Everything posted by The Unrest Cure
I think this may be an over-simplified take on game economics. We have zero idea how much it cost to gain Alonso's participation, and we have zero idea if that was predicated on and/or necessary to gain investment into the title from outside investors (which happens). We also have zero idea how many developers out there are conversant enough in the EGO engine and who happen to be close enough to actually work at Codemasters. There are variables here that are probably not as easily dismissed as one may think. The balance for a better game is probably something all game companies deal with: how good can you make a game within a particular length of time? If you have forever it can probably be mind-blowing. But if you have a responsibility to shareholders, investors, et al you cannot finance a game for forever with nothing to show. Does that mean a game that does not get that length of development is inherently bad or substandard? No. It simply means that there is a balance between playability and actually finishing a product for shipment. Your criticisms may be well-founded and your frustrations sincere, but when legitimate graphical criticisms become wild guesses at irresponsibility or blind stabs at Codemasters' ultimate intent - before the game is even launched! - I think we can probably see why Codies prefers not to step into these kind of threads. They devolve quickly. In the end, we all want to see the best GRID we can. Let's not lose sight of being productive in this vs becoming unhinged and myopic.
I don't think you will come away from this thread satisfied, then. I doubt the devs are lazy or that there are graphical issues that are "easy" to resolve, rather that game development is hard, performance is always a trade-off between graphics and gameplay, and even the best game engine is brittle and requires countless iterations and adjustments to guarantee proper playability. Perhaps Codies is just ignoring the complaints in this thread ... hosted on a forum that THEY pay for and offer so that the public and themselves can provide feedback and receive information (in case it is unclear: I don't think they are ignoring the complaints; just because a game is shipped does not mean devs are not still working on it). Or perhaps devs just don't like coming here (there is a reason developers/publishers hire game media managers!) for any number of reasons. I think it is pretty easy to figure out why, as tempers and words tend to flare in these kind of threads. That does not mean any slight to the complaints expressed in this thread, but it may explain why the feedback some seek has been so evasive.
While I am not a "hardcore" Grid gamer I have played the previous incarnations and enjoyed them, mostly. I appreciate the efforts some posters here have made to point out the weaker graphical elements of the game while framing their concern in an intelligent manner, but I do wonder what the graphical shortcomings of the game truly mean to most players? I'm not an accomplished video game driver - I struggle with Dirt Rally and DR2 like many, but do try to learn and improve - and honestly I would be hard-pressed to see many of these graphical concerns like shadows, textures, etc while in the middle of a race. I am primarily a console gamer, so perhaps I just don't have the equipment necessary to really get a true-to-life visual fidelity out of any racing game I play, but are these graphical issues that distorting to the experience? I assume they must be given the tenor of the many posts here, but just thought I would share my limited .02 on my comprehension of it all. While graphics are clearly necessary for most gamers to enjoy the game (I don't wish to play this on a Playstation 1, after all!) perhaps Codemasters' efforts on GRID had more to do with creating a vital and realistic simulation of a race's tenor and a racer's tenacity rather than the race's graphical fidelity. To state this GRID is just a rehash of Grid Autosport seems to overlook Codies' continued message about opponents being difficult, varied, and "living". When the game is out into the wild perhaps this emphasis will show to be hollow ... I don't know. But it seems there are improvements made over the past 5 years to the series, and to judge the game on something that may not have been the primary selling point in the first place seems remiss, even if those judgements are correct. Either way: great discussion here that has certainly educated me about gaming's visual concerns, moreso than any Digital Foundry video I've seen! : )