Jump to content

So I hear JC got fired?


Daphne Jones
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ShippyLongstalking said:

The idea that Empyrion or any other game could just "use the tech" makes no sense. Entirely different engines -- you can't just "use the client side". 

Either you understand game development and programing in general far better then me or its the opposite. 

 

To me, games can change the engine. 

Or, they can learn from other's code how to create aditional layers of logic on top of the engine they have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Either you understand game development and programing in general far better then me or its the opposite. 

 

To me, games can change the engine. 

Or, they can learn from other's code how to create aditional layers of logic on top of the engine they have. 

Changing the game engine is like changing the unibody of a car.

 

You can do it.

 

But you're basically building a whole new car from scratch - and it would cost you more to do a body swap than to just...buy a brand new car.

 

Taking a game off one engine and putting on another is the same way in pretty much every imaginable way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mordgier said:

Changing the game engine is like changing the unibody of a car.

 

You can do it.

 

But you're basically building a whole new car from scratch - and it would cost you more to do a body swap than to just...buy a brand new car.

 

Taking a game off one engine and putting on another is the same way in pretty much every imaginable way.

 

Yeah, I assume that's an accurate analogy. I don't know cars. Is the unibody attached to the carburetors? :D 

 

It goes beyond just the code. For example, Empiryon uses Unity -- the entire nature of how the project is structured is based on Unity's constructs and editor. 

 

The idea of a commercial studio buying code to learn from it....unless the code is dirt cheap, that doesn't really make sense to me.

 

It's very time-consuming to audit code like that -- and almost always better (and faster) to research and implement the concept yourself.

 

It's very rare to have a task that engineers just can't solve because "they don't know how" -- it's almost always a question of how much time/engineering hours you want to spend on it vs. needing some third party code to learn. 

 

15 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Either you understand game development and programing in general far better then me or its the opposite. 


Not going to say i'm the best coder, but have been in software development for about 12-13 years and spent 3 years in game dev.

 

I've worked with a lot of purchased codebases and it's often the brand and market position the boss is buying (which could happen with DU), not purely the tech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ShippyLongstalking said:

I've worked with a lot of purchased codebases and it's often the brand and market position the boss is buying (which could happen with DU), not purely the tech. 

Come to think of it - the only case of a major studio's code actually being taken over by somebody else and development being continued rather than going on life support that I can think of was Hellgate London. They also didn't 'buy' it - they 'owned' it as being the primary investor for Flagship studios who when going under turned over ownership to Hanbit.

 

Even in that case, the continued development was merely a few steps away from life support. Basically a few additions and repackaging efforts to resell the game a few times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buying tech does happen, but it is usually the larger players that do that with the intention of developing it further.  So Unity, Unreal, or Amazon would be the most likely.  My money would be on Amazon.  Of course they are even less likely to make a successful game with the tech than Novaquark, but they have money to burn and have been trying to make a name in the gaming industry.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Taziar said:

Buying tech does happen, but it is usually the larger players that do that with the intention of developing it further.  So Unity, Unreal, or Amazon would be the most likely.  My money would be on Amazon.  Of course they are even less likely to make a successful game with the tech than Novaquark, but they have money to burn and have been trying to make a name in the gaming industry.  

Buying tech is fine but the tech has to be packaged. Engines themselves are a perfect example of that tech. As are APIs, GUIs etc. IIRC NQ themselves use Coherent for the UI. That's the kind of tech you buy, packaged and well documented and easy to plug in to your project and saving you months of effort of deving it in house.

 

Nothing NQ has is portable to another game without tremendous effort. 

 

NQ holds 2 patents that I'm aware of and only the one for the partitioning has any real value - https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a7/15/87/2ec4f4e207739a/US10565785.pdf

 

The other does not. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/44/3d/9e/c0d03c82bee467/US20190279401A1.pdf

 

Basically the only thing they could do is sell the patents to a holding company and try to hope someone licenses them. With that said, server meshing isn't a new thing and they just hold the patent for THEIR way of doing it - the value there is questionable as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a specific game, sure, but big companies buy tech they intend to further develop and it is generally not in a perfectly modular state when they do.  They do it to get a jumpstart on the market, as calendar time can sometimes matter more than labor costs.  Amazon has been developing their own game engine and a showy new tech is just the kind of thing they would go for.  They are trying really hard to develop the 'next great game' (having skipped the first step of learning how to successfully make a game).

 

I am not saying it would be a good investment, just that I can see it happening.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/4/2021 at 4:09 PM, Lethys said:

ItsIts a public forum, everyone can Post wherever he wants. Smh some ppl

 

Official NQ statement still missing but I guess they will write something on tuesday. Or a week later. Or never. Who knows

Incorrect.  This is not a public forum.  This is a private forum owned by a company they can set the rules and what can and can't be said.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LouHodo said:

Incorrect.  This is not a public forum.  This is a private forum owned by a company they can set the rules and what can and can't be said.  

Sure. But everyone can post everywhere he wants, not whatever he wants. Exactly what I stated 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Taziar said:

Buying tech does happen, but it is usually the larger players that do that with the intention of developing it further.  So Unity, Unreal, or Amazon would be the most likely.  My money would be on Amazon.  Of course they are even less likely to make a successful game with the tech than Novaquark, but they have money to burn and have been trying to make a name in the gaming industry.  

I think you're thinking too small... the net tech is the main NQ product and its value is not limited to games. Sure, there may be no game dev buyer, that that's not the target customer. It's general purpose server meshing tech. It has a lot of possible applications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the server tech is the real asset, I have always said that even when NQ tries very hard to deny it. Investors do not pour millions into a super niche MMO game, they will pour  millions into a server technology which, once complete and proven to work, can be licensed at very lucrative rates for use in all sorts of applications.

 

Novaquark is "the Metaverse Company" and the server tech is the Metaverse technology while the game is "just" the PO for that tech and in that capacity does not need to be a profitable avenue by itself.

 

The announcement made earlier pretty much aligns with what I hoped would happen, JC stepping down and become a consultant to/on the board regarding his vision for the game while a new CEO is appointed who actually knows business and finance. Now I hope we hear of a project manager being hired to oversee the day to day development as part of the "improved processes" Naerais talked about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...