Algorithmic patents amount to patenting maths which, by very longstanding precedence, is not a thing, for good reason.
In the EU there’s only one way to patent software and that’s if you’re using it to achieve direct physical ends. E.g. you can patent washing machine firmware in so far as you patent a particular way to combine sensor data to achieve a particular washing result. Rule of thumb: If, 30 years ago, you’d have an electromechanical mechanism to do the task then you can patent the software that’s now replacing it.
Oh: It’s also possible to patent silicon, that is, you can patent your hardware acceleration methods for video decoding. That doesn’t extend to decoders running on general-purpose hardware, though.
If you want to monopolise your brand-new hash algorithm there’s a simple way: Don’t publish the source, use copyright to collect royalties… though that doesn’t mean that reverse engineering is outlawed, especially if necessary for interoperability. Practically speaking nope hash algorithms just can’t be protected which is fair and square because it’s academia who comes up with that kind of stuff and we paid for it with taxpayer money. Want to make money off it? Get tenure.
If not a EU citizen do not sign it, that’d be the opposite of helping, but do enjoy numbers go up from afar. Also you can spread the word that’s fair game.
You can’t automate generation of shape keys. An artist needs to go over every single asset and make it work for every single extreme point on every slider, then make sure that the automatically derived in between points look good and fix those if required, in all slider combinations.
And it’s probably still going to clip during some animations because going over absolutely everything is just prohibitively expensive.
Why is the term “Body Type A” and “Body Type B” present at all when there are clear pictures of the two options that speak for themselves? It feels like just going out of the way to include “the corporate approved buzzwords intended for maximum synergy with the brand!”
“Type A” and “Type B”, I assure you, are not things corporate or marketing came up with. This is programmer speak for “I don’t want to name it but can’t call it foo and bar either because normies will be seeing it”.
As said: This is a re-release. The game and its assets was originally never designed to support anything but a strict binary, but the pronoun vs. body type thing was trivial to do, so they did it. And then for some reason avoided “male” and “female” because face it that sounds like a good idea especially if you’re not overthinking it and the labels were left in because probably also easier to do. Or just didn’t consider the alternative.
That is: You’re assuming intent when there’s simply economy of action. You might call it laziness, but then the people who did that release had 10000 other things to do besides that.
Putting in half a dozen body types and a boob slider shouldn’t be a ton of work
Body types no but you also need armour and clothing for everything. You quickly get a combinatorial explosion which you can then reign in with shape keys (“sliders”) which make all assets harder to develop.
That’s morph targets and you just increased the budget for the character model and every single set of clothing and armour by a whole magnitude. Might even influence animations, though I guess with Elden Ring being the game that it is those are the same for everyone.
Games that do this aren’t being progressive or inclusive, they’re changing the color of the cup that my drink comes in and pretending it’s an entirely new beverage.
The thing is… if you use “dude” and “chick” in the body type descriptions you’re implying gender identity. There may be better options that “Type A” and “Type B” but dude and chick ain’t it because it simply means male and female.
In a very flexible system, you could use more granular options like “wide shoulders”, “wide hips”, “boobage”, etc, to freely mix+match everything. It’s also expensive to develop and even more expensive to create clothing for and a gazillion times more expensive to make really good-looking clothing for (fabric folds and flow aren’t easy). From a developer’s perspective, looking at the work involved really makes you want to say “We’ll just tell the player they’re now Geralt of Rivia and that’s it”.
I think for most games the appropriate choice would be to have an early radio button, saying “male/female/it’s complicated”, the first two options hiding every enby option including pronoun selection. That’s right-out trivial to do and just good UX. And yes the body types should be called male and female, you already selected “it’s complicated” so it’s clear that when you’re selecting a body, you’re selecting a body, not identity.
As to laziness: Eh. Noone’s going to start a research programme on how to do things in an optimal way for a re-release. Someone had a look at the code and assets and thought “hey we can support separate pronouns and bodies without doing anything more than providing an option” and that’s exactly what they did, using the extent of knowledge and consideration that was already in-house. Yep, it very well can happen that if you take your foot out of one thing, you put it right into another.
As to “primary/secondary”: One of the options has to be to the left, or on top, of the other. Ain’t no way around that. I mean you could put option B on the left of option A to cancel things out but now you’re being confusing. More importantly you can make it so that none is selected by default.
Am I onto something or is this all crazy talk?
Yes and no you’re being quite personal, and I include your perspective shift into the POV of others in that, about things that will never make 100% of the people 100% happy because technical reasons. The perfect is the enemy of the good and all.
I’m not sure if you could call Talos Principle indie. Croteam is an ancient company (of Serious Sam fame), they sold out to their publisher some years ago (Developer Digital). Wikipedia says 42 people, that’s about the same ballpark as Wube (Factorio), way smaller than Coffee Stain (123), which yes vibes heavily indie (Goat Simulator!) but is part of Embracer Group.
If you look at Developer Digital and Embracer group they’re not really that small – certainly not smaller than CDProject Red, which is very much throwing AAA money at their projects and definitely had their own big business culture fuckups. They’re simply more distributed, instead of orchestrating one or two big projects they have multiple studios working largely independently on small to mid-sized projects. Talos and Satisfactory are AA scale.
Is Wube indie? Well, at least at the start they were, growing with Factorio’s early access. Still independent, as far as I know. Budget-wise they’re certainly not operating on a shoestring, though… you also have to take into account that they’re taking their sweet time for everything. Also AA.
A would be stuff like Celeste. That’s a broad category, I wouldn’t really call anything B unless you don’t have separate coder, writer, sfx/msx and gfx. Maybe toss the writer but anything under that and you’re smaller than minimum demo group size.
All this is to say: Can we please stop dividing the industry into “AAA” and “Indie”. CD Project Red is independent. They’re doing AAA. One is budget, the other is whether the studio has a corporate overlord lording over multiple studios. Game quality is a third measure. System requirements yet another: Factorio has no issues melting your CPU even though it’s highly optimised, then you have B-budget projects which melt your box because the dev has never heard of polycount and a background prop toothbrush has 400 quads… per bristle.
Does Crusader Kings 3 have African leaders enabled or does it come as a DLC?
The base game has a notoriously difficult achievement involving starting as a specific female tribal chief uniting “all of Africa” under one reformed pagan religion. Scare quotes because the map doesn’t go further south than approximately the Sahel, not all Africa is playable. Whole of the Americas, Oceania, as well as much of east Asia (incl. China and Japan) are missing. There’s probably going to be map extensions (and China and Japan will be DLCs with lots of custom mechanics) but the original map is already bigger than CKII ever got, and India was playable from the start, with custom mechanics and all.
Output resolution has negligible impact on VRAM use: 32M for a 4-byte buffer for 4k, 8M for 1080p. It’s texture and mesh data that eats VRAM, texture and mesh data that’s bound to be different between different cameras and thus, as I already said, can’t be shared, you need to calculate with 4x VRAM use because you need to cover the worst-case scenario.
The general point still stands, though, you can’t do the same thing with a 2015 game. On the flipside you should be able to run the 2004 game in different VMs on the same box, no native support required.
I can’t do that, but you know who could? The people who originally made the game.
How to tell me you’re not a gamedev without telling me you’re not a gamedev. You don’t just turn a knob and the game uses less VRAM, a 4x budget difference is a completely new pipeline, including assets.
Low poly models with textures that quadruple the game’s size are the worst possible middle ground.
Speaking about redoing mesh assets. Textures are easy, especially if they already exist in a higher resolution which will be the case for a 2015 game, but producing slightly higher-res meshes from the original sculpts is manual work. Topology and weight-painting at minimum.
So, different proposal: Don’t do it yourself. Scrap together a couple of millions to have someone do it for you.
4x splitscreen needs approximately 4x VRAM with modern approaches to graphics: If you’re looking at something sufficiently different than another player there’s going to be nearly zero data in common between them, and you need VRAM for both sets. You go ahead and make a game run in 1/4th of its original budget.
NEVER! I choose to embrace my inner geriatric and complain about kids these days and their hippy-hop music.
Can recommend, but only when you’re subverting expectations. Young student is unloading a bunch of empty beverage crates from the elevator on the ground floor, making you wait, already looking quite self-conscious about it? Bellow, loud but not shouty, “Unbelievable, the students of today”. See them flinch and cower, “oh fuck this again”. Continue, with flawless timing, “why isn’t that beer?”.