Hi, owned GG for a while and while I frequent the forums I've not been much of a poster as you may be able to tell.

Anyway as the title says.

I guess I should of researched this software a bit better before purchase but I assumed when I saw support for MP games that it would be functional and not tied solely to the editor,I only realised this problem when I decidedit was time to do an MP test with a friend...... Seeing as MP is a component of the game it seems kind of crazy that this feature seems to be restricted to GameGuru only atm. One of the main selling points for me was MP included and can sell it commercially.

I am working on a game that will be SP, Co-op and MP. Heavy emphasis on the MP.
Problem is we can only play MP with other GameGuru owners. This makes making an MP game problematic on many levels.
Most important of all would be how do we play test our game?
We're told Gameguru allows us to make commercial games, what if a person has a game ready to go, how can they sell it when nobody who purchases would be able to play it?

Now no offence to other Gameguru users, but I want to have people play test with me that I have chosen to do so, not strangers I have never met, and who could be a developer that may be potential commercial competition.
I mean imagine DICE are making a new Battlefield game and they are forced to use Treyarch employees for testing who also happen to be working on their newest and similar CoD..... (just an example I'm not expecting I am going to spit out the next AAA of the decade here )

It's a bit different from socializing and offering help and advice on forums and being friendly in general.
But to be honest if we're making commercial games with this or any other software we need to have control over our projects on every level.

Now I know there is feature request/creep or whatever and voting, but I think we need an ETA on MP being outside of GG.
That it such an important aspect of the software and games than a "Depends on how much it is requested" or"when we get around to it" for an answer and it needs to be on the top of the list of things needed to be added to our ability to make a game.

I mean I make a single player game, no probs, I can put it out whenever I want to. But I make a MP game and complete it how long am I to wait before I can playtest it properly let alone sell it?
a month? 6months? 5 years maybe?
I do not think it is unrealistic for people to be seriously concerned about this. I know that I for one am gonna be pretty frustrated if I complete my game and have to sit here twiddling my fingers for who knows how long, and after all this software had been in development a hellova long time as it is. (at least 2007 as FPSC X10?)

So yeah, is there an ETA on MP outside of GG, that we can compile a game send it to testers and be able to host a game they can join?
(and hopefully not being solely reliant on or bound to Steam, Peer to Peer or dedicated server options would be great)

I for one really need to be able to multiplay, and not just that but with people I know, trust and can rely on. I need to be able to test when and where I want, not faff around on a forum trying to organize a play date with strangers who may or may not be on the n other side of the planet. (Gotta remember those pings while we're at it.)

I don't want to put a lot of work into a heavily MP game and not know it's future.

This is exactly why the community voting board was made. Before this there were threads of nothing but flaming based on what each individuals priority and feelings were for the day.

Once the board was put in place and the tallies were added up and posted, it was very clear what the voting users wanted and in what order.

We are all waiting on features in the voting list and the reality is, that all of them are getting closer. 2016 will see the introduction of a vast arrays of features from the voting list.

-We wanted more performance all around and on even more lower end machines.
>We got that.
-We wanted more scripting commands and features to make the huds and on screen sprites come to life.
>We got that, and are even getting more.
-We want better graphics and shaders to make our games look more modern and not from the 90's
>We are getting that, development is starting Jan 1st 2016.

The order of wanted features and where they stand are posted for all to see at any time.
At any time you can change your vote to try and bring a certain feature up faster.

Hope this make it more clear on why things are done the way they are here.

I am cool with voting as I mentioned on the similar discussion I started on the Steam page. (and voting that came AFTER I bought GG) But in saying that some things should not be voted on I feel and should just be part of any modern game making software by default.
Also "WE"? Who is we? We is not me. Better performance for example, GG ran fine for me so that wasn't on my list.
I understand eventually you need to retire your 2006 toaster and 2015 software and games require the appropriate hardware. A discussion I've had with many a person in regards to games like ARK and Withcer 3 withgamers bitching their ancient 14 inch Intel HD laptops (laptops for gaming, let alone game development!!! LOL) will not run modern graphically intense games. PC gaming you upgrade, your machine evolves and those who do not realise this are in the wrong hobby and I think devs also need to realise this.
What is the cut off point for hardware? Should GG, Unreal and Unity, idTech etc run on my 2002 HP Pavillion with Sli Voodoo2?

At what point should devs stop pandering to the lowest common denominator at the cost of those who take their software and hardware seriously?
Some things I feel, and it is just my opinion, need a standard, a bar set. Somethings just should be a given in game development, especially a program that has been in development as long as this one.
If GG is running at 5fps which going by videos and forum posts it does for many, should that not be a warning all the optimization in the world is not going to fix anything for those people?
(Plus from experience optimisation usually comes at the end of development after the feature set and bug squashing not before.)

Anyways food for thought and I like you am getting off track........point here is all other features aside, my current and main concern is multiplayer. That is the topic, let's discuss that and save other features discussion for another day and another thread.

I purchased GG based on the features listed on the store page, many of those features being Multiplayer and being able to share and sell MP games on Steam and as I stated on that Steam discussion many of those features listed are listed as if they are already included in GameGuru and functioning and many of them are not. There is no mention of a "these items are not included and are planned at some date TBA."

So people buy GG expecting to be able to make an MP game, not only that but to be able to sell it, that people will be able to play it, that it has Steam Workshop support. The majority of GG and it's media being FPS heavy reinforces this notion that you could make a Counterstrike or CoD from the moment you buy it.

In my case, it led me to believe I'd be able to compile my game and give out copies to people to test with me.
How can I sell my MP based game when it doesn't have MP?

Any way I've gone into more detail on the Steam discussion so I won't bother repeating it all here.

MP is in Gameguru, but in an impractical way. Would it really be that hard to implement a basic P2P so we can playtest as we make our games instead of twiddling our thumbs wondering when it will be developed and available?
Seen people doing as such in much much older versions of FPSC with no sign of "requires FPSC to do" I may be wrong I do not own FPSC and only have 2008-2010ish videos to go from.

Would you accept me saying "it's okay all those other things like the wheels, engine, ignition, fuel tank and such required for it to be the advertised ferrari will come much much later....... depending on what others buying the product want......you know just forget the product brochure altogether and advertising altogether......who knows, you might be able to race in 10 years from now...... K? thanks"
For all you know the others want a pink Citroen and that is what you will get with that thinking, it's not what you want or need yourself or indeed even what you bought, but hey, tough luck.

Sooooo okay, tomorrow I have my MP Deathmatch game made and ready to go. Just a basic Last Man Standing game so GG for now is perfect for it, care to tell me how I am going to market, sell and advise people on how to get a match going?

Can you see what I am getting at here?

I think TGC really needs to go back to the Steam store and change everything to be honest. There is no mention that most of the features listed do not even yet exist. It's false advertising and that's not an opinion it's a fact. If I sold you a Red Ferrari and everything related, said it would have everything required to race professionally at high speeds and what I delivered was a blue mini shell barely capable of driving on a public street would you be okay with that?

The store needs everything to state EXACTLY what features are in it and what is coming soon, that what MP functions there are requires ownership of GG. It needs to be much clearer that this software is very very far from complete and very very much a work in progress like an Early Access title still in development. As it is, GG is nothing like advertised and I am sure TGC and it's staff know it.

Honestly if I knew the state the product was in via the store page being honest ,I'd probably still of bought it, but I would of at least fully known what I was purchasing and what to expect.

It does seem to be a common theme among TGC software. Advertised features not existing and full retail software being still in development.

Maybe TGC needs to pool all it's resources into one product and get it completed instead of spreading itself thin over numerous programs and having them all half finished? Just a thought.

But yeah, Steam information needs to be updated to reflect the real situation of purchasing GG.
Same For AppGameKit, AGFPro no doubt.

Those who regularly upgrade their machines and invest that much time and money are in the minority of people who game on their PC's. This is why games are so well optimised these days and you are able to adjust the graphics. Its a business and developers have to sell copies, not just to the few who can buy a new rig every 2 years.

The issue with game guru's performance was not that high-poly, high resoluted maps would cause slowdowns, but that a simple terrain with half a dozen models would crawl on systems only 4 years old. That was not acceptable and has been ironed out. Many indie developers would like to target a broad audience and might also like to make lowpoly games, that do run like lowpoly games. Those with the expensive machines lean towards big-studio games rather than indie titles.



The developer should be able to decide. For me its 5 years. A system from 5 years ago should be able to run my game on the lowest settings.



During. Especially during the art design. LOD meshes and polyreduction aswell as occlusion take time to run well.



I can agree with that.



I can see how younger buyers would think that, but its incredibly unrealistic. I'm with you that, if Game Guru advertises it, you should be able to release working Multiplayer games but the notion that you could ram out something that actually sells is far fetched.
The amount of maintenance and playtesting needed for big multiplayer games like CoD or CS are staggering. Those are developed by large studios with even larger budgets. Look: You won't find all that many independent Unity or UE3/4 multiplayer games that have much recognition or even sales. To expect to be able to do something this large with a maker-software is just unrealistic. I think it would be cool if it happened, but seeing how little of value in this regard has been produced in the 10 years I kept an eye on unity and the unreal engine (from small developers that is) I just don't see that happening ever in game guru.



You are right. Even though I doubt Guru's MP will ever be anything more than a simple P2P for you and your peers. You can sell them, yes, but don't expect to be able to support a large user-base. I don't say it is impossible and it would be great to see this happening, I just highly doubt it.

I like game guru for what it is/trying to do but I agree with you in general. If you are really serious about developing that online shooter, you might have to look elsewhere if you aim to do something that pays the rent. Same with single player by the way.

Thanks for your Feedback Wolf, Lee has addressed many of my concerns on the Steam thread I mentioned which can be found here:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/266310/discussions/0/487877107148784933/

Specifically in regards to the Steam store page more accurately reflecting what GG is currently capable of.
It is reassuring to see the devs taking these matters seriously and interacting with users.

Also agree I think a 5 year hardware span is realistic. Consoles get 10 years these days, but even they once upon a time cut off generally after 6 years of life.

Also yeah if and when I get more serious with my game developing I may look to Unity or Unreal or similar. Already have AGFPro on stand by for when and if that time comes.
Although I do think GG will be at a level to make it a viable platform one day. Alas sadly I do not rely on games paying my rent and this is exactly why something like GG appeals to me. It fits in with the amount of time and money I have to dedicate to my project at the moment.
Being on the older end of the scale, family and work and such to work around. One day though, maybe I will be able to make games full time as I always have wanted to, instead of years of just dabbling.

(sigh no game dev courses and such when I was a kid like there is now. Back then trial and error a tonne of reading and practice and messing about with Wolfenstein and Doom was all we had. Oh to be young again today! lol.)

I do think honestly I could if I at least had a functioning MP component in GG. I work in IT and my main skill is graphic design, and I have a whole host of commercial software at my finger tips along with a bit of experience from modding games over the years. My main hurdle atm is being able to properly test the game I am making as I make it.

I mean CoD and CS, CS started as a mod for HalfLife, HalfLife started as a Quake1 and Quake 2 total conversion, many retail games and large companies started small both financially and team wise. Sure game development can take a long time, but it depends on the game you are trying to make, and the scope of your project along with the developers skills.
Heck if I remember my old PC magazine articles the first CoD initially started with a pretty small team.

My goals are not lofty for the present, but I do have lofty ones for the future. For now I am trying to stitch together something functional that looks good and that I can use to generate media with the goal of going to a Kickstarter one day.
When GG works as intended I do think 'ramming' out a decent game will be possible if the right people are working on it.
Something that would be easier when it's easier to collaborate and test with others.
After all it is 'the easy game maker', with the right assets and a bit of work you can at least make a decent looking,if a little functionality restricted SP game in no time vs Unity and the like.
In saying that I know it can take a couple of years to make a decent product, but then again, not always.

I am a pretty realistic person expectations wise and if GG can get to what it can be, I think we'll be able to do some pretty cool and commercially viable stuff with it, but I do think in some regards it needs to get there a little quicker than it is.
If anything I find I am actually developing faster than it can keep up, but sadly I'm not at a developing level, have the time or am financed enough to switch to another engine.
Something like GG is perfect for people like me, or it at least it has the potential to be.

If I were you, I would just use the game engine that I wrote.

I tried to make some money as a freelance artist once, and while some clients I had where pretty cool people, most of the work was really jarring and it was not what I expected to get out of it. But hey! At least I tried. But yeah, I'm here for the same reason.



I wouldn't bet on it! We have some dinosaurs here.



I got started in that aera. The indie scene was very small and dedicated back then, especially in regards to modding. All I can say is that times have changed... at least that is how I feel about it. Especially the gamers have gotten a lot more jaded when it comes to indie games. We have a lot more potential and possibilities now but some of the magic is gone as well. Also I'm getting old dang it! I used to get comments to my stuff like "wow! This look better than oblivion!" ...now its just "I kinda like that retro look."



I know! Before the time of million dollar projects, shareholders and "mainstream gaming".



I concur, its been in development a few years and if you have been, like me, there from the very beginning, it feels like an age has passed and we are not there yet. Oh well!



-Wolf

Here's to 2016 and hoping we see an influx of much needed additions to GG.

I too have noticed as the technology gets easier and the graphics get prettier people are less impressed than they once were. I do miss the 90's when it comes to game development and modding I must say.

I think it's just these days thanks to kickstarter and badly implemented/monitored things like Greenlight and Early Access on Steam allowing any 12 year old with access to Unity to make a game and the influx of badly made titles and mass amounts of clone games, that developer interaction has been going down hill for some time, has a lot to do with it with people getting jaded.
Along with all the advances the games industry has kind of taken a few steps backwards in many areas.

As for our ages, think this is also what appeals to me with GG, that the community and devs tend to be on the older end of the spectrum also. Makes being able to relate to other users and communication that much easier and pleasant.