Official Thread Crackdown 3

  • Guest, I'm signing an executive order to make Courier the official sarcasm font on UnionVGF.
Sep 11, 2013
21,379
3,414
3,930
Leave it up to you to be too dense to follow the conversation. I'm not sure if it is because you actually aren't able or you are being deliberate about it just to argue.

I know what matchmaking does dude. The point being if I have to use LFG to put me into a group of randoms anyway, then I should have been given the option to have matchmaking in game because, ironically, I would be with randoms either way. Bungee decided they knew what was best and imposed their selfishness off on me.

Either way I am done arguing with a child about this. It’s not the point of this thread anyway, so knock yourself out. You’re all about the attention anyway...
Oddly dnough that is a point I agreed with 10 posts ago.

Don't blame me for your dumb rant on an invalid comparison, the comparison was the only point I was making.
 

lowdru2k

TXB member 2002-2013
Sep 13, 2013
3,967
796
2,220
That is ridiculous not to have that in at launch.

The MP will be DOA. I’m sure there will be a small amount that do not mind playing solo. The large portion of people that play MP will laugh at not being able to party up with friends and move on.

So stupid.
 

D-V-ANT

A mentally stable genius
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,151
1,380
12,830
That is ridiculous not to have that in at launch.

The MP will be DOA. I’m sure there will be a small amount that do not mind playing solo. The large portion of people that play MP will laugh at not being able to party up with friends and move on.

So stupid.
Give them a break. I mean it's not like they've had nearly 8 years to develop this. :txbrolleyes:

Oh wait.... :really:
 

Kerosene31

What happened to the American Dream? It came true.
Forum Mod
Supporting Member
Sep 12, 2013
7,299
1,547
3,620
Multiplayer definitely seems half baked for sure. I'm only interested in SP anyway, but they shouldn't put multiplayer in there at all if it doesn't have basic functionality. Yet again, good communication is important. Don't tell people there will be MP and not have simple functionality. Just say the MP isn't ready for launch and coming at a later date.
 

D-V-ANT

A mentally stable genius
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,151
1,380
12,830
Multiplayer definitely seems half baked for sure. I'm only interested in SP anyway, but they shouldn't put multiplayer in there at all if it doesn't have basic functionality. Yet again, good communication is important. Don't tell people there will be MP and not have simple functionality. Just say the MP isn't ready for launch and coming at a later date.
I'd say there was very little appetite to formally announce anymore delays with this even if it's about functionality that is to be added.
 

Kerosene31

What happened to the American Dream? It came true.
Forum Mod
Supporting Member
Sep 12, 2013
7,299
1,547
3,620
I'd say there was very little appetite to formally announce anymore delays with this even if it's about functionality that is to be added.
Don't delay the game, just the MP. It is better than the alternative. I can already see my Youtube front page on Friday "broken Crackdown 3 MP!!!!". The gaming community can be silly sometimes, but you know they are going to freak out.

Being up front and honest about things is always the least bad option. 95% of gamers don't read places like this and won't have a clue.
 

menace-uk-

Division Agent
Sep 11, 2013
21,379
3,414
3,930
Don't delay the game, just the MP. It is better than the alternative. I can already see my Youtube front page on Friday "broken Crackdown 3 MP!!!!". The gaming community can be silly sometimes, but you know they are going to freak out.

Being up front and honest about things is always the least bad option. 95% of gamers don't read places like this and won't have a clue.
Doesn't make a difference. Delaying the MP will have the same result. The MP in this is doomed anyway. Between the dev time and online hyping this game will get ripped apart.

I can already see the Kotaku article, "entitled gamers outrage over multiplayer."
 

Kerosene31

What happened to the American Dream? It came true.
Forum Mod
Supporting Member
Sep 12, 2013
7,299
1,547
3,620
So... everyone seems to be in total tandem regarding this game here...
Many of us get it on Game Pass so many of us will try it on Friday and you should have a good number of opinions from people once we've actually played the game.
 

Swede

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2018
1,167
349
448
L M A O. What an absolute and utter failure. A basic bare bones function of ANY online multiplayer game since 2001 is not in a game that is releasing in 2019. That is absolutely INEXCUSABLE
Not played or watched the mp much, might there be a gameplay reason for it not being included?
 

tumorman

Supreme Member
Sep 12, 2013
413
138
359
So does the non partying up count towards co-op? Because that was the main reason I even wanted to play this game. Had a blast with OG Crackdown's co-op
 

Frozpot

Well-Known Member
Sep 13, 2013
10,373
2,418
3,629
That's what they say but I doubt you would have needed cloud for those waves if the console had a better CPU, I wouldn't be shocked if they could have done it without it period because there are plenty of games with great looking water already. The destruction in CD3 seems to be there just for the sake of being there, the fact that it doesn't cause damage and doesn't seem to have any difference in how it falls regardless how big the piece is makes it once again sound like something that wasn't needed but is just there as a tech demo more than anything. I still think we are a long way off from anything meaningful being able to be integrated into a game through the cloud.
I'm not sure it matters as much as the rendering, but needing to be rendered centrally in order for that dynamic, moving environment to be the same at every frame for everyone.

If you render physics locally there could be variation in where debris lands, thus rendering it useless for a shared scenario where you can use it for cover, or traversal.

This is why you would bake destruction or make debris disappear.
 

JinCA

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
11,282
4,589
3,830
I'm not sure it matters as much as the rendering, but needing to be rendered centrally in order for that dynamic, moving environment to be the same at every frame for everyone.

If you render physics locally there could be variation in where debris lands, thus rendering it useless for a shared scenario where you can use it for cover, or traversal.

This is why you would bake destruction or make debris disappear.
Yeah but again that kind of thing has been done baked before, does the end user really know the difference?
 

Dno69

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,676
1,280
2,830
Ok now I’m seeing footage with proper shadows and s***. What’s going on? lol
 

JinCA

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
11,282
4,589
3,830



........................
It's clear they couldn't actually produce what they advertised early on, the tech demo was so much more than what they were actually able to achieve with real gameplay. The destruction was downgraded in just about every way possible, the quality of the destruction and the scale has been toned way down, it's small maps now vs what the guy said they could do in the video which was talking about being able to destroy every building you could see even a mile away etc. I kind of want to blame it on it being handled by lackluster studios but they still had access to MS's engineers and 5 years of development time.
 
Last edited:

OneBadMutha

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2013
2,137
675
1,760
It's clear they couldn't actually produce what they advertised early on, the tech demo was so much more than what they were actually able to achieve with real gameplay. The destruction was downgraded in just about every way possible, the quality of the destruction and the scale has been toned way down, it's small maps now vs what the guy said they could do in the video which was talking about being able to destroy every building you could see even a mile away etc. I kind of want to blame it on it being handled by lackluster studios but they still had access to MS's engineers and 5 years of development time.
Demo was by a different team who was trying to sell their tech. They sold it to Epic. Microsoft kept none of it and started over. What I’m curious about is what kind of deal did Microsoft have that they funded someone else's science project and that company took the tech somewhere else without Microsoft getting to keep anything from the relationship.

Sign of incompetent management at the time. Not incompetent engineers. Doesn’t seem like they brought the tech in house.
 

Hedon

Hedonism
Cornerstone Member
Sep 13, 2013
15,951
3,691
15,031
It's clear they couldn't actually produce what they advertised early on, the tech demo was so much more than what they were actually able to achieve with real gameplay. The destruction was downgraded in just about every way possible, the quality of the destruction and the scale has been toned way down, it's small maps now vs what the guy said they could do in the video which was talking about being able to destroy every building you could see even a mile away etc. I kind of want to blame it on it being handled by lackluster studios but they still had access to MS's engineers and 5 years of development time.
You can leave the Crackdown thread now. Thank you for your time