On June 20 2014 06:46 KaiserJohan wrote: I wonder where the money for Artillery comes from? a whole year of development with no clear goal or end-design, while awesome for the developers to play with, don't understand why anyone would pump money down that hole. I really wished hotbid would've asked that.
According to crunchbase, Artillery took $2.5 million in first round funding from a diverse group of venture capitalists. They were also founded by a group of reasonably high-level ex-Facebook and Google devs, which means they're likely to have (a) good access to investors, and (b) a not insignificant amount of personal capital to throw into the project.
It's worth keeping in mind that the end-goal of the company isn't to build an RTS. It's to build a proven technology for delivering RTS-like games over HTML5. The browser-based gaming market is beyond huge, and if they can position themselves as the "Source/Unreal Engine" of that area, that's where the big money is going to come from.
Whatever actual game they're developing is just the necessary proof that the technology works and can attract people to play it. From the engine developers point of view, the more time they spend during "Atlas" development trying out how the engine can do different crazy things, the more complete and flexible the underlying code will be proven to be, and the more attractive it'll eventually be to license to others.
On June 20 2014 21:35 Skilledblob wrote: it's nice to see all the idiots in this thread that did not watch the interviews and believe the tl;dr bullshit that was on the first page.
no he will not stop casting no he is not joining an accounting firm
Really liked the interviews, especially the part where he mocked arm chair game designers. Loved the the truth bomb that "we are really bad at predicting what will be fun". The game seems to be on good footing and I am glad they are not taking anything for granted and working from the ground up. People get to hung up with what the believe are the "cores" of a good RTS and it's awesome to see them bore down to the the core of what is fun and what isn't.
On June 20 2014 15:38 LastDance wrote: I think Starcraft 2 could have been something astronomical if Blizzard had people like Day9 on the dev team.
imagine boxer in david kim's position ;_;
Patch note : - Blue flame hellion get +20 against everything. - Blue flame hellion can now shoot air units. - Nuke get +300 damage - Command center can crush interceptors - You can ally your ally and unally him on top of widow mines - Planetary Fortress can shoot while flying.
On June 20 2014 15:38 LastDance wrote: I think Starcraft 2 could have been something astronomical if Blizzard had people like Day9 on the dev team.
imagine boxer in david kim's position ;_;
I know, just look at the amazing job he did with his pro Starcraft team.
You mean brining MMA to be one of the best player of WOL era ?
Damn Day9 ♥ For my last cast i brought up his : "The player name is a famous writer, pokemon or pharmaceutical product" everyone was like : "what did you smoke". Damn those noobs :p
On June 20 2014 12:53 RogerChillingworth wrote: It's nice to have a day9 interview but the interviewer's voice should never be 3x louder than the interviewee's voice. especially when you're constantly cutting him off >_< pro tip; put the mic closer to day9 and further away from you.
Then you think in every other interview HotBid ever did, he did a good job?
On June 20 2014 12:53 RogerChillingworth wrote: It's nice to have a day9 interview but the interviewer's voice should never be 3x louder than the interviewee's voice. especially when you're constantly cutting him off >_< pro tip; put the mic closer to day9 and further away from you.
Then you think in every other interview HotBid ever did, he did a good job?
On June 20 2014 22:49 Plansix wrote: Really liked the interviews, especially the part where he mocked arm chair game designers. Loved the the truth bomb that "we are really bad at predicting what will be fun". The game seems to be on good footing and I am glad they are not taking anything for granted and working from the ground up. People get to hung up with what the believe are the "cores" of a good RTS and it's awesome to see them bore down to the the core of what is fun and what isn't.
I can't say I fully agree on this point. I was listening to an interview with Tony Zurovec (the lead designer for the Crusader: No Remorse and No Regret series that made him a bit of a legend), and he talks about how he had this really great, enticing vision for a game with such a solid concept that he could never let go. And I'm sure he playtested it and everything, but he never radically changed any of his core ideas, so to say that people are bad at predicting what will be fun may not necessarily be true for everyone. I'm a bit skeptical as to whether you can really generalize that statement to all game developers. Generalizing is usually something that you should be careful about!
Besides that there are a lot of templates one can use; I mean you could probably copy a Doom game and make a fairly successful indie shooter without going into deep playtesting. And there are likely plenty of other templates for the other genres to build off of. So you can make predictions off of previous successes; I think Day 9 is probably talking about the details of the game which may be substantially different from others.
As an aside I remember getting power-ups in Red Alert 1 and 2 and I thought they made for a fun and game-enhancing addition in single and multiplayer; so it goes to show that it can work if its designed right.
I guess another example might be the development of the game Underrail, an indie game that follows the style of Fallout in some respects but is mostly its own game with unique concepts. There has been a lot of playtesting (I was part of the alpha), but the core game really has not changed; it was fun from conception. So again I think the statement isn't entirely accurate. The only thing I remember being altered were the perks you could get, introducing wear and degradation, lockpicks, carry weight...mostly secondary effects on your items that were necessary to help balance the economy
Or if it is and these people are just statistical improbabilities, I don't know how you could make a general case that among thousands of game developers, the majority of their original ideas failed to be fun and had to be changed significantly. You'd need quite a bit of data to make that claim, I don't know maybe Sean has this data but I'm a bit skeptical
Anyway I love Day9, I hope I can meet him in person, give him a hug, and hopefully not weird anyone out . He's just such a positive influence, and one of the most entertaining people I've ever seen. And its Friday, my favourite day of the week . Wonder what he's playing this time...
On June 20 2014 22:49 Plansix wrote: Really liked the interviews, especially the part where he mocked arm chair game designers. Loved the the truth bomb that "we are really bad at predicting what will be fun". The game seems to be on good footing and I am glad they are not taking anything for granted and working from the ground up. People get to hung up with what the believe are the "cores" of a good RTS and it's awesome to see them bore down to the the core of what is fun and what isn't.
I can't say I fully agree on this point. I was listening to an interview with Tony Zurovec (the lead designer for the Crusader: No Remorse and No Regret series that made him a bit of a legend), and he talks about how he had this really great, enticing vision for a game with such a solid concept that he could never let go. And I'm sure he playtested it and everything, but he never radically changed any of his core ideas, so to say that people are bad at predicting what will be fun may not necessarily be true for everyone. I'm a bit skeptical as to whether you can really generalize that statement to all game developers. Generalizing is usually something that you should be careful about!
I agree. I think it might be better to say that you can predict what games will, can, or should be fun but it is hard to predict what games will be successful.
On June 20 2014 12:47 Penguinator wrote: I think I could actually just listen to Day9 talk about absolutely nothing for hours upon hours and I would never get tired of it
Absolutely. I still tune into dailies once in a while, despite not getting much from them because he always says interesting stuff.
HotBid needs to stop spazzing out and asking several questions about every single minute detail the person being interviewed mentions. It just leads the interviews off on tangents upon tangents which then become a clusterfuck.
On June 21 2014 02:33 sigm wrote: HotBid needs to stop spazzing out and asking several questions about every single minute detail the person being interviewed mentions. It just leads the interviews off on tangents upon tangents which then become a clusterfuck.
On June 20 2014 15:38 LastDance wrote: I think Starcraft 2 could have been something astronomical if Blizzard had people like Day9 on the dev team.
imagine boxer in david kim's position ;_;
Patch note : - Blue flame hellion get +20 against everything. - Blue flame hellion can now shoot air units. - Nuke get +300 damage - Command center can crush interceptors - You can ally your ally and unally him on top of widow mines - Planetary Fortress can shoot while flying.
EPT
The game he's designing will undoubtedly be awesome! It should be codenamed tfarcratS though. 
. He's just such a positive influence, and one of the most entertaining people I've ever seen. And its Friday, my favourite day of the week 
