Bionite: Origins needs Support!

[Ded10c]

the problem with UE4 is that is made by EPIC

based on my experience with EPIC and how they support there products, no one will ever get anywhere using UE4. That engine will be full of bugs for years.

for example, the memory pop bug in UE3. they didnt fix that for years. anyone using UE4 is just a lab rat.

That sure explains why UE3 is the most popular engine created to date.

In my experience, EPIC's support is fantastic - both for UE3 and UE4. I'm sure it won't be long until TheJamsh - who work(s/ed) professionally with both engines - comes in and says precisely the same thing.


And regarding it having bugs - there's an old adage that runs that if you think your software has no bugs then you're not testing it properly.

[danrhodenizer]

I thought James 'TheJamsh' got the physics code from Battlezone 98 working in the Unreal 4 engine? I'm curious what engine they will be using.

[Nielk1]

WHAT?!?!

you guys think that they wont use a modern engine??

why the hell wouldnt they?

and if THAT is true, why do i get all kinds of hell from people for not switching to UE4??

Because you don't have any substantial complex code-base and there is a clear and concise upgrade path from UDK to UE4. If you were on UE3 I could understand, but UDK's level of access is very simple and would port easily to blueprint in UE4. The only question is how much work you have done, but given how what you show off barely changes, you can't really have that much in place other than resources, which port easily.

As for BZ1/BZ2's physics, it's literally car lift-spring people, it's not hard.

[LtFEED]

And regarding it having bugs - there's an old adage that runs that if you think your software has no bugs then you're not testing it properly.

VERY good point. it almost like "if something is done right, no one knows anything was done at all"

[danrhodenizer]

Regarding how long they've been working on it and what engine.

[LtFEED]

In my experience, EPIC's support is fantastic - both for UE3 and UE4. I'm sure it won't be long until TheJamsh - who work(s/ed) professionally with both engines - comes in and says precisely the same thing.

i can understand that. however if you go back and read the UDN forums, you will find hundreds of post by developers lamenting over the fact that they couldnt release their product because of the memory pop bug that would occure in the level streaming system. I read HUNDREDS of posts from people BEGGING the jerk at EPIC to fix that bug becuase they couldnt release their game to the public. If the game being developed in UE4 is not for commercial use, then its fine. NO ONE that makes a UE4 game and sells it on the market will get a decent nights sleep for months if not YEARS

[LtFEED]

still the networking master Dan?

very interesting answer from the people at Rebellion.

[danrhodenizer]

still the networking master Dan?

very interesting answer from the people at Rebellion.

haha still working towards something :p at least they respond in a timely manner. I still think this could be good for Bionite too, this publicity could lead into some more interest. Hopefully it does, you can never have too many FPS/RTS games

[LtFEED]

still the networking master Dan?

very interesting answer from the people at Rebellion.

haha still working towards something :p at least they respond in a timely manner. I still think this could be good for Bionite too, this publicity could lead into some more interest. Hopefully it does, you can never have too many FPS/RTS games

agreed

[Red Spot]

'remastering' the code wont work using a modern engine. the original code for BZ is way too old. at best they can use it as a model going forward. If they take any shortcuts, the game will be complete shiite. I hope the try to use UE4, then they can spend all of there time working for EPIC as quality testers and beta testing.

Old code is good code. It's important as a programmer and developer to understand that the shiniest new thing is oft not a move you want to make. Mature code, more specifically than old, is good. The more mature code is, the more tested and bug free it is. Also, you're looking at this as an all or nothing situation, where any modern program, and I mean past 30 years, is a highly modular beast. They will keep the existing engine and REMASTER IT.

If you want an example of a remaster where the original code is used, look at HOMEWORLD Remastered. That's running a lot of "original code [that] is way too old" and it's **** great!

They used HW2's engine for both HW and HW2 and royally screwed the first game. HW2 may be good remaster, HW absolutelly is not. Not even mentioning the way targeting worked in the original and how it became a RNG in HW2 and thus now is in both remastered games.

[DeusExCeteri]

HW2 may be good remaster, HW absolutelly is not.

Wroooooong, as a long-time Homeworld fan I'm absolutely loving both remastered games. You're entitled to your opinion that HW1 was "butchered" and an "unfaithful" remaster but maybe speak more subjectively if that's the case because I can feel the butthurt from here.

[Nielk1]

Side point before it comes up: BZ1 and BZ2 are far more different than HW1 and HW2. HW1's core difference was in UI, and it was full of tons of screens. HW2 is more the sub-window style that doesn't get you away from the gameplay. Admittedly some of the HW1 stuff might seem a bit odd in the HW2 UI, but it works.

[blue banana]

I'm sorry, but I have to nitpick. I find this reboot/remaster/remake/whatever to be promising.

Games like BZ take years to develop (took six months for me to debug Bionite and im not done yet).

Sorry, but no. Bionite is not Battlezone, and Battlezone is not Bionite. Platoon Studios is not Activision, and Activision is not Platoon Studios. Don't read it literally.

The reason the original BZ titles were so good was because of the blood, sweat and tears that were spent by the developers to make that game. If anyone thinks for one second that Rebellion is going to allocate the resources to make a decent BZ sequel, they are seriously delluded.

Given their description of saying a "remaster", or whatever you wish to interpret, it is clearly not going to be a sequel. Rebellion spent big bucks for the Battlezone IP, and they are very professional- they will allocate the resources. They are fully aware of what "Battlezone 1998" actually means.

Based on what i have seen, the devs at Rebellion will spend maybe six months making the game, 6 months debugging it and the results will be horrible. MARK MY WORDS.

You, and every other outsider, have seen nothing. I can only guess that this upcoming game will be better than the Battlezones we have now, which continue to be incredible.

[Red Spot]

Side point before it comes up: BZ1 and BZ2 are far more different than HW1 and HW2. HW1's core difference was in UI, and it was full of tons of screens. HW2 is more the sub-window style that doesn't get you away from the gameplay. Admittedly some of the HW1 stuff might seem a bit odd in the HW2 UI, but it works.

I really do not care for the UI changes, much. They buthchered the tactical way you could play the original and replaced the actual tactical options with buttons that give the impression it is there, but it isnt.
There is enough info about it around the net .. and even Gearbox has admitted this.


Deus, exactly. You're coming across as butthurted. I'm not even purely stating my own opinion, you seem to though.

[DeusExCeteri]

I'm not even purely stating my own opinion, you seem to though.

Excellent observation skills! You continue to prove that you possess reading comprehension! I did in fact state my view as an opinion!

I do also acknowledge that HW1 has been changed in some pretty big ways from the original, gameplay HAS been changed in ways that other people may find unfavourable.

But when you say that HW1 remastered is ABSOLUTELY a bad remaster I have to stop you there because I disagree and I'm not about to have a game that I personally enjoy be called trash without my own 2 cents.

That is all.

*shrug*

Carry on.