth of R&D. Also, despite being a high-level tool, it provides low-level tweaking options for increasing and optimizing performance. Of course, companies with their own R&D departments don't need it as much, but the bigger the project, the more UE4 comes in handy (see Square Enix using it for DQ XI and FFVII Remake, after their own Luminous Engine turned out to be more trouble than its development was worth). As far as performance issues go, it's been known to cause some input lag issues in fighting games, but these issues can be resolved.
|
|
simon
New Blood
Posts: 34
inherit
2676
0
Jul 9, 2019 0:27:30 GMT -6
18
simon
34
Jun 28, 2018 15:22:16 GMT -6
June 2018
simon
|
Post by simon on Jun 28, 2019 14:59:45 GMT -6
From Kickstarter Comments Section:
DN Mesias A about 2 months ago So even though we only just got the targeted performance for Switch last week (with stuttering in the demo and no video to show it working properly) and a delay announcement yesterday, it's already too late to change platforms? and all those who want to change get is "Bad luck with your choice"? I know it's not PR's fault but come on.
Angel CorluxCollaborator about 2 months ago @dn - Hey there, the stuttering and other issues that have been reported on the Switch version will all be smoothed out by launch, many of them already have. And although we're scheduling an extra week for polish we're working to pull that in and release on the 18th on Switch too.
I don't want you or anyone feeling like they got the short stick by picking the Switch version, trust me, that's not going to be the case at all. Right now it's coming a week after (but may change) but everything else is going to be smooth and satisfying.
And this isn't just PR-speak, I'm the brand manager for the game, my brain isn't even wired for PR style stuff, I'd probably flip my desk if I tried lol.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Jun 28, 2019 17:19:43 GMT -6
Has anyone on here had experience working with UE 4? The impression I get is that it's a high level tool to simplify game creation, and for a lack of a better phrase, it's like "game programming for dummies." Is this perception somewhat correct? From my experience, these tools rarely do a good job in terms of performance because of too many layers. Anyways, just curious on the topic, so putting it out there knowing I might be completely wrong. Well, I haven't worked on it directly, but UE4's not a simple to use tool; something like Unity, which I have worked with, is like game programming for dummies, but even then you really need to know your away around things like shaders to get the most of it. What UE4 does is basically provide developers with high-level programming libraries that have different implementations for each platform, as well as development tools that work with those libraries. It offers ways to access graphic features in modern GPUs that developers know how to implement and use, but not necessarily how to incorporate into a single game engine that's also flexible. Doing this takes a lot of time, money, and people who really know what they're doing, and it's basically a requisite for modern game development. So UE4 essentially alleviates this issue, saving companies like 5 years worth of R&D. Also, despite being a high-level tool, it provides low-level tweaking options for increasing and optimizing performance. Of course, companies with their own R&D departments don't need it as much, but the bigger the project, the more UE4 comes in handy (see Square Enix using it for DQ XI and FFVII Remake, after their own Luminous Engine turned out to be more trouble than its development was worth). As far as performance issues go, it's been known to cause some input lag issues in fighting games, but these issues can be resolved. There are still some things Unity are far superior at, one of them is physics. Despite more advanced implementations, its physics is designed around shooters, meaning its collision detection is wonky compared to Unity (think poor loot bag), while Unity can generate perfect recreation of a super mario 64 level by a single indie dev. On a Platformer this becomes a serious problem.
Edit: Phys X 3, not Havok, which both engine uses. Which is even worse since Unreal could have implemented better. Edit 2: Unreal generally don't have well configured tool set that is designed for other kind of gameplay (not that unity come with everything, not without community plugin anyway) and physics can on occasion unstable, but with the right implementation can still satisfy the need while an improper implemented mechanic in unity can still be very broken (smaller devs also cannot afford the effort or licensing cost of autodesk application and will likely settle for Blender which doesn't work very well with Unreal). This comment is written when I was pissed with some level of trolling cause I am more experienced with Unity, and feel some need to defend it. With tweaking, you can make a platformer feel as solid as Mario. The case with MIT is honestly a bad example. You can set time scale individually and globally by comparing your own velocity and parallel velocity and the engine lacks more advanced functions and the handful of entities must have constant velocity or stay in place, and I don't think the camera acceleration is well defined. Lighting however will still be very difficult and cannot be done with post processing.
|
|
lobo
New Blood
Posts: 4
inherit
3390
0
Jul 19, 2019 12:00:05 GMT -6
7
lobo
4
Jun 26, 2019 8:21:00 GMT -6
June 2019
lobo
|
Post by lobo on Jun 30, 2019 9:25:24 GMT -6
Tower of the dragons it's unplayable
|
|
inherit
3394
0
Nov 13, 2019 11:18:37 GMT -6
23
bradd80
33
Jun 26, 2019 8:55:22 GMT -6
June 2019
bradd80
|
Post by bradd80 on Jul 2, 2019 8:26:31 GMT -6
They should do compensation of some kind. They did screw up and the value of the switch backers is not the same as the value the other backers got. Its all ArtPlay and 505 fault that this dissaster of a switch port occured. If they were worried about losing money they would not have treated the switch port so poorly. The best selling version of the game is the switch version, the version that is right now making them the most money. And it would have made them more money but a lot of people put off buying the switch version because of how BAD ITS IS. It is like playing a game underwater, input lag and blurry mess. If they were worried about money, they should have put some actual budget into the switch version instead of 3 guys using UE4 import tools.
|
|
inherit
1593
0
Jul 5, 2019 15:24:25 GMT -6
25
adralmelech
37
Jun 26, 2016 13:30:12 GMT -6
June 2016
adralmelech
|
Post by adralmelech on Jul 2, 2019 8:35:59 GMT -6
The game runs poorly on switch because they don't have a switch team or a competent unreal engine 4 team. After seen how the performance drop on switch i bet they didn't even used the proper profiling tools for switch. The switch has enough ram to run 1080p mid to high settings when you don't use wasteful middleware, but it is reasonable to expect 720p @60 fps on this kind of game if you only dedicate 2gb of ram to graphics and the rest to the middleware, the game doesn't seem to use this rules at all.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Jul 2, 2019 18:27:13 GMT -6
The game runs poorly on switch because they don't have a switch team or a competent unreal engine 4 team. After seen how the performance drop on switch i bet they didn't even used the proper profiling tools for switch. The switch has enough ram to run 1080p mid to high settings when you don't use wasteful middleware, but it is reasonable to expect 720p @60 fps on this kind of game if you only dedicate 2gb of ram to graphics and the rest to the middleware, the game doesn't seem to use this rules at all. I think it's unreasonably to ask for 720p @60fps. Sure the camera is in a sense fixed but there are also consistently more objects, albeit zoomed out on the switch version. Switch only has 4 gb, 0.3 gb is fake, 0.5 gb is reserved for system, and you also has to run basic ai, potentially cpu based physics and geometry (to run on amd and avoid getting higher fees from Nvidia), and 2gb can be in some case be considered generous. Even properly optimized the game cannot possibly do better than Fortnite (cpu bound means resolution and fps can be unrelated). That said LOD is super messed up on all version, all entity models are drawn to max when it's zoomed out (if fact there should be different setting for different glasses), Cutscenes and dialogues uses max version that's insufficient close up, stage is not frozen during dialogue which add unnecessary load and look odd on top of that, and stage loading could definitely be faster.
Also what are you talking about Middleware?
|
|
inherit
1593
0
Jul 5, 2019 15:24:25 GMT -6
25
adralmelech
37
Jun 26, 2016 13:30:12 GMT -6
June 2016
adralmelech
|
Post by adralmelech on Jul 2, 2019 20:49:56 GMT -6
The game runs poorly on switch because they don't have a switch team or a competent unreal engine 4 team. After seen how the performance drop on switch i bet they didn't even used the proper profiling tools for switch. The switch has enough ram to run 1080p mid to high settings when you don't use wasteful middleware, but it is reasonable to expect 720p @60 fps on this kind of game if you only dedicate 2gb of ram to graphics and the rest to the middleware, the game doesn't seem to use this rules at all. I think it's unreasonably to ask for 720p @60fps. Sure the camera is in a sense fixed but there are also consistently more objects, albeit zoomed out on the switch version. Switch only has 4 gb, 0.3 gb is fake, 0.5 gb is reserved for system, and you also has to run basic ai, potentially cpu based physics and geometry (to run on amd and avoid getting higher fees from Nvidia), and 2gb can be in some case be considered generous. Even properly optimized the game cannot possibly do better than Fortnite (cpu bound means resolution and fps can be unrelated). That said LOD is super messed up on all version, all entity models are drawn to max when it's zoomed out (if fact there should be different setting for different glasses), Cutscenes and dialogues uses max version that's insufficient close up, stage is not frozen during dialogue which add unnecessary load and look odd on top of that, and stage loading could definitely be faster.
Also what are you talking about Middleware?
I'm pretty sure you know what middleware is. Also nintendo is pretty clean in letting you switch off most of the OS when in game mode, so the OS foot print is less than .5 GB.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Jul 3, 2019 5:05:10 GMT -6
I think it's unreasonably to ask for 720p @60fps. Sure the camera is in a sense fixed but there are also consistently more objects, albeit zoomed out on the switch version. Switch only has 4 gb, 0.3 gb is fake, 0.5 gb is reserved for system, and you also has to run basic ai, potentially cpu based physics and geometry (to run on amd and avoid getting higher fees from Nvidia), and 2gb can be in some case be considered generous. Even properly optimized the game cannot possibly do better than Fortnite (cpu bound means resolution and fps can be unrelated). That said LOD is super messed up on all version, all entity models are drawn to max when it's zoomed out (if fact there should be different setting for different glasses), Cutscenes and dialogues uses max version that's insufficient close up, stage is not frozen during dialogue which add unnecessary load and look odd on top of that, and stage loading could definitely be faster.
Also what are you talking about Middleware?
I'm pretty sure you know what middleware is. Also nintendo is pretty clean in letting you switch off most of the OS when in game mode, so the OS foot print is less than .5 GB. I am not sure how Unreal Engine will screw this up. You are not even on a VM unless you are on the Xbox/ Windows Store version. If you are talking about Blueprint vs c++, to run on this kind of hardware a lot of more central system would have to go on c++, and generally you don't get faster than that save for improving your algorithm (commonly outside of compilation, which is not something most of the dev have access to or understand properly, such as defining order of operation, which typically require some level of understanding of c++ to assembly, understand limit on cache instead of just memory and preferably know one or two functional language such as Haskell or Scheme. Even Epic has short supply of computer Scientists.) or loaded resource.(let's say unreal is not great with those, then it's a problem that all games made with Unreal share) If you are talking about some kind of third party plugin to better deal with some problems or an alternative to vanilla Unreal, sure but many of those are meant to be chose purposefully or otherwise gets removed. Given the time on development, this should not be a problem. But since the switch version is handled improperly, many of those things that could be ditched was not (also shift some load onto the gpu), not to mention the build of UE4 they used has not yet implemented mobile optimization. But are you serious about 1080p mid to high setting? Even Nintendo cannot accomplish this kind of absurd expectations. How about you try that with a budget gpu or better xbox one s? So, what are you going to do with 3.4GB of, mind I say, regular, memory? Edit: If you are talking about Nintendo's API, there is not enough time to migrate to the switch properly, and even the industry's standard one will not cripple the game in any significant manner. Edit 2: The biggest Middleware is Unreal itself, so unless you are inclined to rewrite core Algorithm there is little the Middleware may be improved. The main difference is that on a later build, Unreal itself performs better and have better tools to handle resource to prevent loss at a lower resolution.
|
|
apop
New Blood
Posts: 7
inherit
3331
0
Jul 11, 2019 22:21:26 GMT -6
4
apop
7
Jun 23, 2019 18:43:40 GMT -6
June 2019
apop
|
Post by apop on Jul 8, 2019 20:19:19 GMT -6
The issue isn't the unreal engine, Has anyone saying this seen Mortal Kombat 11 running on the switch? That game looks simply amazing and runs at a near flawless 60 frames a second.
|
|
inherit
373
0
Feb 10, 2023 12:28:42 GMT -6
5
mobilevil
24
Jul 13, 2015 17:18:51 GMT -6
July 2015
mobilevil
|
Post by mobilevil on Jul 10, 2019 0:06:21 GMT -6
not a game programmer but I think the game is using excessive dynamic lighting, which should have baked in at least for switch. and the procedural texture generation too.
|
|