Call of Duty, Silent Hunter, Panzer Commander?

[muzik]

AH can inform supporting sims of the scenario start, end, swap to another maps and starting conditions, etc.

I am assuming of course that a special product version or addon would be released for these games to add the HLA layer and supporting logic and constraints as well as the maps.

An WWIIOnline/AH symbiosis might almost be worth it.  Each has a core competency they excel in that the other supports but isn’t their main talent.  And they are in the same town (Sorta).  And they’ve had a past working relationship (I don’t tknow tho it that is a advantage or disadvantage depending on the baggage ). 

Regards,
Wab

1 You seemed to already see this as I envisioned it but just to clarify, I see HTC "hosting" the CoD, SH, etc on dedicated servers. HTC has complete control over the each game environment. When the war is won, HTC doesnt merely "inform," those game arenas are reset automatically with the correct maps etc. They will get text notification just as AH does.

2 That is what I foresee. And I dont think it would be cost in-effective as you pondered because after the initial merge and debugging, the game could go for years without any significant developments. For example CoD could license an old version of the game. New versions would not be released to HTC until it reaches the end of it's profit life. As for any new items that Hitech creates, a new plane for example could be developed by hitech and a cloning program could render the same item for CoD leaving the CoD team without any real expense in supporting the game.

3 I agree that using WW2Online would be easier, but I dont see either company liking the idea of, or doing well, splitting their profits unless a huge influx of new customers hit this "new joint game." If not, then both companies have just split profits for very little to show if anything. As a matter of fact the larger of the two would lose money if they split 50/50.

As I said earlier, games like CoD get their profit from software sales, not charging for online play. So the developers are more likely to say yes when offered a smaller cut yet ongoing income. If the idea failed they wouldnt lose anything other than development time. Plus as I said CoD has had millions of players where as WW2online has maybe 3x the number of players of AH. (my best guess) The potential for triple digit customer base is a far better gamble.

Either way, I don't want to download another 10+ gigs for a piss-poor game thing that probably wont work and will be filled with whining, screaming CoD kids on my crappy Alaskan internet 

If you dont want to play CoD you dont have to. So much for downloading the 10gigs. Learn to use squelch. A LOT!

[Ack-Ack]

using CoD or MoH and how they have their servers setup is actually apples and oranges compared to what would like to see.  You're also mistaken that any royalties or license fees will be inexpensive and honestly I don't know why you think this will be such a simple thing when it is anything but.


ack-ack

[lengro]

Muzik,

What you think is simple, is very complex when you dig into the details. So let me give you another example:

the CoD players - playing in their game - sees this tank coming at them. the tank is controlled by an AH player. The
CoD players tries to hide in their highly detailed graphical complex environment.
The Ah Tank commander - playing his game - already spottet them before they took cover - so he is heading to run them
over.

Now, how will this look from:

1) CoD perspective
they see a tank coming at them. The tanks x,y,z positions is calculated in AH - but since AH ground is pretty flat,
there is not much variance in Z - these numbers is forwarded to the CoD higly detailed ground environment with lots of
bumps and holes. It doesn't look good that the tank seems to be totally unaffected by ground variance. It just runs at
a straight line directly at them.
You can then say - the server which transforms between AH x,y,z and Cod x,y,z - just could read the ground values from
CoD and modify them so the tank banks and tilt according to the CoD environment, or the CoD client could recieve the
raw data, and then do the manipulation of tilt and bank locally, but...

2) AH perspective
The AH player running at a flat map, has no problems with aiming his machinegun - he is not aware of how hes tank tilts
and banks in CoD. And he has no problem seing the troopers, because when the highly detailed Enviroment is send to the
transformation server and delivered to AH, the low-polygon ground engine in AH doesn't render their cover very well.


look at the screenshots of the AH tank and the CoD guys.
How will you transform the enviroment?


1) Build an AH low-poly map based on the high-poly CoD map?
Here is a link to the AH map editor - please try and make an AH mockup of the screenshot from CoD.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/downloads-content-art.html
Good luck!

2) build a transformation engine who can transform AH maps to Cod maps - or CoD maps to AH maps? Getting building,
trees, bushes, hills and so on right. place the texture mapping correct, flip all polys with normal vector pointing
outward, converting bump maps, ocapity maps, alpha maps and stitch it all together correctly. Running polygon
optimization/smoothing and still have objects look correct.
Good luck!

3) Build a completely new map which works in both games. hey, we can then use a common 3D engine in both games.
Now we are beginning to make sense!

When we are done with this, we can start to look how Panzer commander maps will interact.

How's this for your little bail out scenario Lengro?...  Ok you bail out of your plane at 2k above ground. You pull up your clipboard as you descend. You now have 2 options. Tower out and take whatever decision is made for you or select "SWITCH GAME."

Good, you are starting to realize the problems with the map transformations - it's seems easier to switch game  

[muzik]

the CoD players - playing in their game - sees this tank coming at them. the tank is controlled by an AH player. The
CoD players tries to hide in their highly detailed graphical complex environment.
The Ah Tank commander - playing his game - already spottet them before they took cover - so he is heading to run them
over.

Now, how will this look from:

1) CoD perspective
they see a tank coming at them. The tanks x,y,z positions is calculated in AH - but since AH ground is pretty flat,
there is not much variance in Z - these numbers is forwarded to the CoD higly detailed ground environment with lots of
bumps and holes. It doesn't look good that the tank seems to be totally unaffected by ground variance. It just runs at
a straight line directly at them.

It seems that you are slowy catching on Lengro, but you still dont get it. CoD is playing on a custom-made CoD map modeled after AH maps. Every blade of grass would be itentical in CoD. If there are NO fluffluff'n BUMPS in AH, then there are NO fluffluff'n BUMPS in CoD. It is the same map. Get it?

Granted, CoD players have beautiful graphic renditions of trees, grass, people and tanks, but they are not going to play on one of the original CoD maps crammed into a AH environment. When they convert an AH map to CoD format, they can get as aesthetically detailed as they want to. But they CAN NOT put obstacles in CoD environments that are not in AH or that create an unfair advantage. How hard is that to understand?

YOU are making this far more complex than it needs to be. We dont have to "Build an AH low-poly map based on the high-poly CoD map." It doesnt matter how different the graphics engine is.

And when you said this..."build a transformation engine who can transform AH maps to Cod maps - or CoD maps to AH maps? Getting building,
trees, bushes, hills and so on right. place the texture mapping correct, flip all polys with normal vector pointing
outward, converting bump maps, ocapity maps, alpha maps and stitch it all together correctly. Running polygon
optimization/smoothing and still have objects look correct." AGAIN you are INSISTING that you cant do something in CoD or AH that you couldnt do in the other. If you can build a bush in AH, you can build a bush JUST LIKE it in CoD!

Personally, I think you might just be confused. But the other option is, you can't stand being wrong and you are throwing all this programming babble out thinking you're going to BS your way out of it. NOT going to happen. Im not a programmer, but Im not stupid either.

I never said this would be easy, I said it would be EASIER than doing it from the ground up.  And if that isn't enough, then the fact that doing it from the ground up is STUPID considering that anything hitech creates isnt going to be half of what CoD is and it will never reach that level of popularity. If hitech does his own, he may increase his business over the years and someday 15 years down the road have 100k members. If he used CoD he might do it overnight!   hmmm  which sounds more appealing?

[muzik]

When we are done with this, we can start to look how Panzer commander maps will interact.

Good, you are starting to realize the problems with the map transformations - it's seems easier to switch game 

1 Great, looking forward to repeating myself.

2 Wrong again. For the 100th time, I never suggested that the games be "one" game. My assumption has ALWAYS been that you would have to switch from one to the other to play different aspects of the game.

[lengro]

Granted, CoD players have beautiful graphic renditions of trees, grass, people and tanks, but they are not going to play on one of the original CoD maps crammed into a AH environment. When they convert an AH map to CoD format, they can get as aesthetically detailed as they want to. But they CAN NOT put obstacles in CoD environments that are not in AH or that create an unfair advantage.

You can't make low-poly "as aesthetically detailed as they want to" - not gonna happen.
In CoD, a converted AH map will be ugly flatland - CoD is all about fighting and hiding in a very complex 3D environment - CoD players will stay in their own online maps - not a single will join flatland.

CoD 3D engine is highly optimized for complex 3D handling - no use for that anymore, they might aswell license HTC's 3D engine. (you know what I'm hinting at)


Then they can also use the same map - no need to rebuild maps between very different 3D engines.

If he used CoD he might do it overnight!

 

Personally, I think you might just be confused. But the other option is, you can't stand being wrong and you are throwing all this programming babble out thinking you're going to BS your way out of it. NOT going to happen. Im not a programmer, but Im not stupid either.

 
Try to stay on topic.

My opinion hasn't changed, I still say - not possible - the only way is the ww2online way - design a common framework to acommodate all type of players. Do reuse the best 3D models, flight handling physichs, ballistic physichs engines and so on, but wrap it up in 1 game client.

This is going in circles, we will never agree. Can we still be friends?  

[FLS]

So this would only be in the Axis vs Allies arena?

[Ack-Ack]

1 Great, looking forward to repeating myself.

2 Wrong again. For the 100th time, I never suggested that the games be "one" game. My assumption has ALWAYS been that you would have to switch from one to the other to play different aspects of the game.

Have you thought about why this isn't done with other games?  Like I mentioned before, Ubisoft tried this before with Silent Hunter and Destroyer Commander.  Two seperate games that in theory were supposed to let players of each game connect with each other and play.  The only problem is that it didn't work, it was a messy, buggy and laggy affair.  In fact, the lesson learned from it was not to do it and I have yet to see anyone do it since, let alone successfully.

ack-ack

[muzik]

So this would only be in the Axis vs Allies arena?

FLS, I did not suggest AvA only, someone else did. I think that would be silly as long as the majority of players stayed in the MA. I suggest it be in all arenas. And in spite of what a couple of guys here say. It can be done.

In CoD, a converted AH map will be ugly flatland - CoD is all about fighting and hiding in a very complex 3D environment - CoD players will stay in their own online maps - not a single will join flatland.

CoD 3D engine is highly optimized for complex 3D handling - no use for that anymore, they might aswell license HTC's 3D engine. (you know what I'm hinting at)


Then they can also use the same map - no need to rebuild maps between very different 3D engines.

 
My opinion hasn't changed, I still say - not possible - the only way is the ww2online way - design a common framework to acommodate all type of players. Do reuse the best 3D models, flight handling physichs, ballistic physichs engines and so on, but wrap it up in 1 game client.

This is going in circles, we will never agree. Can we still be friends? 

So let me translate what you just said. An AH map can be built for CoD but it would be ugly and flat. And the only reason CoD guys wouldnt want to be there is because it's ugly and flat.

There's no need for their graphics engine because if you cant have "bumps" then everything should be ugly even the players and buildings. So they should just use stick figures like we have in AH.

Ridiculous!

Again, a bush is a bush. You are wrong that they cant make their bushes prettier than ours. As long as the dimensions are the same, they can paint the houses any way they choose and it wouldnt make a bit of difference to game play. As a matter of fact they would give all of the buildings internal structure that AH doesnt have and then we have instant house to house fighting.

Let me drop another bomb on you, It's ugly and flat on our end too. None of us are here because we are looking for the best graphics in the genre. But you dont see us running for Il2 or other games with 10x better graphics do you? None of us would trade AH for a better looking graphics unless it meant the same level of game play. And no one, especially those of us who despise the ridiculously small spawn and die maps in games like CoD would choose better graphics over better play.

Players could actually escape the area if they get into trouble. The squeakers running around at light speed with impossible aim would be a thing of the past because someone with more patience and a larger field of battle to hide in would put an end to that real fast. Even if some of that behavior did survive in a larger environment it would be minimal.

And your opinion did change, it started out as "impossible." Then it went to "you cant combine these games because the polygons don't like each other." (that was when you thought you fully understood what I was suggesting) Then it went to the "the lil foot soldier has bumps and the tank doesn't bounce enough." And finally we have "flat and ugly."

From a business standpoint WW2Online would not be very successful choice because HT would have to share more of the income with them as opposed to a smaller cut going to a game that isnt making money anymore.

Best case scenario, both sides might come out no better or worse than they were before, but there wont be a flood of new players in the genre. Merging with CoD might bring in thousands of squeakers who's daddy's willing to pay for them. And yes I have already thought of a fair way to SILENCE them so we dont have to hear them!


So we haven't been going in circles, you just steered right into my side. And we can be GREAT friends, as soon as you admit I am right.

Oh dont forget the other 2 programmers who also said I am right even though they dont like the idea either.

[Lusche]

But you dont see us running for Il2 or other games with 10x better graphics do you?

I do.

None of us would trade AH for a better looking graphics unless it meant the same level of game play.

Maybe not you, maybe not him, maybe not me. But we aren't everybody. Lots of people have left this game and went elsewhere.

[FLS]

FLS, I did not suggest AvA only, someone else did. I think that would be silly as long as the majority of players stayed in the MA. I suggest it be in all arenas. And in spite of what a couple of guys here say. It can be done

So the Americans fighting Germans in COD on our map get bombed by P-51s and B-17s flown by Rooks fighting Bishops and Knights? How do games with 2 sides join a game with 3 sides?

[CptTrips]

Oh dont forget the other 2 programmers who also said I am right even though they dont like the idea either.

Don’t get me wrong Muzik, I never said I didn’t “like” the idea.  I’ve dreamed for years that sims would be written to support a common interface standard so I could buy “BlackShark” and buy “Falcon 4.0” and then hook the up.  That would be too cool.

And I personally think it’s technically possible.  I never said easy or trivial, but possible.  I do believe modifications would have to be made to the code base of both products.  I know there have been some past sims that have tried it and failed.  I’m not sure that a general principle can be drawn from that.  I’ve seen some poorly implemented flightsims, that doesn’t prove that it’s impossible to write a flightsim.  It only proves that THAT team did a poor job in THAT attempt.  I do know I’ve seen some highly complex simulations, that weren’t originally designed to interoperate, be retro-fitted to share a simulation space through HLA.  So I have to believe that with a proper design and approach and with smart enough people, it is possible to integrate two separate simulations through a decoupled layer.

My push back is on the business case.  Frankly, I think a company that published  COD would look at HTC’s subscriber base and think, “We have more play testers than that!”
And they’d look at HTC’s revenues and think “We spend more than that on free pizza for our play testers!”  I just don’t think they are playing in the same ballpark.

WWIIOnline however, while still bigger, is at least in the same order of magnitude.  They are in the same genre, and game business model.  Since they’ve worked together at a previous company, I bet they are taking roughly similar approaches technically.  It would probably me the easiest for them to integrate than anyone.  They have almost perfectly complementary core competencies.  Frankly, HTC's ground and strat components…..well, don’t make the best use of their talents.  WWIIOnline is almost exactly the opposite.  HTC tossing away their ground vehicles and strat at this point, and WWIIOnline dumping their aircraft, would not be a great loss for either, IMHO.  They could each then concentrate on what their talents best support.  I’ve seldom seen a more perfect candidate for consolidation.

But, it ain’t gonna happen.  Its like wishing the Eagles and Beatles would form a super-band and come play at my birthday party.    


,
Wab

[lengro]

So we haven't been going in circles, you just steered right into my side. And we can be GREAT friends, as soon as you admit I am right.

It's going to be interesting when these AH tankers, with AH realistic ballistics and AH viewing system:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqTbvD1l44M

Runs into these CoD tankers, with CoD non-existant ballistics and mouse point-and-shoot system. (please disregard environment and imagine flatland with pretty bitmaps)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2wd7M0Dllw

Players want equal footings in equal enviroment = same 3D engine, same physics engine



 

[Ack-Ack]

And your opinion did change, it started out as "impossible." Then it went to "you cant combine these games because the polygons don't like each other." (that was when you thought you fully understood what I was suggesting) Then it went to the "the lil foot soldier has bumps and the tank doesn't bounce enough." And finally we have "flat and ugly."

I will tell you that what you wish for is extremely difficult and the cost of development would be prohibitive for most large studios as there is no guarantee the developed tech will pan out.

Our company looked at doing something like this for a series of our games and came to the conclusion that the tech needed to get it to work isn't quite there yet and we would need to develop the tech, the money costs would be extremely high with little or no guarantee that we'd ever see a return on the investment and time.  It was estimated that it would take at least 3 to 5 years to develop the tech to allow these seperate games to connect with each other, that doesn't include the development time for the engine these games would use that would allow not only cross-game play but also cross-platform play.

It's difficult enough to get people on different platforms to play together in a single game.

ack-ack

[321BAR]

why dont we just wait for HTC which has told us that HiTech himself would both love to have submarines in the game, and want to make a FPS style combat for us also to build it in his own game and make things much more simple???