The Spam Thread!

[huckleberrypie]

Well if it was indeed using CryEngine, the developers definitely failed to tap the engine's potential as what Crytek would often do with their tech demos, er, games.

[cpd2009]

Arrrgh...

Having lots of trouble trying to get a YTP finished. The project appears fine in Premiere, yet when I try to encode to WMV format, it always fails around 60% done. Rendering to DV-AVI works fine, but attempting to use MediaEspresso to convert the DV-AVI to a workable format also fails around the 60% mark.

I'm now trying to encode it using Flash Video FLV. FLV has worked in the past, but the downside is that FLV encoding seems to take forever even when I tried it with Audrey and her quad-core APU. But it seems it's the only hope of finishing the video without trying to spend another hour trying to find what specific clip is making WMV encoding choke. :/

[huckleberrypie]

Arrrgh...

Having lots of trouble trying to get a YTP finished. The project appears fine in Premiere, yet when I try to encode to WMV format, it always fails around 60% done. Rendering to DV-AVI works fine, but attempting to use MediaEspresso to convert the DV-AVI to a workable format also fails around the 60% mark.

I'm now trying to encode it using Flash Video FLV. FLV has worked in the past, but the downside is that FLV encoding seems to take forever even when I tried it with Audrey and her quad-core APU. But it seems it's the only hope of finishing the video without trying to spend another hour trying to find what specific clip is making WMV encoding choke. :/

You tried encoding it to some other format? In my case I was able to speed up my encodes with a copy of DVDFab a friend of mine gave to me some time ago, as it has support for CUDA. I haven't tried utilising NVENC though, but since Maxwell architecture GPUs support it (e.g. the GTX 750 series you and I use), it's no surprising if it does a better job considering it's hardwired into the processor core.

[cpd2009]

You tried encoding it to some other format? In my case I was able to speed up my encodes with a copy of DVDFab a friend of mine gave to me some time ago, as it has support for CUDA. I haven't tried utilising NVENC though, but since Maxwell architecture GPUs support it (e.g. the GTX 750 series you and I use), it's no surprising if it does a better job considering it's hardwired into the processor core.

Here's the problem. My copy of Premiere is so old that the included Adobe Media Encoder doesn't support any form of hardware encoding. It's all software. Granted, encoding to WMV format usually takes no more than half hour to 45 minutes for a full 12 minute YTP. I could gain hardware accelerated encoding by getting a new version of my Adobe Suite, but even used copies go for a pretty penny on eBay. And I'm not signing up for Adobe CC anytime soon.

Later on, I found the source clip in the project that was causing the choke up... another WMV file. For some reason, AME doesn't encode properly if there are certain kinds of WMV files in your project. Something to do with how the source files audio is formatted. I later realized that setting the audio encoder to CBR seems to eliminate this problem. By default, it encodes the audio track as VBR.

[cpd2009]

Yes, I'm still alive... recovering from some extensive dental work. Blame my childhood avoidance of regular teeth brushing. I'm paying the price for it.

But, I am healing up well. During recovery time, I have been playing some old Nintendo games, namely the unlicensed Codemasters/Camerica carts from the early 90s. I have three in my collection, the Quattro Sports, Quattro Arcade, and Quattro Adventure. All 4-game multicarts. On the Arcade cart, I played through "F-16 Renegade", which is a rather good war-themed vertical shooter with a ever sliding scale of difficulty as you progress. They messed up the ending though, which amounts to something between NoEnding and AWinnerIsYou. A shame since the plot in the manual is rather good and a bit bizarre.

Now, I'm playing a game on the Adventure cart... Super Robin Hood. It's based off an older computer game released in Europe by Codemasters in the early 80s, and compared to the originals, the NES port is the best version by far. The graphics, music, and level design are well done. The controls are a bit loose, but it's nothing horrible doesn't really affect the gameplay if you are careful. The game is a platformer, but not your typical type of platformer. It combines action and puzzle elements. You really need to learn the layouts of the levels and traps to advance beyond the first screen. It's a rather unique game.

Also, rumors abound that Nintendo may be ending production on the Wii U by the end of this year. This gives me the impression that Nintendo may be wanting to forget about the Wii U. It had so much potential, but because of Nintendo's corporate policies and chasing away third parties since the NES era (with a brief exception of the SNES era IMO), it really didn't live up to it's potential. The Wii U was also very underpowered compared to the Xbone or PS4. My brother has Star Wars Battlefront for his PS4 and I was able to see him play it over Christmas. The graphics are amazing and the gameplay fast and frantic. The Wii U's graphical level is similar to that of the PS3 or 360, essentially a generation behind. Some games tend to have performance issues and the system UI is rather slow at times. Nintendo should have went with an x86-64 CPU from the start along with an equivalent GPU to match, and perhaps released around the time the Xbone or PS4 were launched. Nintendo thought they had a head start on the eighth generation, but they stuck to their gimmicks and underpowered hardware. They also need to stop recycling their IPs so much. There is only so many "New" SMB games that I can play, each new version just getting better graphics and a new gimmick to keep the gameplay from going totally stale. There is hope, with a new Zelda game in development and a StarFox reboot being released in April.

Only time will tell if Nintendo will fix things with the NX. I sure hope so since I only had Wilf, my Wii U, for not even a year yet. :/

[huckleberrypie]

Nintendo has just denied the rumours, but regardless it's more or less evident that the Wii U isn't performing well as what Nintendo hoped. Problem with them is they're flogging their IPs like a dead horse, introducing few if anything new to the table.

[cpd2009]

Nintendo has just denied the rumours, but regardless it's more or less evident that the Wii U isn't performing well as what Nintendo hoped. Problem with them is they're flogging their IPs like a dead horse, introducing few if anything new to the table.

Here's hoping StarFox Zero starts a trend of Nintendo bringing new ideas to their IPs. StarFox hasn't had a proper game in years and the new game is some sort of reboot of the franchise I think and it will be the first new game in the series in almost 10 years. It recently got a bit of flak for an "invincibility" mode where you can play the game without dying, apparently targeted at brand new gamers. I don't mind it at all as it's entirely optional and you can still play the game normally with challenge.

I guess the main reason why Nintendo doesn't want to shake up it's franchises too much is the fear of changing the game too much. In the past, game sequels didn't do as well as the original because the developers changed too much whether it be storylines or gameplay style. Nintendo seems to want to play it safe which is understandable, but it ends up alienating their older audiences like myself who want something actually new in the next Mario game, not just a new set of levels.

What they need is to go beyond the gimmicks and introduce new villains or new plot elements instead of resorting to the typical "Rescue Princess Peach" story that's been mostly the same since the original SMB. And perhaps reintroduce forgotten IPs like "Mole Mania" or bringing some of their lesser know arcade games to the Virtual Console.

[Blackberry Bun]

Good Friday.

Hypothetically, which of these two servers of an online game would generate more revenue? Both are free to play by default.
1. Default setting is "Normal" difficulty, but players have the option to pay to temporarily unlock "Easy" difficulty.
2. Default setting is "Hard" difficulty, but players have the option to pay to temporarily unlock "Normal" difficulty.

[huckleberrypie]

Good Friday.

Hypothetically, which of these two servers of an online game would generate more revenue? Both are free to play by default.
1. Default setting is "Normal" difficulty, but players have the option to pay to temporarily unlock "Easy" difficulty.
2. Default setting is "Hard" difficulty, but players have the option to pay to temporarily unlock "Normal" difficulty.

There's no definite answer to that imo, as it would ultimately depend on the players for one, and how the game is strewn together. Either way paying to have certain features unlocked, more so with being able to complete the game, just smacks of being cynical on part of the developers if you ask me. Not unless if the IAPs are done in a non-obtrusive way like in Team Fortress 2 for example.

[Blackberry Bun]

Figured as much. Anyway, here's the full story.

There's this MMORPG with the name Phantasy Star Online 2, originated from Japan but currently also has China and South East Asia Server. In the latter two servers, enemies deal about 30% more damage to players compared to Japan server. However, in the latter two servers players have the option to do a kompu-gacha (Picture explanation here) to get a costume which negates the damage increase.

My question was about the decision to increase enemy damage. Would it actually be more enticing for players to gamble their real money for the chance to make the enemies deal "normal" damage, rather than letting the enemies deal normal damage with players having the option to gamble their money for the chance to make the enemies deal low damage?

I'm just a guy with no knowledge of marketing strategies on this matter, so I wonder.