255 réponses à ce sujet

[gecos]

Tommy6860 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Well wrote...

With few exceptions I don't believe there is anyone going overboard.Yes some will push their point.Still it just seems mild to me.To be honest I think it would be tougher working at Mc Donalds having someone in your face grumbling about you shorting them a few fries.

At the risk of dragging this off-topic - I worked retail for four years. It can be very unpleasant, and folks can be tremendous jerks. However, the internet offers something that seems to enable some even worse antisocial behaviour in people - the veil of anonymity.

And once again, everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're also entitled to share it as they see fit - however, if you're telling someone they're a failure at their job and deserve to be fired, don't be surprised when your other opinions are coloured by your behaviour. We've got thick skins and it (personally) takes quite a lot to faze me, but that doesn't mean we aren't people who will occasionally see things through the lens of emotion. 

I'm certainly not suggesting that people shouldn't share their opinions if they're negative, as I believe these forums should be about discussion regardless of what side of the fence you fall on, but I am saying that there needs to be an increase in the level of civility while sharing that opinion. If I see people rationally and politely discussing what they believe about a particular feature or aspect of the game, I'm far more likely to pay close attention than if I see people ganging up on each other for having differing opnions.

This^ to be honest, I try to void threads with even a hint of a discussion branching off into factional sniping. I just read the thread title and thought, "meh, this again". Though there are times when I see a well though otu reply that catches my eye, I will respond. I know I can sometimes be a bit opinionated, but I really try to step in the shoes of the other person as well. Yes, there are those who grate me, but I won't say it publicly here and I still try to discuss it with as much civility as possible; once a personal attack happens, I walk away.

That's why your classy and why I like you so much.

I am opinionated too, and I try to do what you do too. And I try for snark, which get's taken seriously sometimes when I don't mean for it to be taken as anything but funny *sigh* (humor failure, must work on it).

No, it's because you're a classy girl :wub:.

Most of my personality is a result of my mother and many of my female friends :-). As a result, I don't fit in with the macho crowd too well, which is fine by me..

You 2, by the amount of  flying around should already plan for a date or somethin'.

Back on topic, I cannot but agree as a PC user that making a game for PC and then scaling down for consoles is the way to go to ensure the best experience for everyone. It may work the other way around too (AC series) but don't forget the restrictions as to graphics/resolution etc. . I guess what I'm going for is an as good experience as possible for everyone. The problem as I see it is that consoles make more of a bang for the buck as games for them require less due to different reasons and therefore PC gamers are expected to suck it up or be gone. And we are considered to be less in numbers too than our console counterparts. This may come back later to bite the developers but so far it hasn't so the trend goes on.

On a sidenote, kudos to Luke for telling the truth. Truth and bluntness should be encouraged. We are already living in a world full of political correctness bull****, we need more of what's actually true not diplomatic babble. So please think first about it and don't be insulted by this. It's the business and the people running the show not the ones working in it that are to blame for this "PC gamers last" policy.

Modifié par gecos, 05 juin 2011 - 07:57 .

[Tommy6860]

Ulous wrote...

Question?

Why should Bioware and/or any other developer be held responsible for someone forking out extra cash to build/own a gaming PC?

They shouldn't. Ultimately, it is up to the end user to buy the game or not. If they are unhappy, how they *then* hold the developer to their standards, would make it contingent upon them whether future games are pruchased or not.

If people are not satisfied with the games being released for their faveourite platform then you should be taking it up with whoever provides your hardware surely?

Is this a question, or a statement?

In any case, I don't think that is the issue here as PC gaming hardware isn't made towards any certain one game, but for gaming. Developers are somewhat responsible for at least making sure that a game for a PC can run on various hardware set-ups. Having said that, the main issue raised by the OP, is why this game is ported to the PC platform from console. I personally don't have an issue with it since I still can play it with better graphics and controls than a console player can. Some people do though.

[Droma]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Ulous wrote...

Question?

Why should Bioware and/or any other developer be held responsible for someone forking out extra cash to build/own a gaming PC?

If people are not satisfied with the games being released for their faveourite platform then you should be taking it up with whoever provides your hardware surely?

they shouldnt... the marketing just won't support a pure PC only game with a big budget.  I agree that consoles in some sense hold the PC market back but in reality the next push for greater graphics just won't come with the current generation of consoles. 

As to people ever being safisfied?  I really shouldn't have to answer that. 

that is true, the problem many pc gamers have is that we are in a time now were the hardware difference between pc and consoles is huge (and therefor the capabilities of these plattforms). and this won't change until ~2014 (prediction here!) when the next generation of consoles will be released. allthough let's wait till tuesday for "project cafe" and its hardware specs. but nevertheless its true that consoles in someway slow down the pc games as well, but on the other hand they also finance them in a way. as said before, you can't make a 50million $ game nowadays and just release it for pc.

@gecos: i agree that it would be best to optimize your games on pc first and then dumb it down for consoles, but the problem is, it costs money, a lot of money depanding on how much you will dumb down your game. TW2 is a great example as you people now can see how long it will take to bring this game to consoles. it isn't as easy as people sometimes seem to think of it, because it sounds easy. in fact you have to test your whole game on both consoles to assure it doesn't crash/slows down too much. and reoptimizing textures and other stuff also takes time. every month you work on this you devs need to be paid.

it's also a huge problem to release a game 2 times (like TW2 now does) because you have to market the game twice (and marketing costs a lot of money).

Modifié par Droma, 05 juin 2011 - 08:04 .

[gecos]

Droma wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

Ulous wrote...

Question?

Why should Bioware and/or any other developer be held responsible for someone forking out extra cash to build/own a gaming PC?

If people are not satisfied with the games being released for their faveourite platform then you should be taking it up with whoever provides your hardware surely?

they shouldnt... the marketing just won't support a pure PC only game with a big budget.  I agree that consoles in some sense hold the PC market back but in reality the next push for greater graphics just won't come with the current generation of consoles. 

As to people ever being safisfied?  I really shouldn't have to answer that. 

that is true, the problem many pc gamers have is that we are in a time now were the hardware difference between pc and consoles is huge (and therefor the capabilities of these plattforms). and this won't change until ~2014 (prediction here!) when the next generation of consoles will be released. allthough let's wait till tuesday for "project cafe" and its hardware specs. but nevertheless its true that consoles in someway slow down the pc games as well, but on the other hand they also finance them in a way. as said before, you can't make a 50million $ game nowadays and just release it for pc.

@gecos: i agree that it would be best to optimize your games on pc first and then dumb it down for consoles, but the problem is, it costs money, a lot of money depanding on how much you will dumb down your game. TW2 is a great example as you people now can see how long it will take to bring this game to consoles.

The gap may be even greater by then (prediction by someone who's working in the IT industry).

[HTTP 404]

gecos wrote...

The gap may be even greater by then (prediction by someone who's working in the IT industry).

the gap is always predicted to be greater but when the next generation of consoles emerge it wont really be the case AGAIN.  computers may be ahead in tech (some times further ahead at times) but never really in cost effectiveness.  That cost effectiveness will make console gaming always a viable market.  btw Im not choosing sides in console vs pc....

[Dormiglione]

HTTP 404 wrote...

gecos wrote...

The gap may be even greater by then (prediction by someone who's working in the IT industry).

the gap is always predicted to be greater but when the next generation of consoles emerge it wont really be the case AGAIN.  computers may be ahead in tech (some times further ahead at times) but never really in cost effectiveness.  That cost effectiveness will make console gaming always a viable market.  btw Im not choosing sides in console vs pc....

Exactly, thats one of the main reason why a game often is designed for a console and then ported to pc. The console has world wide the same hardware specs. Its easier and faster to write a game for the console.

PC are always ahead in hardware specs. Sometimes two Hardware generations ahead. And that makes it really difficult to write software that uses the max out of the pc hardware.

[bEVEsthda]

I'm astounded by the amount of posts this thread has generated. And curious. So I glossed over it all, all pages. And while the content of the thread kinda makes it obvious that most gamers don't care or even are aware of certain things, I still feel like making a few points:
Its NOT easier, to first develop for the PC and then to port down to the console. That notion would ONLY be true about 3D models and textures, IF you want superior graphics on the PC.
Porting up, OTOH, is dead easy. Using certain dev tools it's almost only a matter of flicking a switch. (“Games for Window” -Yeay!  ).
 The part everyone seem to miss is that the gameplay has to run on the console, WITH a graphics engine AND a gui. And the game-state has to be feasible to 'save' on a console. For that reason a cross-platform game has to be planned for the consoles from the outset. And they ARE. These days. That in turn limits what kind of gameplay we get to see these days. Except for a few odd PC-only games.
 No one here wondered why the only kind of shooters we see these days are the run-down-a-corridor-of-shooting-galleys kind? Why did the gameplay of, say, the 'Stalker' series, or the original 'Far Cry' PC-game disappear? No one wonders? - Consoles!
 And that is really what gnaws me the most.  All games gameplay converge towards Donkey Kong 3D with fancy graphics, regardless of formal genre-belongings. Because of consoles.
It seems everyone, even PC gamers, only care about graphics? Well then, in that case all you will get from next generation of consoles is better graphics. Gameplay stays with script-driven corridors. (...And this new-fangled stuff of jumping up and down  in front of the TV. )

[efrgfhnm_]

I am a console player myself, but I do agree with what has been said. It seems like a fairly lazy excuse when there are many much better looking games which are more crowded then this. I mean i would say Oblivion was better looking then this, had a world filled to the brim with NPCs and that was released years ago now..

[Skilled Seeker]

Has anyone read my posts in this thread? So much ignorance. I never said the PC version should be released earlier, I never said it's easier to start on PC then port to consoles. I said it's better and gains more profit and respect in the long run.

[neppakyo]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Has anyone read my posts in this thread? So much ignorance. I never said the PC version should be released earlier, I never said it's easier to start on PC then port to consoles. I said it's better and gains more profit and respect in the long run.

Most people just skip ahead because its too hard to read.

I know ya said that, and myself I said the same thing here quite a few times. You'd get a better game for everyone if its designed for PC, then adapted for consoles.

The main theme of the thread I'm guesing is.

"PC Users tired of craptastic console ports that look like sh*t"

Modifié par neppakyo, 05 juin 2011 - 12:11 .

[Ulous]

neppakyo wrote...


"PC Users tired of craptastic console ports that look like sh*t"

Regardless of what platform you game on very few if any games could be described as "looking crap", I believe this is one of the reasons this generation of consoles has been around so long, simply because graphically games are of such a high standard when compared to previous generations.

Good graphics are standard these days which causes more of a focus on gameplay, with that in mind gamers in general have never had it so good, this year alone is looking to be one of the best years in gaming so far.

Let's all agree that we are all gamers and none of us are better than anyone else and developers in general are making gaming accesible to as many people as possible, if as an individual you feel let down by this then maybe it's time for a new hobby?

((Not aimed at you directly by the way neppakyo, just using your quote as an example))

Modifié par Ulous, 05 juin 2011 - 01:16 .

[Skilled Seeker]

Hell no it's the other way around. Because this generation of console is hanging around for so long, games are looking crap compared to what they could look with today's tech. Have you seen the Unreal engine demo Epic released this year? That's what games would look like now if it wasn't for consoles, that demo runs on the latest PC hardware.

We have every right to be royally pissed off when games are not making use of the advances in graphics and physics that modern hardware, which we shell out for in order to support the development of gaming, allows.

Modifié par Skilled Seeker, 05 juin 2011 - 01:18 .

[Droma]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Has anyone read my posts in this thread? So much ignorance. I never said the PC version should be released earlier, I never said it's easier to start on PC then port to consoles. I said it's better and gains more profit and respect in the long run.

yes it is better and gets more profit because of what? you say so? it's your opinion but it's in no way the truth. fact is console sales are higher then pc sales, so why are you allways asuming it would be better to focus on pc? aah let me guess, because you are a pc gamer! let me rephrase your own quote:

Skilled Seeker Droma edition wrote...
I said it's better for me and gains more profit and respect from me in the
long run.

and again, arguments like "but game x made this and that, why can't bioware make that" are totally irrelevant. too many factors here. as said in a other thread, with that argumentation, why does da2 doesn't have the facial expressions of la noire or the stunning console grafics of ff13?

Modifié par Droma, 05 juin 2011 - 01:23 .

[Skilled Seeker]

We've already gone over the sales crap. Most PC sales are digital. These numbers are not recorded. The PC market is far larger than the console one. Enough of this bull.

[Ulous]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

Hell no it's the other way around. Because this generation of console is hanging around for so long, games are looking crap compared to what they could look with today's tech. Have you seen the Unreal engine demo Epic released this year? That's what games would look like now if it wasn't for consoles, that demo runs on the latest PC hardware.

True but that is just a case of "coulds" and "shoulds", i'm not a fan of the Wii or DS myself but compared to it's rivals the graphics are quite...... well... poo, it doesn't however stop them stamping all over the others when it comes to sales.


With that said we are still seeing new things being achieved graphically even at the end of the current gens lives, XBOX360 and PS3 new releases are still going above and beyond what was thought possible with them graphically, as it was when the best games come out on PS2 towards the end of it's life (and still went on for some time into this generation).

Does all this hold the PC gaming industry back? Yes maybe it does, but taking it out on the developers is madness as far as i'm concerned.

Modifié par Ulous, 05 juin 2011 - 01:26 .

[MDT1]

Droma wrote...

 you can't make a 50million $ game nowadays and just release it for pc.

SC2, anyone?
Blizzard still perfectly understands that you can make lots of money with PC gaming when you deliver a certain quality.
But Blizzard also understands, that the most important IP they posses is the name Blizzard itself.

The problem with PC gaming is that console customers just seem to be more popular for some developers/publishers.
And this has nothing to do with piracy.

[Droma]

@skilled seeker: and also this is so because you say so? great =D

yes sc2 is one of the few last pc only games. as said earlier in this thread, for pc there is allways a market in strategy games and mmos (and facebook games and stuff). and this is also a quite large market, but i was refering here to the other games (mainly AAA games by big devs)

Modifié par Droma, 05 juin 2011 - 01:32 .

[MDT1]

Droma wrote...

yes sc2 is one of the few last pc only games. as said earlier in this thread, for pc there is allways a market in strategy games and mmos (and facebook games and stuff). and this is also a quite large market, but i was refering here to the other games (mainly AAA games by big devs)

And here I disagree, there is a huge demand, there's more a lack supply, because the easier money can definitly be made with something like DA2.

Also Diablo3 is neither strategy nor mmo.

Its just Blizzard still aims for a qulity no other developer dares or can.

[Droma]

diablo 3 will be released for consoles as well. or let's rephrase it so that it actually is the truth: blizzard "seriously considered" diablo 3 for consoles (and searched for console developers)

http://www.g4tv.com/...o-3-on-console/

so i wouldn't count diablo 3 in the "pc only" category just yet =D


but i agree that there is a lot of potential in the pc market and devs make it easier for themself with consoles games, but can you really blame them for that? making easy money without huge risks or high risks is a huge difference.

Modifié par Droma, 05 juin 2011 - 01:51 .

[Skilled Seeker]

No it's not because I say so. Sources have already been provided earlier in this thread and google is your friend. I will not repeat myself again. I get it, you can't afford a good PC, no need to try and bring us down to your level.

[Droma]

ah now we go the insult road, wow that makes you even more respectable. all you have shown are sources about gaming market in general (which includes mmos, and facebook games), but they don't matter for bioware (or at least not that much i know da legends exist!). the good thing is, i don't need to effort a good pc because you agree with me, there are way to few games out there which really support what a high end pc can offer xP so this would be a waste of money on my part.

[Skilled Seeker]

That's why we're pissed off. And that's why the hardware industry will suffer if the gaming industry doesn't get it's act together and start releasing actual modern games and not 2005 stuff.

[MDT1]

Droma wrote...

diablo 3 will be released for consoles as well. or let's rephrase it so that it actually is the truth: blizzard "seriously considered" diablo 3 for consoles (and searched for console developers)

http://www.g4tv.com/...o-3-on-console/

so i wouldn't count diablo 3 in the "pc only" category just yet =D


but i agree that there is a lot of potential in the pc market and devs make it easier for themself with consoles games, but can you really blame them for that? making easy money without huge risks or high risks is a huge difference.

Ok perhaps you are right here, I just don't expect to D3 to be the same game on consoles, if they releas a version, but I could be wrong of course.
And on the otherhand releasing a crappy console version of D3 would be worse for Blizzard then releasing no console version at all.

Modifié par MDT1, 05 juin 2011 - 02:28 .

[Droma]

@skilled seeker: sure, but it's quite risky and especially in the last years there were many devs who needed to be shut down (the gaming market also was highly influenced by the crysis of 2008). i can understand you and see that it's sad but it would be even worse if bioware puts in all of their recources and make TEH PC GAME and finally doesn't sell enough to make profit. making games for a wider audience is often the easier way. you could argue that they didn't achieve this with da2 but that doesn't actually make the case "if bioware would have focused da2 for pc everything would be better" true. it could also have been much worse.

Modifié par Droma, 05 juin 2011 - 02:31 .

[Skilled Seeker]

We don't want Bioware to focus soley on PC. We want Bioware to make full use of what each system offers and that means starting with the strongest system then working your way down and removing features so it can run and be played on the weaker systems. Everyone is happy this way. Right now Bioware isn't focusing on each platform equally, the 360 is getting the most focus as it's the weakest platform, followed by the PS3 then the PC. This isn't fair on those of us who don't buy it for 360.

Yes the PC version would be better than the 360 version this way, that's the whole point. The PC version should be better because it is running on much more capable hardware and is the most flexible platform when it comes to controls or modding or graphics, sound, physics and stereoscopic 3D etc. We need to pay more to get a gaming PC so why should we get a worst product than the cheap 360?

To use an example that you gave, it would be like the 360 getting games of DS quality graphics, controls and complexity. Would you be happy about this?

Modifié par Skilled Seeker, 05 juin 2011 - 02:53 .