Current TW Production Cycles: A tad rushed?

[Divinus Arma]

I could be wrong, but it seems like we got from RTW to the evolution reproduction pretty quickly.

What was the release time between STW and its evolution reproduction MTW?

This makes me think of only one possible situation:

CA is being driven hard, exploiting a proven game concept and proven business model: engine (STW), evolution (MTW), revolution (RTW), evolution (M2TW), revolution (?TW), evolution (?TW), etc.

Meanwhile, CA is putting out "feelers" for associated products, capitalizing on their brand equity in the market. I wonder if Spartan was considered a marginal success or big success. The profit margin of Spartan will determine whether they continue with branded spinoffs in the vein of evolution-revolution via console.


I have no prob with any of this, aside from production speed. A major factor of the TW brand is quality of experience. Quality can be sacrificed pretty quickly when the next game after your current project is already halfway through the mill.

My feeling is that the next revolution engine is being finished up now and they are ready to start applying the cosmetics.

[Zawath]

Since Shogun they have released a new TW title every 2 years. The speed is quite slow actually because the real development time for a single game takes at least 3 years. They started working on Medieval 2 way before Rome was released.

[shifty157]

They said that they began work on the Rome engine at the same time they began work on MTW.

[AggonyDuck]

Also I think the company itself has grown bigger, thus increasing the resources available for creating the games.

[Vladimir]

Also I think the company itself has grown bigger, thus increasing the resources available for creating the games.

Agreed.

[Divinus Arma]

Wow. This stimulated some hardcore flame war debate didn't it? :shame:

[screwtype]

My feeling is that the next revolution engine is being finished up now and they are ready to start applying the cosmetics.

I don't know, I don't see any reason for a "next revolution engine". The revolution was in going from 2D to 3D. This is a revolution that's occurring industry wide. But after 3D, what possible coding revolutions are there? None that I can see. Progress in the gaming market from this point will, I think, be evolutionary rather than revolutionary, CA included.

I see M2 as an evolutionary not a revolutionary step, and I think the improvements to the system from now on will be evolutionary. Which is a good thing IMO.

BTW, I agree that CA is pushing hard to get new product into the marketplace. However, they've always had overlap in product development, MTW was being developed alongside RTW. They have different teams working on each new title.

But I don't think M2 is appearing particularly quickly on the heels of RTW. After all, by the time it's released it will probably be two years since RTW's release. That doesn't seem especially quick to me.

[Gregoshi]

DA, for $20 I won't tell anyone in the Backroom about this thread. :laugh4:

[Divinus Arma]

Believe it or not, I do post elsewhere here at the Com, oh esteemed derobed master. :bow:

As for the topic, I can see why there would be a perception that going from 2d to 3d is the only possible revolution in engines possible. I do disagree though. I think that is simply a leap in perceptual interface. True, it is huge, but it is not the upper limit in technological potential.

Imagine an engine taht supports completely individual characters. Imagine a game that tracks each individual and allows you to take control of him in 1st or 3rd person, much like Spartan or Mount&Blade. Now amplify this to a seamless battlefield spanning hundreds of miles. Congratulations: you have modern combat. I'm not talking only individual combat, I'm simply discussing the possibility that all units will be tracked individually. An engine that treats each soldeir as a truly single entity capable of individual reaction with its environment. Wow. What a game that would be. Imagine a world with physics and true-to-life physical engagements where sword and shield actually clashed and the motion of men mattered. An engine where training and experience would be reflected not in stats, but in how soldiers encounter their enemy and move on the battlefield. Swing too high, block too low, expose yourself with a wide swing; all would matter in this engine.

We are at the very beginnings of what will be done with gaming. we will see amazing advances in the next ten years and be awed by the works 20 years from now.

[Dooz]

Believe it or not, I do post elsewhere here at the Com, oh esteemed derobed master. :bow:

As for the topic, I can see why there would be a perception that going from 2d to 3d is the only possible revolution in engines possible. I do disagree though. I think that is simply a leap in perceptual interface. True, it is huge, but it is not the upper limit in technological potential.

Imagine an engine taht supports completely individual characters. Imagine a game that tracks each individual and allows you to take control of him in 1st or 3rd person, much like Spartan or Mount&Blade. Now amplify this to a seamless battlefield spanning hundreds of miles. Congratulations: you have modern combat. I'm not talking only individual combat, I'm simply discussing the possibility that all units will be tracked individually. An engine that treats each soldeir as a truly single entity capable of individual reaction with its environment. Wow. What a game that would be. Imagine a world with physics and true-to-life physical engagements where sword and shield actually clashed and the motion of men mattered. An engine where training and experience would be reflected not in stats, but in how soldiers encounter their enemy and move on the battlefield. Swing too high, block too low, expose yourself with a wide swing; all would matter in this engine.

We are at the very beginnings of what will be done with gaming. we will see amazing advances in the next ten years and be awed by the works 20 years from now.

Sure... assuming we're all not dead from WWIII...

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Sure... assuming we're all not dead from WWIII...

Hippy



Edit: but on topic, there must be some rushing in CA game development. If there weren't then I'd imagine that the major flaws in RTW would have been noticed and dealt with.

[doc_bean]

Hippy



Edit: but on topic, there must be some rushing in CA game development. If there weren't then I'd imagine that the major flaws in RTW would have been noticed and dealt with.

They might have been pushed by Activision, it might be part of the reason they left.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

They might have been pushed by Activision, it might be part of the reason they left.


could be could be, good point.

[econ21]

As I recall, the publishers asked CA to spend an extra year making RTW. CA envisaged it to be not such a big change from MTW, but the publishers got excited by the early work and persuaded CA to spend an extra year to make it more impressive. I haven't seen the sales figures, but I suspect they succeeded: RTW seems to be a higher profile and bigger market game than MTW or STW were.

[hellenes]

As I recall, the publishers asked CA to spend an extra year making RTW. CA envisaged it to be not such a big change from MTW, but the publishers got excited by the early work and persuaded CA to spend an extra year to make it more impressive. I haven't seen the sales figures, but I suspect they succeeded: RTW seems to be a higher profile and bigger market game than MTW or STW were.

IIRC the reason for the delay wasnt that much with the evolution or game imporovement (its apparent from the state of the 1.0 game), the reason was to *cough*dumb down*cough* sorry i meant make more accessible to the average GTA player out there, so the bulk of the extra time was spent of improving the advisors...I believe that CA themselves stated that Activision wanted a more accessible game even in the expense of the PO and general gameplay depth...

Hellenes

[doc_bean]

Activision still could have demanded a finished version the first time they sent it to QA, CA might have purposely skipped on doing those UI changes since they were already short on time.

Might, might, might,....


I do fear that, with the current release rate, I'll be less and less excited when yet another TW game gets announced. there's only so many times I want to play the same game. CA could do with some competition in the market to stimulate innovation...