121 réponses à ce sujet

[jawlz]

Pompeii69 wrote...

I have both versions, PC and XBox and quite frankly I'm enjoying the console version better. Now granted, I'm certainly not an "elite" gamer, but neither am I a child. (44 yrs old, professional software developer) I have the PC version because I'm interested in the toolset, but not for making mods, for delving into machinima. As fare as playing user made mods, I have little or no interest in it. It's far more preferable to sit in my recliner, playing on my 62" TV in my roomy living room than it is in my cramped computer room, with the uncomfrtable desk chair.

And before people start spouting off with "hook your PC up to the TV", it's just not feasible. I'm not going to lug my computer into the living room to just play a game. Plus my computer is for other things, such as video editing, movie making, software development, etc... And I'm not going to be comfortable doing that in the living room...

I wouldn't say to hook the PC up to the TV, I'd instead suggest investing in a nice comfy desk chair! 

[Amish Love Machine]

I originally bought the 360 version and finished it and started another character. after reading up on the toolset and wanting to try to my hand at player-made content, I purchased the PC version as well. After playing on both, I find myself wishing I would've gotten only the PC version. While I was used to the way the game plays on the 360, I liked being able to have all of my talents, etc. on the lower bar, hotkeyed, etc. I also like being able to click on the player icon and take control of the player instead of having to hit "RB" or "LB" to scroll through the party members.



The winning difference for the PC, I believe, is the toolset. It's just too stinking cool to pass up.

[Haexpane]

I guess this board doesn't have mods to lock flame fests?



The PC version is better, that doesn't mean I 'hate" the console version, in fact I am playing the PS3 version

[jawlz]

Haexpane wrote...

I guess this board doesn't have mods to lock flame fests?

The PC version is better, that doesn't mean I 'hate" the console version, in fact I am playing the PS3 version

Probably 90% of the posts in this thread are NOT flames.

[Amish Love Machine]

Pompeii69 wrote...

I have both versions, PC and XBox and quite frankly I'm enjoying the console version better. Now granted, I'm certainly not an "elite" gamer, but neither am I a child. (44 yrs old, professional software developer) I have the PC version because I'm interested in the toolset, but not for making mods, for delving into machinima. As fare as playing user made mods, I have little or no interest in it. It's far more preferable to sit in my recliner, playing on my 62" TV in my roomy living room than it is in my cramped computer room, with the uncomfrtable desk chair.

And before people start spouting off with "hook your PC up to the TV", it's just not feasible. I'm not going to lug my computer into the living room to just play a game. Plus my computer is for other things, such as video editing, movie making, software development, etc... And I'm not going to be comfortable doing that in the living room...

And for the record, I've had no problems with the controls.  I have experienced a few glitches, but nothing all that vastly different than what the PC users might experience as well.

I agree about playing the 360 on the larger TV.  I didn't have problems with the 360 controls, either. They're not that hard to get used to once you play it. After I played the PC version, though, I found I liked that scheme better as it's one I'm more used to.

[FatedHeart]

Just for the record... i own all three versions (got them all free - thank you university course ) and i honestly prefer the ps3 version. my xbox currently is a keyboard stand for my ps3, has been for the past year and the close up texture problems i agree are a downside. They however dont seem to appear for me on the ps3, which im quite glad about.



The pc version (£1400 rig, new in august, also used on £900 rig) i agree has a few features some may find more attractive, however for me, when your programming and designing these sort of enviroments all day... the toolset seems very basic and does nothing to excite me... hence i do prefer the console game, get to relax in bed and enjoy it with surround sound and comfort.



Theres technically no reason to hate either or... they are all the same game and each displays the good parts of the game well...

[isvalla]

tried the pc version first to see if my laptop could run it (was a fail, everything turned off and lowest resolution) and now i´m almost finished with the xbox360 version... i liked the controls way more on the console. And while it is true it is easier, you can always use a higher difficulty

I also think it looks pretty on my console... a lot more that the graphics i got from my laptop anyway and no, i can´t afford a new computer while i already have my xbox on the living room...

[Zealuu]

I haven't actually tried the console version (seems a bit wasteful buying the same game twice), but my decision to stick with my PC over my Xbox on this one was largely a result of the console versions not offering the option of zooming the camera out and into the tactical/isometric view. The lack of user created content and my preference for mouse/keyboard controls over gamepads when possible factored in as well, of course, but the camera limitations were the deciding factor.

That said, I don't hate the console version, I just believe the PC version offers the best experience, provided your system can run it reasonably well.

Modifié par Zealuu, 19 novembre 2009 - 10:16 .

[Steffin]

Fatalmephisto wrote...

...snip...... What Experince would i be missing if i had a PC that chould run DA:O?

This is why I love steam, I can play this game anywhere I have steam installed And one of the reasons I'm stating this is one of the PCs I am playing DA on is over 3 years old. This whole mentality that consoles are mysteriously more powerful that PC is complete garbage.  Open up your Xbox/PS3 and see what's in there, You'll be surprised to find out that that hardware is about 4-5 generations behind where PCs are.

As far as problems, the only problem I had was the not so smart decision to tie all the "extra content" that people paid for into a beta social site at time of release.  Seriously, who didn't see that cluster pluck coming.....  

I do not really want to get into a whole console vs PC debate, but console players like things easy. They don't like taking the time to figure things out, they just want to turn it on and play. I think we can all safely agree with that. That mentality does not bode well with games that present challenges.  



Anyway, why are people complaining? Because its what people do. You need to take the complain that the person into aspect to decide if that said complaint is worthwhile. I ignore 95% of the complaints here ( PC and console) because most of the PC complaints are from idiots who don't know how to maintain their PC ( rightfully so, these people should best move to the console).  

[FatedHeart]

Steffin wrote...

Fatalmephisto wrote...

...snip...... What Experince would i be missing if i had a PC that chould run DA:O?

This is why I love steam, I can play this game anywhere I have steam installed And one of the reasons I'm stating this is one of the PCs I am playing DA on is over 3 years old. This whole mentality that consoles are mysteriously more powerful that PC is complete garbage.  Open up your Xbox/PS3 and see what's in there, You'll be surprised to find out that that hardware is about 4-5 generations behind where PCs are.

As far as problems, the only problem I had was the not so smart decision to tie all the "extra content" that people paid for into a beta social site at time of release.  Seriously, who didn't see that cluster pluck coming.....  

I do not really want to get into a whole console vs PC debate, but console players like things easy. They don't like taking the time to figure things out, they just want to turn it on and play. I think we can all safely agree with that. That mentality does not bode well with games that present challenges.  



Anyway, why are people complaining? Because its what people do. You need to take the complain that the person into aspect to decide if that said complaint is worthwhile. I ignore 95% of the complaints here ( PC and console) because most of the PC complaints are from idiots who don't know how to maintain their PC ( rightfully so, these people should best move to the console).  

Are you saying that we want things easy just because of the platform we choose to play upon? How is it then that some of us "console players" are gaming software developers who are making the games you will be playing in the future on the pc? if we loved things easy surely the games we help to create would reflect our preference for simplistic games?

Dont start generalising people... as that just adds fuel to the fire of flame wars.

[Pompeii69]

Steffin wrote...
I do not really want to get into a whole console vs PC debate, but console players like things easy. They don't like taking the time to figure things out, they just want to turn it on and play. I think we can all safely agree with that. That mentality does not bode well with games that present challenges.  

If you didn't want to get into the debate, perhaps you shouldn't have stereotyped all console players.  I have no problem with figuring things out, in fact my PC is optimized for software development and movie making/editing, and is more than capable of running this game.  But I choose to play it on the console because I prefer to play on a console rather than my PC...  And that does not mean I like things easy...

[mastorofpuppetz]

dj1917 wrote...

$500? That's about £300. You can't get a decent gaming set-up for that, my laptop cost £250 (recently) and isn't even close to being able to play DAO, the best it can manage is Medieval 2 Total War, and that's the best gaming set-up I could afford. A desktop wouldn't run it (decently) at that price either unless it was a HUGE bargain. PC snobs should remember that we can't all afford top-end gear- that's why console games outsell PC games despite a lot more homes containing PCs than consoles;. most people can't play new games. The 360 version is a good bloody game and the reason it has less enemies is because it's played more as a real-time game and less pause, point and click. The graphics aren't that bad either. Certainly better than they'd look on a £300 PC, anyway.

WRONG, you can build a gaming rig, twice as powerful as any console now, and Radeon 4870 1 gb GPU is only 130 now. get with the times.

Also, show me a 300 consoel that can play games, and do alla PC can? Thanks.

[W1slicer_carolina]

I'm probably wasting time with a post no one will read but, the simple answer is that the rule of thumb in gaming is that PC/Mac is always > or at the very least = Console versions, except when the game in question is very specifically and distinctly designed around a console system and only much later ported to PC/Mac. When the console version is superior, its almost always because its functions and ui are designed around a controller device and its limited button combination's, which always results in a very clunky very limited and annoying experience on the PC/Mac. Consoles will probably never be able to keep up with the times, at least when you have games that take full advantage of the options available for a PC/Mac game, specifically because they limit themselves with a specific rule set that every game made for the specific console must adhere to, therefore automatically limiting more complicated games.

[Jaucinet]

I'm very much a pc ftw! guy but I'm perplexed by pc fans stridently stating the bleeding obvious as if it matters.



What does matter to me is that, as I understand it, the console versions retain the tactical nature of the game. This isn't a zero sum game - if a load of console players are newly converted to rpgs of a richer kind of gameplay to, say, fable, then maybe in future us pc players will feel less cause to grumble about the streamlining effects of cross-platform development.

[gingerbill]

deathwing200 wrote...

Since console players are always kids, who are generally bad at challenging RPGs like DA:O, Bio toned down the difficulty of the game on consoles to prevent them from crying if they die too much.

this is the type of person who has been condemning the console version , arrogant PC players who have never played the console version.

I can only speak for the xbox but i think the game is brilliant , good controls , nice graphics but most importantly a great RPG , definetly my favourite RPG ever.

[trickfred]

My eyes started to glaze over around page 3 of this thread.



Why all the console/PC hate? As far as I'm concerned, a real gamer plays both if they are able/can afford to, and is positive about games and gaming, rather than negative with regards to someone else's tool of choice.



I'm all for PC gaming, but DA:O was an Xbox purchase solely so my wife and I can both relax and play it on the 42" in the bedroom, away from the kids. I'm not a pre-18 year old kid who needs 'easy mode'. And guess what? The story is the same, even if the interface/difficulty isn't, and that's what matters to us.



I'll probably get the PC version as well next year; I can play user mods once Mass Effect 2 is out and the wife is hogging the Xbox.

[fant0mas]

For me the decision was easy. I grew up a PC gamer. I remember all of the Gold Box games from SSI. But I've become a Mac user for the past 4 years and I'll never look back.



I also have a PS3 and Xbox360. I bought the game on the 360 and love it on my 46" LED screen with Dolby 5.1.

[Hawkeye111]

[quote]Yelina wrote...

Here is a complete computer for under $500:

http://www.tigerdire...RCCODE=WEM2079C

[/quote]

Wow, a complete gaming computer for under $500!  That is so awesome! I am definitley going to buy this! Let me click that link and get out my credit card here. I'm so excited, it almost sounds too good to be true. Oh no, upon further review it IS to good to be true...See below:

[quote] ATI Hybrid Graphics Technology
This AMD platform technology enhances the user experience by combining an AMD 785 Chipset with integrated graphics and a compatible ATI graphics card (sold separately) so they work co-operatively yet independently of each other to bring enhanced gaming performance, productivity and platform power efficiency to the mainstream PC. 
[/quote]

Buying a complete gaming computer for under $500 is pure fantasy...that is why the market for consoles exists. Please fact check your posts Yelina. You got me all excited and then let me down - big time bro.

Modifié par Hawkeye111, 19 novembre 2009 - 06:19 .

[mastorofpuppetz]

[quote]Hawkeye111 wrote...

[quote]Yelina wrote...

Here is a complete computer for under $500:

http://www.tigerdire...RCCODE=WEM2079C

[/quote]

Wow, a complete gaming computer for under $500!  That is so awesome! I am definitley going to buy this! Let me click that link and get out my credit card here. I'm so excited, it almost sounds too good to be true. Oh no, upon further review it IS to good to be true...See below:

[quote] ATI Hybrid Graphics Technology
This AMD platform technology enhances the user experience by combining an AMD 785 Chipset with integrated graphics and a compatible ATI graphics card (sold separately) so they work co-operatively yet independently of each other to bring enhanced gaming performance, productivity and platform power efficiency to the mainstream PC. 
[/quote]

Buying a complete gaming computer for under $500 is pure fantasy...that is why the market for consoles exists. Please fact check your posts Yelina. You got me all excited and then let me down - big time bro. [/quote]

i suggest you do some research 500-600 dollars today will egta  PC that can play any gmae on highe settings with ease. a 8800GT can be had for 50 bucks, a 4850, about 3 times as pwoerfule as the PS3 and 360 video card for 100. Learn some facts, I build PC's all the time, you have zero clue what you are talking about.

[Hawkeye111]

i suggest you do some research 500-600 dollars today will egta  PC that can play any gmae on highe settings with ease. a 8800GT can be had for 50 bucks, a 4850, about 3 times as pwoerfule as the PS3 and 360 video card for 100. Learn some facts, I build PC's all the time, you have zero clue what you are talking about.

I enjoy these vague and unsubstantiated references to building high-end computers on the cheap. Forums are filled with guys like you. If you are telling the truth, you should easily be able to back-up your claims. I suspect your proficiency in building computers is as good as your spelling and punctation.
But I will admit I am wrong, if you would kindly your share your engineering and buying saviness:

Here are the "Recommended Specifications." Please provide a link for each item and the aggregate price that does not exceed $500 as per my intitial post and your ugly and angry response.




[*]CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent
[*]RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP) (I'd shoot for more here)
[*]Video: NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater 
[*]      ($50-really mate? Let me guess you buy your $50 cards in a dark alley)
[*]DVD ROM (Physical copy)
[*]20 GB HD space
[*]Motherboard (not listed but necessary)
[*]Monitor (not listed but necessary)
[*]Speakers/Sound system (not listed but necessary)


Send me those links when you get a chance. Thanks mate.

Modifié par Hawkeye111, 19 novembre 2009 - 06:56 .

[mastorofpuppetz]

Hawkeye111 wrote...

i suggest you do some research 500-600 dollars today will egta  PC that can play any gmae on highe settings with ease. a 8800GT can be had for 50 bucks, a 4850, about 3 times as pwoerfule as the PS3 and 360 video card for 100. Learn some facts, I build PC's all the time, you have zero clue what you are talking about.

I enjoy these vague and unsubstantiated references to building high-end computers on the cheap. Forums are filled with guys like you. If you are telling the truth, you should easily be able to back-up your claims. I suspect your proficiency in building computers is as good as your spelling and punctation.
But I will admit I am wrong, if you would kindly your share your engineering and buying saviness:

Here are the "Recommended Specifications." Please provide a link for each item and the aggregate price that does not exceed $500 as per my intitial post and your ugly and angry response.





[*]CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz Processor or equivalent


[*]RAM: 4 GB (Vista) or 2 GB (XP) (I'd shoot for more here)


[*]Video: NVIDIA 8800GTS 512 MB or greater 


[*]      ($50-really mate? Let me guess you buy your $50 cards in a dark alley)


[*]DVD ROM (Physical copy)


[*]20 GB HD space


[*]Motherboard (not listed but necessary)


[*]Monitor (not listed but necessary)


[*]Speakers/Sound system (not listed but necessary)


Send me those links when you get a chance. Thanks mate.

[*]Simple:

[*]http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819115207

[*]Now, after showing a cheap quad core, DA is easily maxed out on my AM<D X2 5600 Dual core which can be had for 60 bucks.

[*]http://www.newegg.co...0-337-_-Product

[*]Case can be had for 40 bucks

[*]No game, especially DA requires more th 2 GB, I hae 2 GB ram, and not one game i cannot max out. Not one game has more then 2 GB for recommended. Easilt had for 50 bucks

[*]http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820104100

[*]Also, keep in mind, Most people already have a PC in their home, so upgrading is even cheaper, they already have mouse, kweyboard (Which can be only 20 bucks anyway) and a monitor

[*]A good gaming PC for 5-600 that can play anything in hogh is a breeze. I could have gotten a much cheaper video card there, a 9800GTX or 8800GT can way surpass the consoles anre are less then 100.
[*]http://www.newegg.co...N82E16813138142
[*]http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817153023

Modifié par mastorofpuppetz, 19 novembre 2009 - 06:58 .

[GravityParade]

This game can be maxed out on an 8800GT at 1080p on a dual core AMD or Intel. The idea that you need a high end PC to play a game that's optimized for a playstation or failbox is laughable.

Also, if you're going to include the price of a monitor and speakers in the conditions for a PC, then please include your TV and speakers when comparing it to the cost of a console.

Modifié par GravityParade, 19 novembre 2009 - 07:01 .

[mastorofpuppetz]

GravityParade wrote...

This game can be maxed out on an 8800GT at 1080p on a dual core AMD or Intel. The idea that you need a high end PC to play a game that's optimized for a playstation or failbox is laughable.

Also, if you're going to include the price of a monitor and speakers in the conditions for a PC, then please include your TV and speakers when comparing it to the cost of a console.

Exactly, my amd X2 5600 @ 2.8, has no issue on MAx settings 1680 X 1050 4 aa, FPS is high and stable. That CPU is 50 bucks now.  Not too mention Xbox live and 20 bucks more per game.

very few games today require a top of the line PC, even crysis now does not, hell, My same processor and 8800GT played crysis on high settings no problem, and that made any console game look old in comparison.

Modifié par mastorofpuppetz, 19 novembre 2009 - 07:04 .

[Hawkeye111]

GravityParade wrote...
Also, if you're going to include the price of a monitor and speakers in the conditions for a PC, then please include your TV and speakers when comparing it to the cost of a console.

I will not include them. More people have TVs and speakers than computers. Its a simple an obvious fact. I'm not going to debate that one. Its not worth the time.

This game can be maxed out on an 8800GT at 1080p on a dual core AMD or Intel. The idea that you need a high end PC to play a game that's optimized for a playstation or failbox is laughable.

The idea that Dragon Age is "optimized for a playstation or failbox" is laughable. You clearly have no idea of the differences between the PC and console versions and that is what this entire thread has discussed. Either you didn't read any other posts in this thread or your short-term memory is abysmal. Please start from page 1 of the thread and read all the way through.
I suspect you are too lazy so I will give you the Cliffs-notes summary of the differences. The game was designed for multilpe platforms and there are clear distinctions between the PC and console versions because the hardware in consoles is not capable of performing at-par with the PC. There is no "optimization" for consoles friend.
The obvious differences are the PC version has much better graphics and a smoother frame rate. The more subtle differences are the gameplay elements that were stripped from the consoles due to FPS problems. Consoles cannot render a large amount of enemies and so the battles are frequently different.
Additionally the PC version includes a "tactical" or isometric camera that was allegedly cut from consoles due to performance issues.
Therefore the game is "optimized" for the PC, not the other way around Timmy. You really should read threads before you stroll in like John Wayne.

[mastorofpuppetz]

Hawkeye111 wrote...

GravityParade wrote...
Also, if you're going to include the price of a monitor and speakers in the conditions for a PC, then please include your TV and speakers when comparing it to the cost of a console.

I will not include them. More people have TVs and speakers than computers. Its a simple an obvious fact. I'm not going to debate that one. Its not worth the time.

This game can be maxed out on an 8800GT at 1080p on a dual core AMD or Intel. The idea that you need a high end PC to play a game that's optimized for a playstation or failbox is laughable.

The idea that Dragon Age is "optimized for a playstation or failbox" is laughable. You clearly have no idea of the differences between the PC and console versions and that is what this entire thread has discussed. Either you didn't read any other posts in this thread or your short-term memory is abysmal. Please start from page 1 of the thread and read all the way through.
I suspect you are too lazy so I will give you the Cliffs-notes summary of the differences. The game was designed for multilpe platforms and there are clear distinctions between the PC and console versions because the hardware in consoles is not capable of performing at-par with the PC. There is no "optimization" for consoles friend.
The obvious differences are the PC version has much better graphics and a smoother frame rate. The more subtle differences are the gameplay elements that were stripped from the consoles due to FPS problems. Consoles cannot render a large amount of enemies and so the battles are frequently different.
Additionally the PC version includes a "tactical" or isometric camera that was allegedly cut from consoles due to performance issues.
Therefore the game is "optimized" for the PC, not the other way around Timmy. You really should read threads before you stroll in like John Wayne.

The vast majority of homes have PC's and internet stats show this, and more people go online then watch TV now, FACTS.  Also, you need a HDTV to get even decent graphics on a console, how much to those go for? A lot of people do not have HDTV's. Attachment rates are still low overall.  Also, name a console that can do alla  PC does? You get what yuo pay for.

The PS3 version is optimized for PS3, the Pc version is optimized for PC, you're an idiot, the fact they changed the game on console for PERFORMANCE reasons shows they optimized it on each platform, thus the big difference in te Pc version being much better, and not a gay bad port.

Modifié par mastorofpuppetz, 19 novembre 2009 - 07:23 .