ZEBBEEE

wwiiol through xbox, PS etc

32 posts in this topic

Could it technically be possible to release the game on a game platform and make it compatible with our servers?

would boost the population as well.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will ask, however I doubt it as a lot of those game consoles do not interlock with each other. 

For example if my son is playing fortnight on his PC he does not see his friends playing on their xbox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BLKHWK8 said:

For example if my son is playing fortnight on his PC he does not see his friends playing on their xbox

Oh damn. That would have been great. 

Or wwiiol could be the first game to propose it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2018 at 5:35 AM, Zebbeee said:

Could it technically be possible to release the game on a game platform and make it compatible with our servers?

would boost the population as well.

I have often thought of this. It’s a no brainer, so I have always assumed it could not be done. And maybe some years ago it couldn’t and maybe now it can. It would be interesting to know...  do yhose consoles have keyboards? I don’t play other games so I don’t know.

Edited by black5
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think the platform matters as far as getting more players.......I think people are just turned off by the old graphics and sub price based on the fact its old.  Dosen't bother me but the younger generation is all about looks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It IS possible for games to exist on multiple platforms AND share the servers. I sub to another game that has PC, PS4 and XBox players all playing together for the past several years (Well XBox came later, and it was originally PS3) However that game was designed with the compatibility of the different systems in mind, and that took at least a couple of years to make it work. Originally it released with two sets of servers and later combined them all into the one main server.

But that game came out a lot later than WWII Online, I don't know if such a thing can be 'added' to an existing game, especially one as unique as this one is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/05/2018 at 6:05 PM, bmw said:

I dont think the platform matters as far as getting more players.......I think people are just turned off by the old graphics and sub price based on the fact its old.  Dosen't bother me but the younger generation is all about looks

you are probably right. maybe with 2.0

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2018 at 11:05 AM, bmw said:

I dont think the platform matters as far as getting more players.......I think people are just turned off by the old graphics and sub price based on the fact its old.  Dosen't bother me but the younger generation is all about looks

 

On 5/10/2018 at 1:01 PM, Zebbeee said:

you are probably right. maybe with 2.0

Gents, I must respectfully disagree on the platform mattering. my reason being is for the last month or so I have been actively trying to recruit players off the street using the business cards I got from Xoom. One of the big problems I run into is people have invested huge money into their console platforms. I hear a lot from people how they just don't play computer based games anymore or never have.  As console systems, Smartphones and Ipads etc. get more capable, some of these folks don't even use a traditional computer. Also if you visit your local stores "at least here in the USA" look at the video game section... it almost all console based floor space. most stores might have a 4 ft. section for PC/MAC games.   So I do think the platform matters to a reasonable degree. 

Graphics is the first mark against the game when i talk with them. but does NOT usually end up a show stopper on its own. I am also not sure the complexity of WWII lends its self to console based systems well... but that is out of my lane by a long shot. I do hope 2.0 can bring a lot more to the table.

S/F ~ Black5 

Edited by black5
missed important word
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xbox is easy, so to speak, in programing terms.
Not easy for this game per say, just in general terms of porting a windows desktop program

As far as having this game run on Xbox hardware, in the same fashion that it runs on a PC
That i can not say, consoles do have their limitations (for good reason)

Playstation i know nothing of at all in software terms
nor much about it's hardware.

Not terribly sure though if the console gamers would be terribly interested in this game or not.
The pace of the game can not be guaranteed and is mostly dictated by the players themselves.
You can swing from 10 deaths in under 4 minutes, to creeping around for an hour being unseen and un shot at.
Most popular console stuff is kind of fast paced.

27 minutes ago, black5 said:

Also if you visit your local stores "at least here in the USA" look at the video game section... it almost all console based floor space. most stores might have a 4 ft. section for PC/MAC games.  

Yes, direct digital delivery has almost nearly taken over the PC/Mac game software market
 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@black5 agreed, we were speaking about graphics relevancy for that market

@merlin51indeed, and this is where the design fails from the beginning: we must have a two-level game

1. Hardcore squad role play 

2. Hardcore quick action shooter

for all weapons.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Zebbeee said:

@black5 agreed, we were speaking about graphics relevancy for that market

@merlin51indeed, and this is where the design fails from the beginning: we must have a two-level game

1. Hardcore squad role play 

2. Hardcore quick action shooter

for all weapons.

I wonder how we could accomplish #2? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, black5 said:

I wonder how we could accomplish #2? 

We already partially did with the introduction of mobile spawns.

I believe we must go further and allow quicker action only when/where temporary teams or squads have set up first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Zebbeee said:

We already partially did with the introduction of mobile spawns.

I believe we must go further and allow quicker action only when/where temporary teams or squads have set up first.

would that speed up the tempo enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Zebbeee said:

I believe we must go further and allow quicker action only when/where temporary teams or squads have set up first.

And are you thinking squads should be limited to building an MS? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2018 at 7:43 AM, BLKHWK8 said:

I will ask, however I doubt it as a lot of those game consoles do not interlock with each other. 

For example if my son is playing fortnight on his PC he does not see his friends playing on their xbox

was going through some older stuff and saw this.

 

FWIW, both MS and Sony at times say they're backing down from this. Rocket league for example has been set to enable cross platform for all for awhile now, MS is still dragging their feet. PSnet and PC players do in fact play together in this game though.

Also both MS and Sony officially support Keyboard/Mouse now

https://support.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/ease-of-access/mouse-keyboard

https://support.playstation.com/s/article/Use-Keyboard-and-Mouse-with-PS4?language=en_US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're on to something. This really wasn't a concern 10 years ago but the gaming landscape has changed so radically in that time that I think it would be foolish not to at least attempt a console release that merges with the PC players (assuming the resources exist to do that, and you first have the game developed to the point where you know you can deliver a quality game experience to all the new players you're about to have flood into the game. The last thing you want to do is release too early into a new market and then fail to retain those players because the game isn't complete enough).

 

Things have since changed.

-PC gaming is an extreme minority by comparison. It was already a minority 10 years ago and it's only gotten worse. Don't be fooled by statistics that claim something like 35% of gamers in the US are on the PC. Playing farmville on facebook doesn't mean you're a gamer. Those kinds of "gamers" aren't ever going to play any kind of FPS game, or probably even have a computer capable of doing so, so they aren't the market we're talking about when it comes to players who might potentially be interested in playing WW2OL.  We're talking about "core" gamers. And far too few of them are on PCs these days from what I see. 

-With the advances in console hardware, and the hardware being sold at a loss, there's very little reason to build a game for the PC exclusively. Few PC gamers have rigs that are significantly more powerful than the best console on the market. There's no need for them to because games are made with console hardware in mind - so almost no games get released for the PC that actually push the boundries of what the best PC hardware is capable of doing. Most of the games that are popular on PC are engineered to run well on old or subpar machines. There's no reason to design a game around the minority of PC gamers who have a dedicated modern PC gaming rig when that base is now so small. I wouldn't be surprised if it's also possible for every PC gaming peripheral to be made to be compatible with Xbox - which further lowers the reason you'd want to make a PC exclusive game. 

-As others pointed out, there's actually a migration away from desktop computers in general. People have phones and tablets to take care of many tasks their computer use to be used for. And of those that have a computer, most seem to prefer a laptop over a desktop in my experience. 

-With Microsoft opening up support for mouse and keyboards on the Xbox, the possibility exists for the console players to not be at a competitive disadvantage. Consoles also have options for light sticks or racing wheels so they have the full spectrum of control options available that a PC user does. They also have an advantage over your average computer user these days because you can use a standard controller to reasonably pilot a plane or tank - but you can't use a mouse and keyboard to do the same feat. A PC user is forced to buy a joystick. You also open up the option with consoles for some even more immersive tech like motion capture gun pointing as an infantry player (Such as taking the two motion control sticks on the PS3 and attaching them to a plastic gun designed for that purpose, which gives you a realistic pointing device that ties to your aim and the ability to move around in-game with your right hand thumb control as it rests on the pistol grip). 

 

As others have said, it is technically possible to have the servers shared and has been for a long time. The Xbox was originally designed with this in mind but they changed their minds when they realized console players would always get absolutely destroyed by someone using a mouse and keyboard in FPS games. Microsoft wouldn't even allow support for the mouse and keyboard on the Xbox for that reason. They didn't want controller using players getting wiped out by the players who plugged a mouse and keyboard into their Xbox. Part of it was also a marketing decision because if everyone felt like they had to start using a mouse and keyboard on the Xbox to be competitive then they didn't want to foster the perception that they were just selling a horizontal PC box rather than a true "console" experience.  

It should be relatively easy to port any windows based PC game over to Xbox considering that Microsoft designed the system to make cross platform development as easy as possible, unless the sheer age of the way the game was coded gets in the way of that for some reason. Playstation is different as it uses a Unix based operating system. 

At the very least they could tap into the majority of the US gaming market just by getting on Xbox, if they didn't have the resources to develop a port for Playstation. 

 

 

 

Edited by ZeroAce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THis is not possible with the current code of the game and resources. 

I am sure it will be discussed as we look at the future of 2.0. (Discussed first)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 3:21 PM, Merlin51 said:

Not terribly sure though if the console gamers would be terribly interested in this game or not.
The pace of the game can not be guaranteed and is mostly dictated by the players themselves.
You can swing from 10 deaths in under 4 minutes, to creeping around for an hour being unseen and un shot at.
Most popular console stuff is kind of fast paced.
 

I'd say it's an outdated assessment to write off console users as just a different breed of gamer who wouldn't enjoy more realism in a game, considering how the gaming landscape has changed. I think most core gamers are actually on the console simply because that's where all the games and accessible hardware is. Plus, there's very few games that are released exclusively for the PC these days anyway. There's not a lot of reason to continue being a PC gamer unless you grew up being a PC gamer. I think it has little to do at this point with a preference for certain types of games over another. Only a minority of strategy games remain PC exclusive out of the need to use a mouse and keyboard as the standard control scheme for the game to function properly. 20-25 years ago it was different - your choice of gaming platform, PC vs console, said a lot about what kinds of games you preferred to play. There was almost no overlap. Today you'll be hard pressed to find a major release PC game you want to play that isn't also available on Xbox or Playstation. It's just not economically as viable to release a game that doesn't tap into the console market. 

 

I also think it's a mistake to look at the situation you described with WW2OL and think the gameplay is not flawed, but instead appear to justify the flaws in WW2OL by saying it just appeals to a different type of gamer. Although WW2OL's gameplay does appeal to a different type of gamer, it's also flawed in it's design that results in inconsistency to the gameplay that doesn't need to be there. This inconsistency frustrates hardcore PC gamers no less than console gamers. That's why WW2OL has struggled to entice a large segment of the PC gaming market over the years. There's a lot of PC gamers out there who love the concept and type of game WW2OL is trying to be, but felt the execution was so lacking that they didn't want to spend their time or money on it. 

I believe a WW2OL with fixed game mechanics, capable of appealing to PC gamers, would be just as appealing to a significant segment of console gamers who would also appreciate a more tactical and realistic game. As long as they had the controller hardware to be competitive, like a mouse and keyboard. There are gamers out there who appreciate these kinds of games who just don't have access to a PC.

I remember as a kid even playing a game like Panzer General on the original nintendo and loving it. They also released a version of that on playstation. You can't make the assumption that only people who play games on a PC would appreciate a historical strategy game like that. It really just comes down to whether or not the console controls allow you to execute playing a game that is complex or not. 

 

Edited by ZeroAce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BLKHWK8 said:

THis is not possible with the current code of the game and resources. 

I am sure it will be discussed as we look at the future of 2.0. (Discussed first)

resources is understood. To hazard a guess on the technicals ... the old openGL we use isn't supported on any console? We'd need to update to more modern APIs and or a client front end like UT4 which already has cross platform ability?

 

3 minutes ago, ZeroAce said:

I'd say it's an outdated assessment to write off console users as just a different breed of gamer who wouldn't enjoy more realism in a game, considering how the gaming landscape has changed. I think most core gamers are actually on the console simply because that's where all the games and accessible hardware is. Plus, there's very few games that are released exclusively for the PC these days anyway. There's not a lot of reason to continue being a PC gamer unless you grew up being a PC gamer. I think it has little to do at this point with a preference for certain types of games over another. Only a minority of strategy games remain PC exclusive out of the need to use a mouse and keyboard as the standard control scheme for the game to function properly. 20-25 years ago it was different - your choice of gaming platform, PC vs console, said a lot about what kinds of games you preferred to play. There was almost no overlap. Today you'll be hard pressed to find a major release PC game you want to play that isn't also available on Xbox or Playstation. It's just not economically as viable to release a game that doesn't tap into the console market. 

IMO this community writes off lots of things for no logical reason. "COD kids (twitch gamers) can't do teamwork" ... apparently no high level events are watched by some as 'twitch' gamers in various esports have INCREDIBLE team work. With nothing really like ww2ol on any console, is there not MASSIVE upside for our uniqueness alone?

Granted not in the current state, we need 64bit, graphics over haul, etc. there is MUCH work to be done before this can be seriously considered. I get that. I comepletely agree with you though Zero, to write off this many millions of gamers is silly.

 

Someone hurry up and win the lottery and finance it all ;-).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with madrebel and zeroace 100%. The gaming landscape and market has shifted immensely since this game was released in 2001. Not only have consoles become more capable, the marginal improvement on a year-to-year basis in graphics overall means that consoles are overall more appealing (even if you eliminate the convenience and cost aspect which consoles dominate). You no longer need to justify having a PC because you can upgrade your graphics card because the difference in graphics between the PS1 and PS2 was a much bigger jump than the PS3 to PS4.

That said I think there are some things lost in the statistics of gaming. Yes PC gamers are a small segment of a large market, but it isn't a segment that is shrinking in absolute numbers. It just hasn't grown as much as the console market or the casual/phone market. Thats why every year since about 2001/2002 when the Xbox and PS2 was released we've been hearing about the imminent death of PC Gaming. Which has never materialized.

That said we shouldn't shut out console gamers because of some per-concieved notions. I like to play Cities: Skylines for example, and that was a game that was recently ported over to consoles. As long as you can get players to play the game and spend some cash to justify the development costs it will be worth it. Consoles are just too large of a segment to ignore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good points aismov. remember, world of warcraft still has around 5 million active subscriptions. certain percentage of those will be gold sellers and what not but that is still a giant number, and no console port so they're all PC gamers. overwatch has 35 million purchases and around 60% of those are on PC according to estimates i've read online. nothing official on these numbers from blizzard.

certainly there are millions of active PC gamers. just saying, for future consideration consoles could bring millions more in potential exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WWII Online's current iteration and scale is best suited for desktop game play. Anything other than that is really out of scope and would be a bit of a shocker to that demographic. To make that work, we'd be essentially be discussing a different product as it wouldn't contain WWII Online's primary ingredient: Scale.

Now if the community would be supportive of and pushing towards creating a product via the Unreal Engine (capable of deploying on multiple platforms), we'd have to likely have some compromises to see that through compared to what you are normally used to at present. Because out of the box, UE4 does not support the massive game world currently supporting WWIIOL. It'd take a lot of engineering to pull that off, and it's something that would require considerably more resources to do.

Part of our internal investigation for how to further enhance WWIIOL's current technology is very realistically evaluating our resources, particularly our manpower and talent / time available. We could be doing a lot more, right now, if we were able to field some full time developers. Astronomically improved timelines to implementation if I were to estimate.

Anyhow, a bit early to discuss any of this and have a solid plan in order. I'm optimistic about our future, so don't take it any other way that forcing myself to be pragmatic when that is really the goal (taking our engine and graphics and sales way further).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, madrebel said:

Someone hurry up and win the lottery and finance it all ;-).

WORD! :lol:

Bottom line is that with the inclusion of keyboard and mouse making consoles a viable option from a control/input standpoint, this game very well could possibly be ported to run on the latest Xbox One or Sony PS4 with a minimal amount of work. Both Xbox and Sony PS4's basically ARE PC's wrapped in cute little boxes.

The Xbox One is running a version of Windows 10 as its OS core (initially launched with Windows 8 core). The Xbox One is running an AMD "jaguar" APU consisting of dual x86-64bit puma based quad core CPUs running at 1.75 ghz, an 853MHz AMD GCN based GPU (found in all AMD video cards from the HD 7000 series through at least the RX400/500 series), and the memory controllers, all squished into the same chip and supported by 8 gigs of DDR3 RAM, 3 gig for system, 5 for the games, supported by a 500GB HD.

Sony PS4 uses Orbis OS which is a branch from FreeBSD Unix. What other PC has always run WWIIOL, and has had a NextSTEP Unix based OS since the OS X "Cheetah" release in 2001? Yup you guessed it, Macintosh.  It also uses an AMD "Jaguar" based APU but was developed with Sony in the mix, so no telling what they changed in the instruction sets. It's two x86-64bit quad core CPU's are clocked at 1.6GHz for PS4 and 2.13GHz for the PS4 Pro, with the AMD GCN GPUs running at 800MHz and 911MHz respectively. It uses 8 gigs of GDDR5 RAM and is also supported by a 500GB HD.

Speaking of OS'a, I also noticed a fresh post from late November this year stating that for the first time, WWIIOL now runs flawlessly on Linux. WOOT!
http://forums.wwiionline.com/forums/topic/420484-for-the-first-time-in-years-the-game-works-flawlessly-in-linux/#comment-6363673

So the only real hardware limitation we might currently face from my understanding of the specs above is that since we are not multi-threaded and rely on a single core, the 1.6-2.13GHz CPU clock speeds could potentially hurt us. My main PC is a 3.5GHz 64bit 8 core, but since WWIIOL is only running in single thread 32bit mode and is leaving 7 of the 8 CPU cores idle, it needs that extra clock speed to keep up with everything. Though with the APU's CPU's puma design being capable of both Out-of-order execution and Speculative execution, it might make up some for the lack of clock speed brute force that most PC's depend on to run the game. As for the rest, being that both units are basically using AMD based PC CPU/GPU/Mem controller architecture, and the rest is common "off the shelf" hardware, the only other unknown limitations would be proprietary stuff they plug into instructions sets for the above mentioned "standard" hardware. Digressing just a little bit, wouldn't even think about it from a spec standpoint until 64 bit and multi-threading was done.

As for the market viability? I agree with the sentiments of several posted above. I think it could work with existing graphics, but only after the addition of voice comms and substantial work in UI and game play dynamics (team work oriented,). But once we get those sorted out, we should definitely look at making ourselves available for that market. Just my $.02

(TL:DR Nothing stopping it but full time dedicated programming resources.)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to hear Hatch. I always thought that since WWIIOL runs on Linux it wouldn't have an issue running PS4 since they are both Unix based. But I never thought of the whole Mac angle of things. But I agree that development resources should continue on the 1.36 path, but I wouldn't discount console players at all. You could very easily play the tank/ATG/AA game with a controller. Infantry as well, but you would probably get wrecked by anyone with a keyboard and a mouse. Flying? Well theoretically everything is there with the two joysticks and dual triggers, I'm sure players would learn but I doubt there would be many aces amongst the group.

And regarding the player demographics that xoom mentioned. I think that the market is deep enough that you would find those players. Hell, they ported Civilization VI to the Nintendo Switch! A Nintendo! The home of Zelda, and Mario, and Pikachu. I pretty much realized that the market for games is wide open when I read about some guy in his 30s crashing his car because he was looking at his phone trying to a hunt a pokemon in Pokemon Go. If you have guys in their 30s running around the park catching pokemon, you will have console players trying, and enjoying WWIIOL.

Its just a question of judicious use of developer resources.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.