RDR2 in renderware

[Midnight Hitman]

Personally I don't like RDR2's controls. They feel clunky and extremely unprecise.
 

One thing I loved about the old GTA titles was the fact that the controls were extremely precise and way more dynamic (everything feels quicker). That's why I think RDR2 should have been done using renderware, also the next GTA should return to that engine.

 

Thoughts on that?

Edited November 4, 2018 by Midnight Hitman

[futureproof]

Nah, they can keep the rage engine. 

[MjrOu812]

RDR2 foot controls do seem to feel clunky...but the horse controls are pretty good, I am happy the way the game is?

Edited November 4, 2018 by MjrOu812

[AUScowboy]

I think the controls are fine once you get used to them. Arthur isn't exactly a free running parkour type, Assassin's Creed RDR2 is not, and that's fine by me. It's a bit clunky, but nothing unmanageable.

[MjrOu812]

1 minute ago, AUScowboy said:

I think the controls are fine once you get used to them. Arthur isn't exactly a free running parkour type, Assassin's Creed RDR2 is not, and that's fine by me. It's a bit clunky, but nothing unmanageable.

And the game is running only on the day one patch...wait till we get 2 or 3 more patches, usually those help in stability& performance....its only going to get better with time?

[Mach1bud]

1 hour ago, MjrOu812 said:

And the game is running only on the day one patch...wait till we get 2 or 3 more patches, usually those help in stability& performance....its only going to get better with time?

Patches aren't going to change the way the character moves.

 

[MjrOu812]

2 minutes ago, Mach1bud said:

Patches aren't going to change the way the character moves.

 

Did not say it would help character movement....it well how ever help in frame rate and stability?

[Mach1bud]

4 minutes ago, MjrOu812 said:

Did not say it would help character movement....it well how ever help in frame rate and stability?

What does that have to do with this topic?

[MjrOu812]

2 minutes ago, Mach1bud said:

What does that have to do with this topic?

You said that, I dint....ok I see were this is going....you win.

[Ash_735]

21 minutes ago, Mach1bud said:

What does that have to do with this topic?

Because less frame rate drops equals less frame timing spikes equals more consistent controller response. 

[Mach1bud]

1 minute ago, Ash_735 said:

Because less frame rate drops equals less frame timing spikes equals more consistent controller response. 

That would make sense if the game had a bunch of frame drops everywhere, but it doesn't, at all. 

[Ash_735]

1 minute ago, Mach1bud said:

That would make sense if the game had a bunch of frame drops everywhere, but it doesn't, at all. 

Depends on if they're playing on Xbox One and PS4 where there are more frame rate drops, minor improvements will still help there. 

[Jason]

There hasn't been a game made in RenderWare for yonks as far as I know. It was last used early last gen and then replaced by other engines. Even EA don't use it.

 

Either way, the way characters move in RDR2 is not an engine limitation, it's a design choice.

[Mr. Scratch]

Is this your first post 2006 Rockstar game?

[6fangedcutthroatTV]

OP just said EA should make the next GTA.

[MjrOu812]

50 minutes ago, JuliusCaesar said:

OP just said EA should make the next GTA.

Yea put it in the hands of EA....and see how that turns out? aka Train Wreck! Followed by microtransactions?

Edited November 4, 2018 by MjrOu812

[Ash_735]

52 minutes ago, JuliusCaesar said:

OP just said EA should make the next GTA.

No he didn't? He said it should use RenderWare. You know EA also license it out as well as using it in-house right? Well, used to, but the last known recorded uses of RenderWare were it being licenced in games by other developers.

[Xerukal]

Oh yeah... that would look great!

[MjrOu812]

11 minutes ago, Xerukal said:

Oh yeah... that would look great!

Very nice....nice and blocky, with a ps1 twist?

[6fangedcutthroatTV]

28 minutes ago, Ash_735 said:

No he didn't? He said it should use RenderWare. You know EA also license it out as well as using it in-house right? Well, used to, but the last known recorded uses of RenderWare were it being licenced in games by other developers.

My post was hilarious! What you said seems to be a sort of headcanon type understanding.

 

Yes, EA still honors licenses that came before the acquisition but they do Not license it out and have not since that acquisition. Renderware today is spread out throughout EA's own tech, only the old things are available and only to those who have licenses from prior to EA buying it.

 

EA buying RenderWare was the reason Rockstar Advanced Game Engine happened when it did, if you remember. EA buying renderware was a direct competitive move and was the result of not being able to acquire Rockstar itself who renewed with T2, if you remember. So, saying it should use Renderware, is like saying, at least in the comedic sense, that EA should make the next GTA. Because EA is the only people who have anything modern of RW, and any RW game since that acquisition has used old engine and made it new themselves, without help or support from EA. In fact, it did not stand up to PS3/Xbox360 standards and that is why it was dissolved by EA upon purchase and only portions of it were kept and absorbed into other tech.

 

Saying next game should be RW, in that case, is saying it should go back to PS2 quality, in a way

Edited November 4, 2018 by JuliusCaesar

[oCrapaCreeper]

7 hours ago, Mach1bud said:

That would make sense if the game had a bunch of frame drops everywhere, but it doesn't, at all. 

Frame drops are pretty common in towns with base model PS4 and Xbones. Even the PS4 pro suffers from some framedrops every now and then.

[Mach1bud]

7 minutes ago, oCrapaCreeper said:

Frame drops are pretty common in towns with base model PS4 and Xbones. Even the PS4 pro suffers from some framedrops every now and then.

Meh, I haven't noticed any at all on the Pro.

[Ash_735]

1 hour ago, JuliusCaesar said:

Yes, EA still honors licenses that came before the acquisition but they do Not license it out and have not since that acquisition.

But that's not true, they have licenced it out after buying it, in the twilight years when they wern't using it anymore. Games like Dragon Ball Online, Persona 4, Alone in the Dark, and then stretching out into the 2010's where it was licenced for Chinese online games. Like if you to try and force a point that the OP isn't making then at least do some research into it.

[6fangedcutthroatTV]

1 hour ago, Ash_735 said:

But that's not true, they have licenced it out after buying it, in the twilight years when they wern't using it anymore. Games like Dragon Ball Online, Persona 4, Alone in the Dark, and then stretching out into the 2010's where it was licenced for Chinese online games. Like if you to try and force a point that the OP isn't making then at least do some research into it.

 

Nerp. You're quite the abrasive edgy one eh? They already held licenses. You can take your own advice and do your research again. I've been accurate. Thanks.

 

RenderWare is no longer available for purchase, although EA still honors old contracts, meaning that external developers who licensed the technology before the Criterion acquisition may still use the technology. What was RenderWare 4 has dissolved into the rest of EA internal tech.^{[citation needed]} Bing Gordon, an EA executive, has stated that RenderWare did not perform well enough for next-gen hardware, graphics wise, and that RenderWare did nott stand up to competition, such as Unreal Engine from Epic Games. He has also stated that the RenderWare team is "mostly a dev house" (indicating that EA is reluctant still to use RenderWare).^[2]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RenderWare

Edited November 5, 2018 by JuliusCaesar

[Ash_735]

2 hours ago, JuliusCaesar said:

 

Nerp. You're quite the abrasive edgy one eh? They already held licenses. You can take your own advice and do your research again. I've been accurate. Thanks.

 

RenderWare is no longer available for purchase, although EA still honors old contracts, meaning that external developers who licensed the technology before the Criterion acquisition may still use the technology. What was RenderWare 4 has dissolved into the rest of EA internal tech.^{[citation needed]} Bing Gordon, an EA executive, has stated that RenderWare did not perform well enough for next-gen hardware, graphics wise, and that RenderWare did nott stand up to competition, such as Unreal Engine from Epic Games. He has also stated that the RenderWare team is "mostly a dev house" (indicating that EA is reluctant still to use RenderWare).^[2]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RenderWare

So you're using Wikipedia which confirms that RenderWare 4 was dissolved and absorbed into the engine later used by Burnout/NFS, which is true, though the statement about RenderWare no longer being available to licence was from an old document back when the acquisition happened. AFTER that however once they decided to shelve RenderWare, they did then later licence it out for CHEAP because they knew it wasn't a major competing engine anymore, but was still extremely documented and easy to work with, something which in the twilight years of its use the smaller studios favoured. That's why it's mainly cheap games and Online games that licenced it after. Those last games on the tailend don't use RenderWare 4, that never came out, they do however use variants of RenderWare 3 which were licenced on the cheap.

 

The plan was that EA wanted RenderWare when they got Criterion so they could have it as an engine to licence out, in hopes that RenderWare 4 would be worthy of being a major engine. Once they see that it wasn't going to be that way, they halted all development of RenderWare 4 and let the licence sale go on hold for a few years, 2008 onwards was when they allowed it to be used again for small projects because hell, they might as well make some money off it right? Want to see one of the last known games using RenderWare which got the licence AFTER the buyout?

 

 

So again, sorry to shoot you down, but your initial statement was false, and still is, nothing "edgy" about correcting people spreading bullsh*t.

 

edit: And just to provide more evidence...

"development on Persona 4 in Japan did not begin until after the release of Persona 3."

Persona 3 Release: July 13, 2006

 

"In August 2004, Electronic Arts announced they had acquired Criterion Games"

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Ash_735

[6fangedcutthroatTV]

All looks like headcanon dude. All edgy aggressive language. It's a turn off so I say something about it, that's all. Would appreciate more constructive discussion. It's an interesting discussion out of a joke, it's worth it.

 

Softstar was making games on that engine since before even SA came out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_RenderWare_games

 

A license they already had, pre-acquisition. Same for Atlus, who was around for many years and definitely had their license before the release of P3 in 2006, the game clearly would have already been being developed throughout that time. Maybe somewhere in here, we might find where they might have began using it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlus_USA#History

 

There might be other ones. Discuss it. Whatever you're doing right now just isn't working for me. I'd like the correct information whichever it is so we can carry correct info going forward, so let's find which it is, together. 

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by JuliusCaesar

[Ash_735]

12 hours ago, JuliusCaesar said:

All looks like headcanon dude. All edgy aggressive language. It's a turn off so I say something about it, that's all. Would appreciate more constructive discussion. It's an interesting discussion out of a joke, it's worth it.

 

Softstar was making games on that engine since before even SA came out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_RenderWare_games

 

A license they already had, pre-acquisition. Same for Atlus, who was around for many years and definitely had their license before the release of P3 in 2006, the game clearly would have already been being developed throughout that time. Maybe somewhere in here, we might find where they might have began using it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlus_USA#History

 

There might be other ones. Discuss it. Whatever you're doing right now just isn't working for me. I'd like the correct information whichever it is so we can carry correct info going forward, so let's find which it is, together. 

 

You're initial attempt at framing the OP as saying GTA should be made by EA is still wrong though and there's games on that list which were licenced AFTER the buyout, you keep using the word headcanon and then keep twisting things to make it seem like you wern't wrong in this. Just accept the L dude if all you're going to reference is Wikipedia citing old articles.

[6fangedcutthroatTV]

Wow. You're an arrogant one. My initial post was hilarious. You seem obsessed with things that I have linked sources for and you go ahead and show me a license that came after that acquisition, I'm sure I will find where/who held that license before the acquisition, and gained it through their own acquisitions, and so on.

 

If you're so sure, then go correct the wiki. let's see if it sticks.

 

I'm not wrong. Jokes can't be wrong. You have fun in life with that weird aggressive attitude. It's about right and wrong for you? Okay, you be right, right out of my mind bro. I got no time for toxic behavior.

 

EA owns RW. OP said next GTA should be RW. For next GTA to be that, it would need to be modern. So by simple logic, OP said EA should make the next GTA. It was hilarious.

 

That means you are wrong. And if you don't bring sources for your claims, those are also wrong. For the record, I don't care and I'm over it - my sources show I have been accurate. I am a friendly person. I won't continue with you are give you any respect that isn't mutual.

Edited November 5, 2018 by JuliusCaesar

[MjrOu812]

You too still bickering about renderware?

[Ash_735]

2 hours ago, JuliusCaesar said:

Wow. You're an arrogant one. My initial post was hilarious. You seem obsessed with things that I have linked sources for and you go ahead and show me a license that came after that acquisition, I'm sure I will find where/who held that license before the acquisition, and gained it through their own acquisitions, and so on.

 

If you're so sure, then go correct the wiki. let's see if it sticks.

 

I'm not wrong. Jokes can't be wrong. You have fun in life with that weird aggressive attitude. It's about right and wrong for you? Okay, you be right, right out of my mind bro. I got no time for toxic behavior.

 

EA owns RW. OP said next GTA should be RW. For next GTA to be that, it would need to be modern. So by simple logic, OP said EA should make the next GTA. It was hilarious.

 

That means you are wrong. And if you don't bring sources for your claims, those are also wrong. For the record, I don't care and I'm over it - my sources show I have been accurate. I am a friendly person. I won't continue with you are give you any respect that isn't mutual.

You keep talking about aggressive and toxic behaviour and yet it was you who tried to turn the OP's comments into a negative thing and frame it like he wants the game to be made by EA, then proceed to claim "it's just a joke bro" before going on to accuse and attack me in your posts. I think your humour needs some adjustment or at least lay off the projection. I listed multiple other games that you somehow ignored so yeah, I don't need to go any further either. Though I understand your paranoia about aggressive behaviour given your name.