this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
153 points (98.1% liked)
Games
16806 readers
991 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fallout 4 took 7 years to develop and still felt rushed. Exactly how far in advance do you think they knew about the show?
Options:
Any of those could've been done in the time they'd know about the FO show release target.
much of a game's development time is spent creating assets, using a new engine doesn't mean your existing low fidelity assets suddenly look better, just better lit
Eh, a lot of it also has to do with designing things, not the producing assets. If you're just doing a remaster and upgrading assets that already exist, it should take a lot less time than building something from scratch.
that's just simply not true. if you look at the project lifecycle for a game very little resources are spent in preproduction, the bulk of the time is in production. preproduction usually has all of the core mechanics and ideas implemented by the end, then it's just about executing on that plan. there's not a lot of experimentation and iteration once you are in full tilt production mode
I'm not saying "game design," but things like deciding on art style, optimizing balance between fidelity and performance, etc. AFAIK, that's all "production" stage things. Assuming it's the same studio as built it the first time, they'll still have the original artwork, which probably just needs to be touched up and reexported. That's a lot less work than building something new from scratch.
In fact, you probably need minimal assistance from developers since all the gameplay elements are already there, you'd just need a small group for making some tweaks here and there to keep consistent performance, and maybe add in a little bit of fanciness here and there (e.g. tweak shadows, maybe some RTX if you go crazy). None of that is particularly time-consuming for a developer to throw in, so once the art team is done freshening up the assets, they can prep for release.
I'm thinking a project like that could be completed in 2-3 years, depending on which game they pick and how far they want to take the remaster. That's definitely in line with the timeline for a TV show.
They did do that. It was called Starfield.
Probably the best we'd get for story DLCs would be for FO4 or 76 because there's absolutely no way they'd create new content for a game over a decade old that isn't Skyrim or the latest entry in another series of theirs that is either fallout or fallout or fallout.