Nur um das festzuhalten:In the case of C&C:3 our development cycle was something like 11 months. Compare that to Blizzard or Relic who was spending 3-6 years on their RTS titles. Our longest development cycle was 18 months on RA3, but at that time the team was split in half and added another platform (PS3), so the extra dev time was kind of a wash. EA simply needed us to keep cranking out games to keep the LA studio afloat while many its other teams floundered. So to answer your question I was not happy with how C&C3 or RA3 turned out, our games were always rushed, our engine technology aged and degraded over the years, our path finding was horrible, our online implimentations were embarassing, and ultimately our games did not, in my view, live up to the orginal C&C, or RA2, or Generals (which I also worked on but in a very lowly capacity).
Unfortunately by the time the community actually knew enough about the game to make suggestions, it was already too late for us to implement them due to our short development schedules and late betas.
Unfortunatly our schedules usually meant we couldn't do any real iteration on the design. We were essentially shipping out "first pass" work as final across all areas of the project, balance and design included. Additionally the schedules precluded us from having meaningful multiplayer betas. This was always a huge source of frustration and disappointment for me.
Greg Black hat EALA verlassen, da er den EA Wahnsinn nicht mehr aushalten konnte...! Es geht weiter mit C&C4:EA had broken many promises to us and was continuing to make bad decisions at the expense of the C&C franchise and over the protests of the development teams. I just needed a break from the EA insanity.
C&C4 ein Produkt von dysfunktionaler Firmenkultur.The important thing to know is that C&C4 was never meant to be a true Tiberium universe canonical game, but rather an experiment in online play. It originally started as out an Asian market online-only version of C&C 3. At some point the company executives decided it made the most business sense to add a single player campaign, call it C&C4, and put it in a box. The team of course protested this change in direction but the decision stood. The team did what they could to make a good game given the realities inside EA, but ultimately it was the product of a dysfunctional corporate culture.
Am Ende die Zustimmung für die Beschwerden der Community. Unfassbar, dass EA nachwievor nichts dazu gelernt hat. EA sucks? Aber sowas von!I had a great deal for affection for the C&C community, even when you were ripping our games apart. I often felt the very same way you guys did about the games we were making and if not for a few lucky breaks, I would have been on your side of the fence instead of on the development team.
» Kommentare
Noch keine Kommentare vorhanden. Schreib den Ersten!