• Announcements

    • PITTPETE

      NEW Career Subscriptions now available   06/08/2019

      The all new highly anticipated / requested "Career Based Subscriptions" are available through www.WWIIONLINE.com/account only, starting at $9.99! There are three new subscriptions being added; 1) All Infantry at $9.99/mo, 2) All Air Forces at $9.99/mo, 3) All Ground Forces (Army Persona) at $12.99/mo. Continue reading to learn more and get back into the fight now! View the full article on battlegroundeurope.com
ZEBBEEE

wwiiol through xbox, PS etc

32 posts in this topic

25 minutes ago, aismov said:

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.

Yup.

Consoles aren't just for kids anymore. That's for sure. My nephew is full time Army, in his early 30's, and plays the heck out of his console (can't remember which one). Doesn't even own a PC, only a cell and notebook/tablet. Our demographic is in the console market just as much as any other game playing market. Just hard to know the percentage until you get in there and do it. But just as our long term exposure to the PC market and our short exposure to Steam has shown, to do it right, you really need to have a polished product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, XOOM said:

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.

I don't understand why you say the scale of the game would need to change. It sounds like you're operating here from a presumption that console gamers only want small scale FPS games like CoD built off the unreal engine to dazzle them with sparkles as they run and gun around the map. But, as I was saying, that presumption is just not true these days. There are plenty of PC gamers who only use to want that out of games too and as a result they shunned the hardcore or patient PC games. It's a gamer demographic issue for certain but it's not a demographic issue that is necessarily tied to a particular platform anymore. There's not even an age demographic difference between consoles and PCs anymore. The only real age difference comes when you compare the user base of a nintendo console vs an XBox/Playstation (because nintendo is cheaper, it's hardware can't handle the same games, and therefore games that get produced exclusively for it tend to be geared towards a younger or more casual crowd). The Xbox/Playstation players are not much different from PC gamers these days. I don't think you need a new engine specifically to appeal to console gamers any more than you would need a new engine to appeal to PC gamers.

IL-2 has been adapting their games to consoles for about 10 years already.

Insurgency is a mil-sim round based shooter that started on PC, which I always loved for their realistic weapons handing and movement, and their newest iteration of the game (sandstorm) is also ported to Xbox and Playstation. I actually think they went so far as to optimize the game for the console because it's nigh unplayable on PC for a lot of people.

Warthunder may have arcade mode as the most popular option, but it does have hardcore and intermediate sim versions of the game - and it is also is available on Playstation and Xbox. Even their "arcade" version of the game is really quite high fidelity and not a true arcade game. It's certainly not the level of fidelity you'd expect to see on consoles if you compared what console "fighter" games use to be like 20 years ago compared with PC flight sims. 

The idea of the PC being a different demographic of hardcore gamer who is willing to invest more money, time, and expertise into gaming mostly went out the window with the introduction of the Xbox 360 around 2005. It just took years for the effects to fully manifest as the transition from PC to consoles took place. The 360 could do anything a gaming computer could at the time and it had a vastly larger user base. This marked the beginning of companies moving away from making PC exclusive games to making games tailored for the consoles and then merely porting them over to the PC. Advances in PC hardware it meant nothing to the game developers because it made no sense for them to develop a game for the limited PC market and then spend all the effort of scaling it down for consoles. It just made more sense to design the game around the bulk of their market, the console, and then simply port it over the PC (and often not even doing a good job of that). There was no longer any advantage to pushing the boundries of the latest PC hardware. 

The only thing that probably kept me as a PC gamer was my preference for mouse and keyboard. That's still the only reason that some games like WoW or Civilization won't translate to a console. But, honestly, if the latest Xbox games start all supporting mouse and keyboard then I may have little reason not to buy a cheap console rather than build a new computer. It's cheaper for the performance and a lot less headaches if something goes wrong.

At this point, if WW2OL was ported to console, I would probably prefer to hook up my PC joystick to a console to play it. Mainly because I haven't updated my gaming computer in 10 years (I've had little need to due to console hardware dictating game graphics quality). So if I really wanted to play the latest and greatest stuff, it would be cheaper at this point for me to just buy a console where the hardware is sold to me at below manufacturers cost than it would be for me to go build my own computer all over again. Then I could just use my laptop for work type activities and leave the gaming to the console with a mouse and keyboard hooked up to it.

 

19 hours ago, HATCH said:


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

I also agree 100% that the game is not ready for a console port from a gameplay design and UI perspective. You want to make sure that when you make the port that you are able to capture the new players with a solid game experience. Too many times, at least from my perspective, I've seen WW2OL able to grab PC gamer's attention for a short time and get an influx of trials on a large scale but fail to retain those players. I believe the reason has always not because they didn't like the concept but because the consistency of it's execution was lacking due to incomplete game mechanics and poor UI design.

The upside to this is that anything you need to do to the gameplay dynamics and UI to make it a better console experience are the exact things you need to do to also make it a better PC experience. So working on shoring up the PC experience can then lead to a later port to console. I don't believe the console would need different gameplay dynamics. And if they are required to use a mouse and keyboard it shouldn't require any change to the UI either. Although I suppose if you really want to try hard to make it playable with a controller then you could tweak their UI a bit. But I wouldn't expect them to have much success playing the infantry game on a controller so it's probably not something you'd want to encourage.

 

 

Edited by ZeroAce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fwiw - 'keyboard/mouse' aren't the only options here either.

https://www.amazon.com/Combat-Hotas-Flight-Stick-PlayStation-4/dp/B01A0P8NBC?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B01A0P8NBC

https://www.amazon.com/Thrustmaster-T-Flight-Hotas-Flight-playstation-4/dp/B015PJ68BK?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B015PJ68BK

and even some rudder pedals

http://www.thrustmaster.com/en_US/products/tflight-rudder-pedals

plus of course an array of  wheels + pedals ranging from low end to pretty high end for the various car games on the platforms. the console platforms as hatch mentioned are pretty beefy these days with solid peripherals. the VR headsets too, hell you get VR working idk that i'd buy an occulus/vive maybe just switch to console.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of peripherals and VR, that brings up another point: One the reasons I wanted to get a playstation 3, as well as giving me a bluray player, was because I wanted to try playing shooter games by using something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-Move-Sharp-Shooter-3/dp/B002I0K622

https://www.amazon.com/Move-Blaster-Combo-Pack-Playstation-3/dp/B0045CZCT8/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1547250073&sr=8-4&keywords=playstation+move+shoot

That had the potential to deliver experiences you couldn't get with a mouse and keyboard, and potentially even be more effective than a mouse and keyboard.

Or the potential of using the motion controller for sword fighting games. I played a PC medieval themed sword fighting game based on the source engine a long time ago but there's only so much you can do with a mouse and keyboard setup. It really demands motion control to come to life. I think the problem is they just never came out with any good games that really capitalized on the motion control, designed to use it from the ground up - at least not ones I am aware of. Peripherals are usually only as good as the support they get from game developers. But the point is I was more inclined to buy a console when they offered me something I couldn't get on the PC, and that came about through the peripheral options.

I also bought TrackIR to play WW2OL with, so I was all about wanting things that would increase both immersion and effectiveness.

Long ago I looked into Nividia's VR at one point for the PC but it didn't seem like there was enough support to justify the cost. But, in concept, I'd prefer to play VR based shooter or simulation games if it was affordable and had good game support. I might still prefer the mouse and keyboard for overhead strategy games but for any game where first person immersion is a critical part of the experience you really benefit from adding VR or good peripherals.

 

Edited by ZeroAce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my understanding is FPS games don't 'work' yet with VR. granted, very little hands on but apparently from what i've read/heard from others is there is an odd disconnect when trying to use traditional means of movement through the 3d space. meaning, even with a 'gun' in your hands and a joystick to move in wasd fashion that it or a normal console like or steam like controller ... the players struggle with comfort. this may be wrapped up in earlier VR display issues, honestly haven't tracked it closely but my take away was it just didn't work. the VR games that do work, again from what ive heard/read, are either vehicle centric or if first person, the game moves around you instead of you through the game.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/vr-devs-fps-games,31100.html

thats now an old story but it sums up some of the early issues.

here is a more recent video

Note the body movements required ... don't get me wrong it would be cool to experience but i don't see myself participating in, say, a large town fight in ww2ol for 2 hours using that method. standing up, leaning forward, back, crouching, actually going prone ... seriously in my house that's going to lead to an ER visit with various childrens toys embedded in either my feet or chest. F legos!

 

now, in a plane or tank ... sign me the hell up. in that you're expected to be seated in one place for the most part. that I can deal with for extended play time. another issue, we'd need 'active' UI for some things. with a VR headset on, you better REALLY know your key binds and if you're missing one that you only kinda sometimes use, you gotta pop the headset off to find it on the keyboard. having some UI menu you can interact with somehow might be required although for a first pass, IMO, i'm fine popping off the headset if I had to for seldom used things.

 

AT guns with 6DoF would be nice too. Tank commander that pops up/down with a quick head up/down movement. A lot of potential for vehicles but I'm not sold the 'long travel' issue is solved yet nor the fatigue aspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if we flip this idea around we can easily see how viable the game would be on the console... Do a poll ingame and ask players if they own a console and what it is.

I for example own a Nintendo Switch. So they you have it a WWIIOL player that also enjoys Zelda and a bunch of indie platformers and puzzle games. I'm sure the reverse would be true for lots of console owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2018 at 10:43 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

Sorry for the late response but, now you can play cross console on fortnight - Xbox to PS4 - Xbox to PS4 to PC to Nintendo Switch to your cellar device

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.