Read moreWell.....
- Stating that dayz wasn't catering to consoles when there were changes being made for the simplification of the game in terms of control and look, to adapt to the already existing market.
- Stating that the console development wasn't planned when it was fully ongoing for a couple years
- Stating that the console development wouldn't affect the PC version, when in reality there would be only 1 version of the game, meaning that any change in the future, that would make the game more console friendly would definitely affect the PC version.
- Stating that the "release" of the game was essential to the game development, when in reality it just ended up with it killed.
- Stating that there would be a continuous support for the development of the game after release, with the same team, when in reality people was being slowly cut from the team.
- Stating that the game would be "finished" with the bare minimum ...
No there were not, it was actually the other way around, we were fighting to fit the new things coming to PC and map them on controller. Consoles are very much the same game.
Console development wasn’t planned from the start, the biggest hurdle to get through in our case was moving from old directX to modern APIs. As this was happening anyways with a new engine to gain performance it was a nice side effect of our efforts in rewriting an engine. (As you might remember one of the most common complaints was performance and security which is why sqf had to be replaced, an improvement in these two areas which required huge engine changes cost us the delay elsewhere)
That is still the case with all the performance improvements that PC benefited from as we analyzed the constraints. Our goal with the console versions was to keep them same. That hasn’t changed.
Yes we made mistakes and miscalculated the amount of effort that was ne...