How to make PC games properly: An open letter to developers
- Thread starter KingsGambit_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Even if you hardcap the frames at 60 fps, you'll still get a tear in every frame and many players are sensitive enough to notice that tearing, unless you turn on v-sync. Only with double buffer vsync, if the game is struggling to get around 60 fps, you effectively get about 30 fps.Bad Jim said:
Triple buffering comes essentially for free on the PC, with the massive amounts of RAM on our graphics cards. Every game dev should include it as an option. There's no good reason not to.
Remember, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the points, I do a lot of my gaming on a PC and wish PC versions were better. Just listing the reasoning behind why some items are the way they are, for the topics that I know about.
And the quicksave/load keys are irrelevant if you ask for the above.
Also means Sony or Microsoft has to allow connections from outside PSN/XBL, but they actually restrict this (hence the focus on peer-to-peer instead). There were plans for games like Borderlands 2 and Dungeon Defenders to support cross-platform play as well, and that was nixed due to them.
However, there are restrictions by Sony, MS, and Nintendo that, when displaying a load game menu, the menus and savegames items have to load within a certain time period, thus there's a limitation on how big the save file can go (not to mention if you're using a memory cart). That's also why games tend to have limited inventory, to reduce save file size for faster loading.
Due to this, redesigning the save system for a PC port is not something you can easily do just like that, since it's a factor in the whole game's design from the beginning.
However, if you're asking for remodeling geometry and extra shader features for the DX11 versions, which they simply don't have the time or budget for a much smaller percentage of their audience.
Yeah I know, it sucks that PC versions have to be limited by the lowest common denominator aspect for consoles. But unless you can fund a studio an additional $10 million, well...
I do wish the studios would pick a universal scheme though, as I hate seeing My Docs/Bioware/Dragon Age/ and My Docs/Bioware/Mass Effect/, but then My Docs/My Games/Borderlands 2/.
I might be incorrect on some of them, as it does vary from studio to studio, but I hope that sheds some light on the subject. It's much more complicated than "devs are lazy".
While I agree it's best if there was a slider, the reason it's so low is due to the relative sitting placement of the player in relation to the display in a desk+chair or TV+couch set up. You have a much smaller angle in a TV+couch, so the FOV is set up for that perspective.KingsGambit said:
In agreement there, but sometimes ports are done by 3rd parties and they aren't given a lot of time to implement a full system, so just remap some keys to the controller's and call it a day. I wish studios would devote some time to create a universal controller library that they could carry from game to game though.
And the quicksave/load keys are irrelevant if you ask for the above.
While it's a console hold over, the advantage of development on consoles is due to the known, standard hardware factor. If you lock the game to always going to run at such a resolution at so many frames per second, it means you can devote the extra processor time of the hardware to other features. Due to the wide array of hardware on the PC, it's much harder to account for this, and often means redesigning the game engine. Not something easily done. There's more to it than just the video card.
The problem there lies on hardware and licensing: a console isn't going to handle more than what, 16 players? Probably less on a home connection to boot, hence many games limiting to 4v4. You'd have to commission a server farm to host the servers for pay to handle more (Much like how EA allowed them to host BF3 servers for consoles). Then comes the issue of mods and achievements and ranking, as well as who pays and owns them and such.
Also means Sony or Microsoft has to allow connections from outside PSN/XBL, but they actually restrict this (hence the focus on peer-to-peer instead). There were plans for games like Borderlands 2 and Dungeon Defenders to support cross-platform play as well, and that was nixed due to them.
Requirements by publishers and license holders. Sucks, I know - on the PC removing them is one of the first things I do.
Eh, depends on the game design. Save anywhere has issues with how to store the world state - a couple flags between stages is much easier to deal with, as you know what state things are in. Bioware games tend to basically do a dump of memory as your saved game, so the further the game progresses, the larger the save file.
However, there are restrictions by Sony, MS, and Nintendo that, when displaying a load game menu, the menus and savegames items have to load within a certain time period, thus there's a limitation on how big the save file can go (not to mention if you're using a memory cart). That's also why games tend to have limited inventory, to reduce save file size for faster loading.
Due to this, redesigning the save system for a PC port is not something you can easily do just like that, since it's a factor in the whole game's design from the beginning.
Game design issue, not really relevant to complaints about PC ports to be honest.
Engine and art issue, you're asking the studio to devote a lot of time for features that have to be downgraded for the consoles. Or spend time to upres for the port (not something a 3rd party studio would do). Higher resolution textures for PC ports are one thing, you'd notice many games offer that (Sleeping Dogs for example). Since the artists would ideally be working at a high res for the source art, they can make easily make a PC high res pack.
However, if you're asking for remodeling geometry and extra shader features for the DX11 versions, which they simply don't have the time or budget for a much smaller percentage of their audience.
Yeah I know, it sucks that PC versions have to be limited by the lowest common denominator aspect for consoles. But unless you can fund a studio an additional $10 million, well...
I'm pretty certain this is actually a Microsoft requirement for software moving forward for Windows. I believe it was optional, in a sort of transitional state for 2K/XP, but for 7 and up, they want it to be much more strict about it. Much like Linux/Unix with the home folders, and console profiles, the idea is that you can back up the whole c:/users/username/ folder and retain all your prefs, docs, saved games, etc., as well as multiuser support, even if it's just one person using it for a home PC.
I do wish the studios would pick a universal scheme though, as I hate seeing My Docs/Bioware/Dragon Age/ and My Docs/Bioware/Mass Effect/, but then My Docs/My Games/Borderlands 2/.
I might be incorrect on some of them, as it does vary from studio to studio, but I hope that sheds some light on the subject. It's much more complicated than "devs are lazy".
I would absolutely prefer a cutscene to QTE as at least during the former I can guarantee I won't get game overed for failing to destroy my keyboard. The only PC game in recent memory that did anything resembling QTEs in anything resembling a tolerable manner was Just Cause 2 in which you pressed a sequence of buttons once each to complete either vehicle hijackings or bomb diffusion. Any QTE whether it's on a PC or a console can piss off if it's simple asking me to jackhammer my buttons into oblivion. In related news I'm not super optimistic about the new Tomb Raider.Joccaren said:
While I disagree with a fair amount of your points to some degree, this struck me as a "what?" point.KingsGambit said:
I mean, seriously, what? Why? Why would you do that? Ever? They do serve a purpose, several in fact. First of all, they allow you to change options before going into the game, second they give you access to your saves without going into the game and waiting for it to load, and finally, they give you the access point to any DLC you may have bought.
Seriously, what the hell?
+ Raw input
+ Option to turn VSync OFF
+ Option to turn Ambient Occlusion OFF (looking at you Far Cry 3)
+ Option to turn Motion Blur OFF
+ Option to choose everything between Toggle and Hold modes (looking at you DeusEx:HR)
+ LAN support
+ Demo Recording/Playback system
+ Wide range of precise options for sensitivity (looking at you, Bioshock Infinite)
+ Option to turn VSync OFF
+ Option to turn Ambient Occlusion OFF (looking at you Far Cry 3)
+ Option to turn Motion Blur OFF
+ Option to choose everything between Toggle and Hold modes (looking at you DeusEx:HR)
+ LAN support
+ Demo Recording/Playback system
+ Wide range of precise options for sensitivity (looking at you, Bioshock Infinite)
Those are Main Menu Screens. Title Screens are the ones before those, that just say "Press {Enter]" and then you go the Main Menu Screen. Grandchildren of the "Insert Coin" and "Press Start" screens from arcades. Their purpose was for you to choose if you'd play on first or second joystick.uchytjes said:
Oh, that should have been clearer. I've always called those "opening splashes" for the whole series of developer credits beforehand and the "opening cinimatic" for when there is a video beforehand.
But I still see no point in removing the opening splashes at the least. Removing a cinimatic I'm okay with, but not the splashes. They are there to let you know who developed the game each time you boot up and can actually serve a purpose in allowing the main menu to load in some games. What the problem here is UNSKIPPABLE splashes. THOSE are annoying. Sure its nice to have them there to build brand awareness, but at least let us skip them.
But I still see no point in removing the opening splashes at the least. Removing a cinimatic I'm okay with, but not the splashes. They are there to let you know who developed the game each time you boot up and can actually serve a purpose in allowing the main menu to load in some games. What the problem here is UNSKIPPABLE splashes. THOSE are annoying. Sure its nice to have them there to build brand awareness, but at least let us skip them.
The choice of having a checkpoint save system rather than quick save isn't meant to dumb down the game, infact for any action game it's quite the opposite, as quicksave is the dumbing down as it allows for save scumming. Also quicksaving allows PC devs to create games that are unbalanced in areas where playing it feels like the devs expect the player to save scum past it.
Also checkpoint saving is at the heart of many Japanese game design philosophy, it's part and parcel to the penalty of death where if you screw up you lose 1-5 minutes of your time backtracking to where you died. Although such a system forces the devs to work more on balancing and fine tuning as there is nothing worse than loading up a checkpoint due to the games fault not your own.
Also all console gamers need a tutorial to fasten their own shoe laces, hell most folk on this forum play on multiple systems. Maybe if you swapped console gamer with mainstream gamer then it wouldn't be such a flame bait.
My own gripe with many PC 2D games, is that there is way too many 2D run and gunners and arcade indies made for the m&k and not traditional control pad / arcade stick. For someone who grew up in the arcades is bloody annoying and keeps me playing Contra and other arcade games on console when I would love to play a similar game on PC.
Also checkpoint saving is at the heart of many Japanese game design philosophy, it's part and parcel to the penalty of death where if you screw up you lose 1-5 minutes of your time backtracking to where you died. Although such a system forces the devs to work more on balancing and fine tuning as there is nothing worse than loading up a checkpoint due to the games fault not your own.
Also all console gamers need a tutorial to fasten their own shoe laces, hell most folk on this forum play on multiple systems. Maybe if you swapped console gamer with mainstream gamer then it wouldn't be such a flame bait.
My own gripe with many PC 2D games, is that there is way too many 2D run and gunners and arcade indies made for the m&k and not traditional control pad / arcade stick. For someone who grew up in the arcades is bloody annoying and keeps me playing Contra and other arcade games on console when I would love to play a similar game on PC.
If you just fucked off with the dig at console gamers, I'd have no problem supporting everything you said that wasn't a matter of personal preference(save keys). But you just had to.
You make some valid points, particularly FoV even though I've never personally had a problem with it. Always online is a problem with all gaming, but it's a problem that PC gaming created. It's not easy to pirate console games, it's really easy to pirate PC games.
You make some valid points, particularly FoV even though I've never personally had a problem with it. Always online is a problem with all gaming, but it's a problem that PC gaming created. It's not easy to pirate console games, it's really easy to pirate PC games.
On the behalf of the OP, I am sorry he didn't use your own terminology.uchytjes said:
And I really dislike Windows for doing that. I would rather back up my games folder and have the saves there ready to use. Or rather what I actually do is have my games folder on a separate partition so only Windows can be reinstalled when needed. And that's how it should work - the home folder in *NIX systems works because it's supposed to work - you can happily have it as a separate partition, which I have, so reinstalling the OS is a breeze and leaves it completely intact. Microsoft are just trying to hammer in a screwdriver - if it works at one location, it won't work across the board if you just lift the concept. The idea they have is - when you do a full (re)install of the OS you'll then install your software back (and games are obviously to go in Program Files) then you restore the profile and done. And this is bullshit, as sane people don't want to be reinstalling everything. Heck, that's why un *NIX you can have /home, /user, and /opt as separate partitions, and also, the symbolic links are quite often used, not to mention incredibly easy to do. Not the case with Microsoft which tries to do the OS a large monolithic thing with just the illusion of flexibility offered by a profile folder.ThriKreen said:
Not to mention that even Microsoft themselves don't seem to be aware how to use it - I moved the location of My Documents to another partition. I can excuse some software for just going for the default - I mean, it's a reasonable assumption to make, and the software is not some big or renowned stuff. But a fucking Microsoft product? Come on! I installed Visual Studio (it was 2010 but they should have known better) and it still decided to disregard any semblance of sanity or reason and went "IMMA MAKE THIS MY DOCUMENTS FOLDER HERE IN C:\. I AM BEING POLITE BY DOING IT!" in, of course, the most obnoxious way possible - without even asking me.
Ugh, I just don't like that.
You are talking about a main menu screen which is not only useful, but vital. I am talking about the pointless title screen that does nothing except ask you to "Press to Continue" usually placed before the menu screen. Why and with what other points do you disgree?uchytjes said:
To clarify the point(s) made about saves and save systems, I would add that some games do it quite differently with often great results. I'll mention Outcast on the PC (1999?) and Resident Evil 4 (Gamecube) as two great examples of great systems that aren't normal.
Outcast had an in-game item called a "Gamsaav Crystal" IIRC. Cutter Slade needed to equip and use it for several (often quite tense) seconds to trigger a save. This involved no menus, but was all done within the game world. Resident Evil 4 and the typewriters spaced around the world was also great. It actually added to the tension the longer Leon went before finding the next one and added to the ambience of the game.
The main issue I raised is that there ought to be a mechanism by which a player can make a hard save when they want, even if there are some restrictions and that there should be multiple slots. This is particularly worthwhile in RPGs with branching paths, choices and dialogues, shooters with tough sections and/or no regenerating health and RTSs with massively long campaigns (more important when it may be necessary to go back a long way to use a different tactic, f.ex).
Outcast had an in-game item called a "Gamsaav Crystal" IIRC. Cutter Slade needed to equip and use it for several (often quite tense) seconds to trigger a save. This involved no menus, but was all done within the game world. Resident Evil 4 and the typewriters spaced around the world was also great. It actually added to the tension the longer Leon went before finding the next one and added to the ambience of the game.
The main issue I raised is that there ought to be a mechanism by which a player can make a hard save when they want, even if there are some restrictions and that there should be multiple slots. This is particularly worthwhile in RPGs with branching paths, choices and dialogues, shooters with tough sections and/or no regenerating health and RTSs with massively long campaigns (more important when it may be necessary to go back a long way to use a different tactic, f.ex).
Except I'm not a console gamer, not exclusively anyway. I play games on my PC that are only suited to the PC, like RTS games and MMOs. It's not a good machine, not anymore, but my PC was acceptable when I bought it.Mypetmonkey said:
How would I know about FoV being a problem(which is only usually a problem on smaller(not TV) screens that you're sitting fairly close to) if I'd never played PC games?
One thing I'd like to see
Develop for the top-end, then cut features out so that an Xbox won't blow up when you try to run the game.
Not the other way around, you lazy assholes. From Software, I'm looking at you.
Develop for the top-end, then cut features out so that an Xbox won't blow up when you try to run the game.
Not the other way around, you lazy assholes. From Software, I'm looking at you.
I agree with most of what your saying, but these give me some pause.
Quicksaving does not belong in all games. Things like Skyrim, Deus Ex, they benefit greatly from it. But there are plenty of games where it doesn't make sense. Roguelikes such as FTL obviously don't work not to mention games where death is a big deal. Imagine playing Dark Souls or adventure MineCraft being able to F5 before you did anything. Quicksaving takes away a lot of the danger and tension of the situation, and should only be used in games which benefit from it.KingsGambit said:
What is so special about these keys? Just because games historically use them doesn't mean all games should be forced to use them (I believe some early shooters used right-click to move forward). There's definitely nothing wrong with these keys (I do use them for quicksaves) but that's no reason to always use them. Hell, the original Deus Ex had the augmentations on F1 - F12 where they best fit. That demoted quicksave to Numpad + and quickload to Numpad / if I remember correctly (of course this game also put reload on semicolon). The keys should be determined on a game-by-game basis.KingsGambit said:
True, they don't really have a purpose but they provide some pretty artwork and help set the tone of the game. Yeah they aren't necessary but there's nothing wrong with them.KingsGambit said:
While you do have legitimate points, Gambit King, I'm also detecting a fair amount of butthurt. A small amount of your points are in direct conflict with budget concerns and a select few directly tie into gameplay design/decisions but have minimal to do strictly with porting.