"Edit Game Settings" [Archive] - Team17 Forum

PDA

View Full Version : "Edit Game Settings"

XRiZUX
12 Oct 2012, 19:32
Ok, I'm disappointed. It's because of limitation.
Weapon Options:
(Useful Weapons/Tools)
Max Girders (4)
Max Sentry Gun (2)
Max Plug Hole (2)
Max Electro Magnet (2)
(Overpowered Weapons)
Max Concrete Donkey (Infinite)
Max Boggy B (Infinite)
Banana Bomb (Infinite)
(ETC)
Take a good look at this, why are we not able to have infinite of "everything" if that's what we wanted in the Weapon Options?
I find that these limitations are really annoying, I wanted to use more than 2 Sentry Guns for each player, but; "NO you can't because we feel it's necessary to limit these specific weapons/tools. We do not want you to play the game different than we intend you to."
I hope to get some kinda explanation why these limits are there, as I see no point in these limits. Thanks for reading.

BethanyTeam17
12 Oct 2012, 20:39
Ok, I'm disappointed. It's because of limitation.
Max Girders (4)
Max Sentry Gun (2)
Max Plug Hole (2)
Max Electro Magnet (2)
I hope to get some kinda explanation why these limits are there, as I see no point in these limits. Thanks for reading.
Hey, this is a technical limit as these are objects which remain on the map, and then there is the potential of 4 players all placing the limits of these. They are not the same as using the weapons you mentioned.
Once these have been placed and destroyed then the players can buy more from the in-game shop using the coin crates.
Though thanks for your feedback, and it is something we could look into changing in the future. Though that isn't promising anything, as like I said this is intentional due to the techinical limits.

XRiZUX
13 Oct 2012, 02:32
Hey, this is a technical limit as these are objects which remain on the map, and then there is the potential of 4 players all placing the limits of these. They are not the same as using the weapons you mentioned.
Once these have been placed and destroyed then the players can buy more from the in-game shop using the coin crates.
Though thanks for your feedback, and it is something we could look into changing in the future. Though that isn't promising anything, as like I said this is intentional due to the techinical limits.
I understand what you are trying to say, thanks for your reply, let's look into this for a moment.
Max Girders (4)
Girders, "technical limit"? Nope, at the very least. If you have a better explanation I would love to see it.
Max Sentry Gun (2)
This is more understandable as a "technical limit" as it uses more complex programming, although having it set to 2 for each player is not a technical limit in my perspective, for 4 players that would make it 8 Sentry Guns in total at once.
Max Plug Hole (2)
Okay, yeah there is more compelx programming involved with these, although it would be the same as Sentry Gun, 8 at the same time if all 4 players place them on each turn before they are destroyed. I don't see how this is technically impossible to improve on to be honest.
Max Electro Magnet (2)
This is also more complex, but having it limited to 8 makes no sense to me.
I don't need any promises though, I just care that much about the game. I appreciate that you could look into it in the future, a lot actually. I am not upset, just disappointed. I'm sure that it could all be improved to the point where you could have infinite of these in a worms match with 4 players involved without any bad consequences. That's why I'm disappointed, these limitations disappoint me because they wouldn't have to be there.

Fijut
13 Oct 2012, 02:40
I understand what you are trying to say, thanks for your reply, let's look into this for a moment.
Max Girders (4)
Girders, "technical limit"? Nope, at the very least. If you have a better explanation I would love to see it.
Max Sentry Gun (2)
This is more understandable as a "technical limit" as it uses more complex programming, although having it set to 2 for each player is not a technical limit in my perspective, for 4 players that would make it 8 Sentry Guns in total at once.
Max Plug Hole (2)
Okay, yeah there is more compelx programming involved with these, although it would be the same as Sentry Gun, 8 at the same time if all 4 players place them on each turn before they are destroyed. I don't see how this is technically impossible to improve on to be honest.
Max Electro Magnet (2)
This is also more complex, but having it limited to 8 makes no sense to me.
I don't need any promises though, I just care that much about the game. I appreciate that you could look into it in the future, a lot actually. I am not upset, just disappointed. I'm sure that it could all be improved to the point where you could have infinite of these in a worms match with 4 players involved without any bad consequences. That's why I'm disappointed, these limitations disappoint me because they wouldn't have to be there.
I have to agree with this... I've seen "technical limit" come up a lot... it's not something you'd really associate with a worms game... as the end customer anyway...

XRiZUX
13 Oct 2012, 02:51
I have to agree with this... I've seen "technical limit" come up a lot... it's not something you'd really associate with a worms game... as the end customer anyway...
Thank you for your input, it is very welcomed indeed. :)

StepS
13 Oct 2012, 10:13
The same issue (max worms limit) was already discussed and is because Team17 waste the graphic performance a lot by everything the game doesn't need or could have used the better alternatives. It's a real shame. This explains why the game doesn't work properly even on some common video cards.
While the game doesn't work at all for me :mad:

PooZy
13 Oct 2012, 10:21
I don't understand why the game is so hardware demanding.
No really. Look at little big planet, a game released on PS3 several years ago.
It had deformable land, four player online (not turn based), 2.5D graphics with 3 layers that are far more detailed than worms revolution, loads of programmable objects, complex explosion and smoke effects, amazing looking water - and yet there's no lag or stutters.

CheesyPeas
13 Oct 2012, 10:28
I'm seeing a lot of 'technical limits' come up as well; chiefly to explain why a game in 2012 has less potential, more restricted gameplay and a slimmer feature set than a title thirteen years prior.
If this technical limit is an issue, then it rather seems that either a challenge has not been met (that of transposing a feature set into 3d whilst at least attempting to retain some of what made it so popular in the first place) or the engine and/or one of the target platforms clearly isn't up to it.
However, I guess this makes sense as it is not a worms game really - it is a 3d game that happens to use some worms gameplay, and is focused on presentation and eye-candy to front-load sales rather than entertainment (or god forbid, entertainment beyond a days' worth). Which is cool, as you chaps are still a company and need to make money. Another disappointment if you happen to be a fan, though.
Not really asking for a fluke that'll stick around for 13 years - I tend leave that to Diablo fans - but once you're done with the single player and presentation it seems to have left no room for multiplayer antics beyond a rather pretty but limp feeling BnG with added jelly blobs. Which I thought was missing the point of worms titles a bit, but I suppose I'm a daft old bugger who should move with the times and stop lamenting :)
I guess seagulls and hats are more important than enjoying yourself, though.
If you're looking for constructive feedback rather than generalised buyer's remorse, please consider the following as suggestions, although I realise a lot of these aren't realistic.
- Please allow six or more worms on a team. If this runs into a technical limit then simply make it so having a certain count of worms on the screen disable, in order - the background (replaced with a static image, then nothing), the water effects (render at a specific alpha with objects below, then flat with objects above), some idle animations and worm interactions, hats and other trinkets, particles.
- All of the above performance options should kick in automatically for consoles (the limitations of which have clearly driven more than one decision here, let's be honest) and automatically for PC's on medium settings. Electing to have a 'custom' setting for PC will allow these individual tweaks to be selected by hand, giving space for future PC owners (or owners with futuristic PC's) the ability to play how they want to.
- Use the above to open out the weapon selection now some of these 'limits' have gone.
- Allow some kind of basic lobby interaction on multiplayer. I see the words 'Player' and 'Ranked' and nowt else on a multiplayer screen whilst sitting at a PC and die a little inside.
That's just off the top of my head. You know, over here in dreamland :)
I get the thing is what it us and none of this'll happen any time soon, though. Besides, what's the financial incentive here? :D
More fan bleating over, carry on.

ChaoticMot
13 Oct 2012, 11:49
I don't understand why the game is so hardware demanding.
No really. Look at little big planet, a game released on PS3 several years ago.
It had deformable land, four player online (not turn based), 2.5D graphics with 3 layers that are far more detailed than worms revolution, loads of programmable objects, complex explosion and smoke effects, amazing looking water - and yet there's no lag or stutters.
Worms Revolution is just terribly optimized; that's all. A game can have poor graphics and terrible performance just by bad optimization.
Unfortunately, Team17's recent releases have been like this; that was the final straw. I'm not buying a Team17 game again.

Neurologic
13 Oct 2012, 11:49
I understand what you are trying to say, thanks for your reply, let's look into this for a moment.
Max Girders (4)
Girders, "technical limit"? Nope, at the very least. If you have a better explanation I would love to see it.
Max Sentry Gun (2)
This is more understandable as a "technical limit" as it uses more complex programming, although having it set to 2 for each player is not a technical limit in my perspective, for 4 players that would make it 8 Sentry Guns in total at once.
Max Plug Hole (2)
Okay, yeah there is more compelx programming involved with these, although it would be the same as Sentry Gun, 8 at the same time if all 4 players place them on each turn before they are destroyed. I don't see how this is technically impossible to improve on to be honest.
Max Electro Magnet (2)
This is also more complex, but having it limited to 8 makes no sense to me.
I don't need any promises though, I just care that much about the game. I appreciate that you could look into it in the future, a lot actually. I am not upset, just disappointed. I'm sure that it could all be improved to the point where you could have infinite of these in a worms match with 4 players involved without any bad consequences. That's why I'm disappointed, these limitations disappoint me because they wouldn't have to be there.
Is not just about the complex programming or not, its also about drawcalls on the engine, plus collision meshes and all that stuff. The code is the last to be worried about,
And considering that a match is unpredictable, not everything can be loaded at runtime, so most of the stuff is ran there on place and can lead to slow downs.
For example if you notice when destroying the landscape it freezes for a moment, a really brief moment as the engine have recalculate the collision mesh on place, even if stuff like girders are destroyed entirely when hit is still another collision to take care about by the engine especially considering that the meshes in the game have perfect collision mesh around the model it self.
So yeah is a technical limit.

Thurbo
13 Oct 2012, 12:07
I think the terrain does have millions of polygons and loads of dynamic objects (each water droplet being a single object with proper physics simulation mind you) but I have no idea of programming anyways.
Idea: Why not just have a placement restriction instead? Each player can only place two sentries, plug holes and magnets and 4 girders at the same time. Afterwards the objects turn grey in the panel and can only be selected again once one of these objects is destroyed. That would be much better.

Fijut
13 Oct 2012, 12:21
Idea: Why not just have a placement restriction instead? Each player can only place two sentries, plug holes and magnets and 4 girders at the same time. Afterwards the objects turn grey in the panel and can only be selected again once one of these objects is destroyed. That would be much better.
that's almost the same thing... and what if 1 pixel of your girder survives and the game doesn't let you place another?
anyone noticed the bridge kit isn't in this game?
No really. Look at little big planet, a game released on PS3 several years ago.
to be fair LBP is a console exclusive and probably had a much bigger budget behind it than this.

Moath
13 Oct 2012, 13:19
Call me an idiot, but if the engine can't that much things happening ( it doesn't look like it is more demanding than any other psn/pc/xbla game ) doesn't it mean that the engine should modified to allow more things to happen. I don't i could be wrong.

DrummerB
13 Oct 2012, 13:48
I don't understand why the game is so hardware demanding.
No really. Look at little big planet, a game released on PS3 several years ago.
It had deformable land, four player online (not turn based), 2.5D graphics with 3 layers that are far more detailed than worms revolution, loads of programmable objects, complex explosion and smoke effects, amazing looking water - and yet there's no lag or stutters.
While that's true and I thought of that myself too, don't forget that LBP is an exclusive title, was backed by Sony and probably had a lot more budget and resources.

XRiZUX
13 Oct 2012, 15:26
Is not just about the complex programming or not, its also about drawcalls on the engine, plus collision meshes and all that stuff. The code is the last to be worried about,
And considering that a match is unpredictable, not everything can be loaded at runtime, so most of the stuff is ran there on place and can lead to slow downs.
For example if you notice when destroying the landscape it freezes for a moment, a really brief moment as the engine have recalculate the collision mesh on place, even if stuff like girders are destroyed entirely when hit is still another collision to take care about by the engine especially considering that the meshes in the game have perfect collision mesh around the model it self.
So yeah is a technical limit.
You are saying the engine wasn't programmed?
Anything could be a technical limit if it's programmed with limitations as an outcome. A worms match is only as unpredictable as it's allowed to be by the functions within the game.
The way I see it, if collisions are calculated at a slow rate, there should be a way for the collisions to be calculated faster, or perhaps in a different pattern of calculation. Calculating a whole bunch at once could freeze up the program for a while if it's too much to handle, although if it was calculated in order at a respectful rate it wouldn't freeze up. Just an example.
I'm not experienced enough with programming to go into detail, but I do know that much. As a programmer gets more experienced, that programmer finds ways to program more efficiently, one piece of code can be very important to a program. If the piece of coding takes too long to calculate then of course there would be problems occuring.
I understand the reasoning behind "technical limit" but I know that it could be improved, that's why I'm disappointed about it. I don't think it's a good idea in general to have most things unlimited; but then leaving a very few specific things limited for such a reason. Limiting the playability of the game is not good in my opinion.

vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.