247 réponses à ce sujet

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Nefario wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Nefario wrote...
That's all true. But it still doesn't support the notion that features are being cut because of the console version. The user interface didn't translate well - but the interface isn't changing, is it? The camera, sure, if you consider that part of the user interface. But I fail to see how the graphical limitations of the engine (which is apparently why the iso camera isn't in this time) has anything to do with consoles, as the issue of a tactical camera isn't something that's included on the console anyway.
I mean... can you give me an example of something that's being cut out and explain how the removal of the feature is related to the console development?
I really think you're just projecting your dissatisfaction regarding design choices.

PC is no longer the lead sku, its easier to port UP than port down. Prolly has a huge part of the camera changes right there.

That doesn't make any sense for a number of reasons. The two versions are being developed simultaneously, so the problems of porting don't apply. But even if they were porting, the tactical camera isn't part of the console version, so it'd have to be worked on independently regardless.
I'm confused here... are you saying that you think the game will somehow arrive on the PC crippled, and the developers will then be unable to develop a camera that plays to the strengths of a PC?

Obvously, but they still have a lead platform 99 out of 100 times no matter how much you'll hear "oh we're doing each platform on its own" And its far easier to port up from the low end to the high end, rather than port down.

That goes for every dev in the industry mind you. Its far cheaper to just port as well.

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

[Nefario]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

That's a reasonable stance to take in itself, but you're still not providing any reason for thinking that console limitations are in fact causing depth-increasing features to be cut from Dragon Age 2.

[Tiax Rules All]

Nefario wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

That's a reasonable stance to take in itself, but you're still not providing any reason for thinking that console limitations are in fact causing depth-increasing features to be cut from Dragon Age 2.

Developers will never freely admit to cutting things from PC to fit in console. So proof? 

Its just widely known (and denied by some like yourself) that it happens.

[Nefario]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Nefario wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

That's a reasonable stance to take in itself, but you're still not providing any reason for thinking that console limitations are in fact causing depth-increasing features to be cut from Dragon Age 2.

Developers will never freely admit to cutting things from PC to fit in console. So proof? 

Its just widely known (and denied by some like yourself) that it happens.

I'm not actually asking for proof of denying anything.
I'm just asking for some line of reasoning demonstrating a relationship between the omission of features and console limitations.
I tend to avoid "it's just widely known" as a satisfactory explanation for anything.

[Ympulse]

I seem to remember having much more playability from my PC version of ME2 than I did xbox. It almost felt like the console version was dumbed down and clunky compared to PC.



I must have had one hell of an acid trip.

[Atakuma]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Nefario wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

That's a reasonable stance to take in itself, but you're still not providing any reason for thinking that console limitations are in fact causing depth-increasing features to be cut from Dragon Age 2.

Developers will never freely admit to cutting things from PC to fit in console. So proof? 

Its just widely known (and denied by some like yourself) that it happens.

thats all hearsay

[Atakuma]

Ympulse wrote...

I seem to remember having much more playability from my PC version of ME2 than I did xbox. It almost felt like the console version was dumbed down and clunky compared to PC.

I must have had one hell of an acid trip.

Thats because of the joysticks. A mouse and keyboard are simply more responsive and precise whitch is important for a shooter.

[Ympulse]

Atakuma wrote...

Ympulse wrote...

I seem to remember having much more playability from my PC version of ME2 than I did xbox. It almost felt like the console version was dumbed down and clunky compared to PC.

I must have had one hell of an acid trip.

Thats because of the joysticks. A mouse and keyboard are simply more responsive and precise whitch is important for a shooter.

I'm sorry my attempt at making a point missed.

Using ME2 as a comparison saying "ME2 was made for consoles so its bad" is outrageous, given the evidence we have.

[Atakuma]

Ympulse wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Ympulse wrote...

I seem to remember having much more playability from my PC version of ME2 than I did xbox. It almost felt like the console version was dumbed down and clunky compared to PC.

I must have had one hell of an acid trip.

Thats because of the joysticks. A mouse and keyboard are simply more responsive and precise whitch is important for a shooter.

I'm sorry my attempt at making a point missed.

Using ME2 as a comparison saying "ME2 was made for consoles so its bad" is outrageous, given the evidence we have.

lol dont be sorry it was rather obvious yet it still flew right over my head

[MerinTB]

Nefario wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Nefario wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

What I'm saying is, its really sad that a series that was orginially aimed at the PC as a throw back to Bioware's roots, could very well end up gimped by putting more focus on their new target userbase in the 360/PS3. And rather than stick to those roots they took a few pages out of ME2's playbook which was clearly designed for consoles in the first place. Again not meaning that as a slight against console users, but I'm sure some will take it that way anyway.

That's a reasonable stance to take in itself, but you're still not providing any reason for thinking that console limitations are in fact causing depth-increasing features to be cut from Dragon Age 2.

Developers will never freely admit to cutting things from PC to fit in console. So proof? 
Its just widely known (and denied by some like yourself) that it happens.

I'm not actually asking for proof of denying anything.
I'm just asking for some line of reasoning demonstrating a relationship between the omission of features and console limitations.
I tend to avoid "it's just widely known" as a satisfactory explanation for anything.

Well, without a keyboard there's no hotkeys, no typing w/o a virtual keyboard (YUCK), no arrow keys...
and without a mouse there's not quick moving a cursor over something, clicking on items or locations...

There are some limitations of console games.

Limited harddrive space for storage (or loading the game on the HDD to run quicker).  Inability to use mods or building tools.  Ancient hardware limiting what the games are capable of.  Lower resolutions.

There are some more limitations.

Due to those limitations, features that would work well on a PC work poorly or not at all on a console.

I think that is what was meant.

[Nefario]

MerinTB wrote...

Well, without a keyboard there's no hotkeys, no typing w/o a virtual keyboard (YUCK), no arrow keys...
and without a mouse there's not quick moving a cursor over something, clicking on items or locations...

There are some limitations of console games.

Limited harddrive space for storage (or loading the game on the HDD to run quicker).  Inability to use mods or building tools.  Ancient hardware limiting what the games are capable of.  Lower resolutions.

There are some more limitations.

Due to those limitations, features that would work well on a PC work poorly or not at all on a console.

I think that is what was meant.

The above is all true enough. Still, it does nothing to explain the actual changes in terms of the limitations of consoles.
Looking again at the tactical camera: it's still the same engine as the last game, and it's not a feature being implemented on the console, so how are the technical limitations of the console relevant? Is the background assumption that if they weren't making the game on consoles as well they'd be using a different engine or something?

Not meaning to derail the thread; this'll be my last post on the subject.

Modifié par Nefario, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:05 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Console controls dont really support using tactical camera as well as pc does. Since it doesn't work well on the console they took it out. Worked great on the pc though, pc is suffering because of console limitiations

[Nefario]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Console controls dont really support using tactical camera as well as pc does. Since it doesn't work well on the console they took it out. Worked great on the pc though, pc is suffering because of console limitiations

Bah. I can't help myself.

See, that's the thing. They still have a tactical camera that they're doing independently of the console. It's just not isometric.
My question, basically, is why would a PC-only feature be limited by console specs?

Modifié par Nefario, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:15 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Nefario wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Console controls dont really support using tactical camera as well as pc does. Since it doesn't work well on the console they took it out. Worked great on the pc though, pc is suffering because of console limitiations

Bah. I can't help myself.

See, that's the thing. They still have a tactical camera that they're doing independently of the console. It's just not isometric.
My question, basically, is why would a PC-only feature be limited by console specs?

because console is the main build and pc is the port so adding any type of thing that is not in the console version is extra for Bioware. Thats why its not a full tactical camera, just a "its sorta there, don't yell at us pc gamers" version

[Beaner28]

The OP's link doesn't work.

Modifié par Beaner28, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:39 .

[Beaner28]

As I suspected, half-assed console port.



*begins to weep*

[Dave of Canada]

Tiax Rules All wrote...


because console is the main build and pc is the port so adding any type of thing that is not in the console version is extra for Bioware. Thats why its not a full tactical camera, just a "its sorta there, don't yell at us pc gamers" version

Isn't adding more control to the camera but not allowing it to pull out as far still an improvement / trade off? I doubt Dragon Age is ruined forever for the PC crowd because of it. It's also not a port when they focus on all of them equally, just because they aren't FOCUSING EXCLUSIVELY for the PC (ironic considering how perfectly fine the PC crowd finds it when they are the ones being catered) doesn't mean it'll be a port.

[Nefario]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Nefario wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Console controls dont really support using tactical camera as well as pc does. Since it doesn't work well on the console they took it out. Worked great on the pc though, pc is suffering because of console limitiations

Bah. I can't help myself.

See, that's the thing. They still have a tactical camera that they're doing independently of the console. It's just not isometric.
My question, basically, is why would a PC-only feature be limited by console specs?

because console is the main build and pc is the port so adding any type of thing that is not in the console version is extra for Bioware. Thats why its not a full tactical camera, just a "its sorta there, don't yell at us pc gamers" version

Regardless of whether the camera is fully tactical, it is something added to the PC version that is not in the console version. So it's still extra for Bioware. Maybe less so than an isometric camera would be? I don't know the relative costs. I'd assume that the camera they'd established in the previous game would be the least expensive to implement this time around, but I can't speak with any certainty about that.
I'm inclined to take the developers at their word when they say it's a graphical (read: engine) issue, though.

[Beaner28]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...


because console is the main build and pc is the port so adding any type of thing that is not in the console version is extra for Bioware. Thats why its not a full tactical camera, just a "its sorta there, don't yell at us pc gamers" version

Isn't adding more control to the camera but not allowing it to pull out as far still an improvement / trade off? I doubt Dragon Age is ruined forever for the PC crowd because of it. It's also not a port when they focus on all of them equally, just because they aren't FOCUSING EXCLUSIVELY for the PC (ironic considering how perfectly fine the PC crowd finds it when they are the ones being catered) doesn't mean it'll be a port.

Well, to be fair, Laidlaw said the old tactical camera wouldn't work for DA 2. Apparently, he said the newer one works better but we still can't decide for ourselves.

Why haven't we seen anything on the PC yet?

Modifié par Beaner28, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[Dave of Canada]

Beaner28 wrote...

Why haven't we seen anything on the PC yet????

All previews have been from the demo aspect that's been introduced, where the console is easily shipped and used rather than carrying full PCs with mouse and keyboard. If consoles were harder to set up, we'd most likely be seeing a reverse situation where there's nothing about the PS3/X360 versions and the console people would feel like "they are hiding the bad console port" or "the game sucks on consoles".

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:46 .

[Beaner28]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Beaner28 wrote...

Why haven't we seen anything on the PC yet????

All previews have been from the demo aspect that's been introduced, where the console is easily shipped and used rather than carrying full PCs with mouse and keyboard. If consoles were harder to set up, we'd most likely be seeing a reverse situation where there's nothing about the PS3/X360 versions and the console people would feel like "they are hiding the bad console port" or "the game sucks on consoles".

I carried my Alienware PC up three flights of stairs to move it into my college dormitory.

In the snow.

Modifié par Beaner28, 16 novembre 2010 - 06:51 .

[Piecake]

Beaner28 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Beaner28 wrote...

Why haven't we seen anything on the PC yet????

All previews have been from the demo aspect that's been introduced, where the console is easily shipped and used rather than carrying full PCs with mouse and keyboard. If consoles were harder to set up, we'd most likely be seeing a reverse situation where there's nothing about the PS3/X360 versions and the console people would feel like "they are hiding the bad console port" or "the game sucks on consoles".

I carried my Alienware PC up three flights of stairs to move it into my college dormitory.

In the snow.

congratulations

[Beaner28]

Piecake wrote...

congratulations

/bow

[Dave of Canada]

Beaner28 wrote...

I carried my Alienware PC up three flights of stairs to move it into my college dormitory.

In the snow.

Up hill both ways?

Though seriously, you didn't have to send it half way across the world and set it up for thousands of people to play it.

[Leonia]

I miss my Alienware, it was going to cost way too much to send it over from the US to Australia. Was a limited-edition Star Wars case too. But now we're off-topic.