Why is DW5 different?
#11
(07-04-2013, 04:44 PM)fade2black001 Wrote: One thing people must not know is that these games had massive slow downs on the console itself. When they're alot of enemies on the screen it would slow down to probably about 10fps im guessing on the console. SO for this to happen would seem rather normal to me. Unless somehow the emulator fixes this but I kind of doubt that it does. So in my eyes its emulating it perfectly and there are no problems here.

Why would a developer release a game knowing that it had horrible slow downs (sometimes) which sometimes render it unplayable? I'm sure as hell that they playtested it, and that it would have come up. Either there was a seriously large overlook, or they were just being irresponsible.
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
(07-04-2013, 06:25 PM)Scootaloo Wrote: Why would a developer release a game knowing that it had horrible slow downs (sometimes) which sometimes render it unplayable? I'm sure as hell that they playtested it, and that it would have come up. Either there was a seriously large overlook, or they were just being irresponsible.

Its true. They have massive slowdowns when large amounts of enemies are on the screen. For all the dynasty warrior games for the PS2 it is like this.
I5 3570k 3.4ghz| 4GB R9 290| 8GB DDR3
Reply
#13
(07-04-2013, 06:25 PM)Scootaloo Wrote: Why would a developer release a game knowing that it had horrible slow downs (sometimes) which sometimes render it unplayable? I'm sure as hell that they playtested it, and that it would have come up. Either there was a seriously large overlook, or they were just being irresponsible.

#1: Time. It takes time to properly optimize a game, and that step is usually one of the last ones done... This is actually a non-factor in this game for reason 3 below, but it CAN be a sign for many other games that exhibit slowdown.

#2: Unlike PS360 games, PS2 games rarely exhibited any screen tearing. Preferring to "lock to a frame rate" instead of dropping frames/desyncing from the screen to try and free up some resources. This means things that would cause slowdowns in PS2, don't happen in PS3 because they just skip rendering. The few games on PS2 that do do this, are usually the ones that benefit most from VU cycle steal (see SotC)

#3: It's Tecmo Koei... and Tecmo Koei is ***** when it comes to game engines. The unoptimized excuse could likely be used for the first game or two of an engine, but it seems like Tecmo Koei just gives up on making changes/improving an engine after it's made and instead focuses on getting out as much from it with as many games as possible. Be mindful of the fact that Tecmo Koei isn't nearly as big of a company as it used to be... so it's a survival tactic. Make as many games as you can, as cheaply as you can. Extra points if you can manage to keep a fanbase buying the same exact game with the exact same story mode over and over again.
[Image: 2748844.png]
Reply
#14
(07-04-2013, 07:38 PM)Koji Wrote: #3: It's Tecmo Koei... and Tecmo Koei is ***** when it comes to game engines. The unoptimized excuse could likely be used for the first game or two of an engine, but it seems like Tecmo Koei just gives up on making changes/improving an engine after it's made and instead focuses on getting out as much from it with as many games as possible. Be mindful of the fact that Tecmo Koei isn't nearly as big of a company as it used to be... so it's a survival tactic. Make as many games as you can, as cheaply as you can. Extra points if you can manage to keep a fanbase buying the same exact game with the exact same story mode over and over again.
Well at least not all game makers are like that.

Once upon a time there was a company called "Heavy Iron Studios". They made a game called "SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom" it was a huge hit. Later on they made another game called "SpongeBob: The Movie" it used the same engine as "SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom", however the game did have some improvements over its predecessor:
  • [Improved] physics - little things like Patrick being able to wear a "hat", and have it bounce around actively. I think that the physics for most things are pre-render though, and not done in real time.
  • [Improved] graphics - overall I think that the game looked marginally better than BFBB, but they still both look great for their time.

Both the games use the RenderWare engine, however I'm almost positive that "SpongeBob: The Movie" uses a newer version of it (RenderWare Physics 3.7, I'm guessing).

My point is some game developers do try to improve upon things in newer titles (though they should do this regardless).
Reply
#15
(07-04-2013, 08:04 PM)Scootaloo Wrote: Well at least not all game makers are like that.

Once upon a time there was a company called "Heavy Iron Studios". They made a game called "SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom" it was a huge hit. Later on they made another game called "SpongeBob: The Movie" it used the same engine as "SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom", however the game did have some improvements over its predecessor:
  • [Improved] physics - little things like Patrick being able to wear a "hat", and have it bounce around actively. I think that the physics for most things are pre-render though, and not done in real time.
  • [Improved] graphics - overall I think that the game looked marginally better than BFBB, but they still both look great for their time.

Both the games use the RenderWare engine, however I'm almost positive that "SpongeBob: The Movie" uses a newer version of it (RenderWare Physics 3.7, I'm guessing).

My point is some game developers do try to improve upon things in newer titles (though they should do this regardless).

I highly doubt the Sponge bob games are anywhere as demanding as the DW so that example is probably moot. Yes game get released even if the game has terrible slow down in certian places. And a Emulator will emulate that too, Emulator isnt gona magicly make game run faster if it ran bad on the original hardware. atlest i never see a game that did.
Reply
#16
^You missed my point. All I meant by that was that not all game developers are lazy just because they've had pass success.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)