255 réponses à ce sujet

[Lumikki]

Lets go back to topic, there is still bigger enough market in both, so no point to argue.

[Skilled Seeker]

I didn't say PC is more profitable so don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is it certainly has a big impact on the gaming industry and it would be foolish to neglect the PC market.

[Droma]

but it's the topic, all i'm saying is, it's a effort vs worth thing here. all these changes which are demanded in this thread, sure would be great and i would have no problem if pc gamers would have a better experience in da2, even if i don't owe it on pc. but the point is bioware has to make enough money. people sometimes seem to think bioware/ea do all these things just to ****** people off, but the point is they want to make money. yes they did seomthing wrong (e.g. rushing the game) but you can't allways argue with "they could have done this and that better". you can allways do that, but the question is, how long does it take (= how much money does it cost) and how much more money will the result assure you.

[Dormiglione]

BrunoB1971 wrote...

the main contention issue is that the bioware team decided to make the game cross platform and that everyone payed for it. the game should have had a seperate team to make sure that the game uses the strenghts of all systems...

I understand why you are asking for different versions that are made for the individual plattforms (pc, ps3, xbox360) and use 100% of the ressources of the different plattforms.

Let me say this straight. To fulfill what you wish, they had to programm different unique code versions of the same content for each of the plattforms (pc, ps3, xbox360). Financial overkill.

Yes, there engines for different plattforms, yes, there are libraries for different plattforms. But each library has an interface, each interface consumes ressources, different systems have different implications and so on. So they have to use the formula "one fits most" and this way every plattform will be used to certain extent but not in a 100% optimized form.

Modifié par Dormiglione, 04 juin 2011 - 10:10 .

[Dragoonlordz]

The reason why some companies favor consoles is because console players on the whole are an easier target they lap up most things dropped on them because there is no where near the same level of choice as on PC. More games get released on PC than consoles and most including all your VGC charts do not include digital sales which make up the majority of all PC game sales. Even NPD does not include digital sales. So they gap is far less than the references you quote reports it to be.

[Dragoonlordz]

Droma wrote...

but it's the topic, all i'm saying is, it's a effort vs worth thing here. all these changes which are demanded in this thread, sure would be great and i would have no problem if pc gamers would have a better experience in da2, even if i don't owe it on pc. but the point is bioware has to make enough money. people sometimes seem to think bioware/ea do all these things just to ****** people off, but the point is they want to make money. yes they did seomthing wrong (e.g. rushing the game) but you can't allways argue with "they could have done this and that better". you can allways do that, but the question is, how long does it take (= how much money does it cost) and how much more money will the result assure you.

One thing I will agree with is there is certainly a lack of effort from some companies. They are too lazy to cater to the higher graphics and options within the PC enviroment. Making a game that is far superior quality wise then dropping that quality to work on consoles takes time so instead some just stick to consoles because it is quicker way to market for quick buck. Unfortuantly it's not that gaming is being dumbed down in general for players it's developers dumbing down for quick sales imho and the knock on affect is on the players. After DA2 can't help but feel Bioware did some of that too, the Hi Res pack is one example.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 juin 2011 - 10:13 .

[Droma]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

I didn't say PC is more profitable so don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is it certainly has a big impact on the gaming industry and it would be foolish to neglect the PC market.

ok i can agree with that, but you still have to ask yourself if some things get you more money (even in longterm if you think about making people happy to buy da3) if you make this and that. and no one here really does know that much about game programming so that we can argue "it's just a simple/short thing to do". in my opinion, if it would be easy and wouldn't take much time, bioware would have done it. that's what i meant when i said that people sometimes seem to think that bioware just want to ****** of their costumers. i really can't understand that point of view. it just makes no sense. we are the ones paying them, so why would they try to ****** us of? of cause they do it sometimes with things they factored in wrong (e.g. acceptance of recycled maps) but i really doubt it was made to ****** us off.

[Dragoonlordz]

Droma wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...

I didn't say PC is more profitable so don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is it certainly has a big impact on the gaming industry and it would be foolish to neglect the PC market.

ok i can agree with that, but you still have to ask yourself if some things get you more money (even in longterm if you think about making people happy to buy da3) if you make this and that. and no one here really does know that much about game programming so that we can argue "it's just a simple/short thing to do". in my opinion, if it would be easy and wouldn't take much time, bioware would have done it. that's what i meant when i said that people sometimes seem to think that bioware just want to ****** of their costumers. i really can't understand that point of view. it just makes no sense. we are the ones paying them, so why would they try to ****** us of? of cause they do it sometimes with things they factored in wrong (e.g. acceptance of recycled maps) but i really doubt it was made to ****** us off.

They gamble with what they can get away with DA2 proves this above all else. They have to keep their overlords happy hence the quick release and the massive amount of issues people have with the game. I get the impression Bioware are juggling quality with time/financial return (all developers do this which is fair enough) however unlike Blizzard which can afford to take as much time as needed and only release something of suffuciant quality they are happy with regardless of time, Bioware are going the other way and are fast falling on to the money side not the quality side these days.


The most comforting quote from any developer in recent years has been from Blizzard which stated they will release 'it' when it's ready and up to quality they are more than happy with. As opposed to Bioware which felt like EA gave them x amount of time, deadline came up and they threw it out at us regardless of quality hoping to fix later any damage control or fallout..

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 juin 2011 - 10:21 .

[Realmzmaster]

The game is cross platform because it contains cost. If you are going to contain cost it is easier to program for the lowest common denominator or you take it in to consideration when programming a PC first version that is going to be ported.

For all of it saying PC first even CDProjeckt considered the porting when they created Witcher 2. I have played both Witchers and know the differences. Witcher 1 could be fully controlled with the mouse or you could use the keyboard/mouse combo. That was removed in Witcher 2, you can only use the keyboard/mouse which matches nicely to a gamepad. No it was not in there because PC gamers used gamepads. Mapping to the gamepad was not included in the PC release which was one of the complaints and they had to patch it in. There were other changes made to accommodate a potential port in Witcher 2

Nothing wrong with that. Also Witcher 2 did not worry about DX11. Everything uses DX9 to good effect. But it also makes it easier to port.

These are design decisions that are made. The console market is huge and unless you plan on remaining a small PC only game company you cannot ignore it.

[Skilled Seeker]

Droma wrote...

but it's the topic, all i'm saying is, it's a effort vs worth thing here. all these changes which are demanded in this thread, sure would be great and i would have no problem if pc gamers would have a better experience in da2, even if i don't owe it on pc. but the point is bioware has to make enough money. people sometimes seem to think bioware/ea do all these things just to ****** people off, but the point is they want to make money. yes they did seomthing wrong (e.g. rushing the game) but you can't allways argue with "they could have done this and that better". you can allways do that, but the question is, how long does it take (= how much money does it cost) and how much more money will the result assure you.

If Bioware put the proper effort into the PC version, they would make more money as more people would buy the product thanks to positive word of mouth. Look at DAO and DA2 sales. That proves my point. Now Bioware may have made more profit out of DA2 due to lower development costs, but the huge blow to their rep means future sales will certainly be lower and so they have made less money in the long term, which is more important than the short term as Bioware is invested in gaming as a long term venture.

Modifié par Skilled Seeker, 04 juin 2011 - 10:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Realmzmaster wrote...

The game is cross platform because it contains cost. If you are going to contain cost it is easier to program for the lowest common denominator or you take it in to consideration when programming a PC first version that is going to be ported.

For all of it saying PC first even CDProjeckt considered the porting when they created Witcher 2. I have played both Witchers and know the differences. Witcher 1 could be fully controlled with the mouse or you could use the keyboard/mouse combo. That was removed in Witcher 2, you can only use the keyboard/mouse which matches nicely to a gamepad. No it was not in there because PC gamers used gamepads. Mapping to the gamepad was not included in the PC release which was one of the complaints and they had to patch it in. There were other changes made to accommodate a potential port in Witcher 2

Nothing wrong with that. Also Witcher 2 did not worry about DX11. Everything uses DX9 to good effect. But it also makes it easier to port.

These are design decisions that are made. The console market is huge and unless you plan on remaining a small PC only game company you cannot ignore it.

The DX11 issue is because a lot of people still use XP and VIsta which does not support DX11 yet I believe, well I know XP doesn't as I still use that. However the actual engine they use is designed for both PC and console versions from the offset which makes sense why limit yourself from the start when can use an engine that can at any stage fufill all formats.

On a side note people have to remember the reason why most companies favor console is because they can charge you double what costs on the PC for each title. A PC game is on average at retail half the price as the console version and the PC version is also higher quality with the ability to change, edit and mod. But the fact a company can sell the same title PC and say 360 and the 360 version charge people double price of PC (yet people suck it up for ease of use) no wonder they do it and get away with it if people keep supporting that massive price difference on the console.

P.s. I am a PC gamer first console gamer second I will admit.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 juin 2011 - 10:28 .

[Chromie]

DAO sold more on PC I believe.

[Realmzmaster]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

The game is cross platform because it contains cost. If you are going to contain cost it is easier to program for the lowest common denominator or you take it in to consideration when programming a PC first version that is going to be ported.

For all of it saying PC first even CDProjeckt considered the porting when they created Witcher 2. I have played both Witchers and know the differences. Witcher 1 could be fully controlled with the mouse or you could use the keyboard/mouse combo. That was removed in Witcher 2, you can only use the keyboard/mouse which matches nicely to a gamepad. No it was not in there because PC gamers used gamepads. Mapping to the gamepad was not included in the PC release which was one of the complaints and they had to patch it in. There were other changes made to accommodate a potential port in Witcher 2

Nothing wrong with that. Also Witcher 2 did not worry about DX11. Everything uses DX9 to good effect. But it also makes it easier to port.

These are design decisions that are made. The console market is huge and unless you plan on remaining a small PC only game company you cannot ignore it.

The DX11 issue is because a lot of people still use XP and VIsta which does not support DX11 yet I believe, well I know XP doesn't as I still use that. However the actual engine they use is designed for both PC and console versions from the offset which makes sense why limit yourself from the start when can use an engine that can at any stage fufill all formats.

You are correct. Witcher 2 changed not only the controls but the UI to make it an easier port to the console. Nothing wrong with that decision. But by doing that CDProjeckt does not take full advantage of everything the PC has to offer in Witcher 2. That is a design and cost decision. The harder it is to port the game to console the more money the company making the port is going to ask for.

The console in some regard becomes the baseline and not the PC.

[Dragoonlordz]

Thats not exactly true in the sense the engine was picked and designed for best results on the pc with as little sacrifice needed for the console version. It was still PC first console second. Other than the controls which has been rectified, the UI was designed more for ease of use rather than specifically console version in mind in general I think but thats a guess I will admit.

PC gaming will always be superior quality wise, graphics, sound, multiplayer and additional content whether thats released by the developer or created by the modders. A PC gamer can use a joypad just like a console gamer only it can do it at higher resolutions and overall better experience but unfortuantly comes at price of cost of the system. It's not that people have to upgrade to play exact same quality as console titles its that the PC gamer wants more than what is offered by the console versions, in most aspects so they spend more on better rigs than is needed.

The console version of TW2 will be around low to low/medium settings graphics wise as the PC version, but an older PC rig could play it at those settings without upgrading however they do upgrade because they have the ability if do so to play on uber settings unlike consoles. This brings me back to the point developers are taking the easier and more profitable route of consoles gamers because they can charge you more for less effort and time.

Imho this to me makes all the developers who take that route lazy and lacking the willpower to design on a higher platform instead happy to trod along with a set specification (lower one than PC high end specs) and sell it for double the price for that lack of effort. To me the development studios are in decline quality wise not just the games.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 juin 2011 - 10:45 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

The game is cross platform because it contains cost. If you are going to contain cost it is easier to program for the lowest common denominator or you take it in to consideration when programming a PC first version that is going to be ported.

For all of it saying PC first even CDProjeckt considered the porting when they created Witcher 2. I have played both Witchers and know the differences. Witcher 1 could be fully controlled with the mouse or you could use the keyboard/mouse combo. That was removed in Witcher 2, you can only use the keyboard/mouse which matches nicely to a gamepad. No it was not in there because PC gamers used gamepads. Mapping to the gamepad was not included in the PC release which was one of the complaints and they had to patch it in. There were other changes made to accommodate a potential port in Witcher 2

Nothing wrong with that. Also Witcher 2 did not worry about DX11. Everything uses DX9 to good effect. But it also makes it easier to port.

These are design decisions that are made. The console market is huge and unless you plan on remaining a small PC only game company you cannot ignore it.

The DX11 issue is because a lot of people still use XP and VIsta which does not support DX11 yet I believe, well I know XP doesn't as I still use that. However the actual engine they use is designed for both PC and console versions from the offset which makes sense why limit yourself from the start when can use an engine that can at any stage fufill all formats.

You are correct. Witcher 2 changed not only the controls but the UI to make it an easier port to the console. Nothing wrong with that decision. But by doing that CDProjeckt does not take full advantage of everything the PC has to offer in Witcher 2. That is a design and cost decision. The harder it is to port the game to console the more money the company making the port is going to ask for.

The console in some regard becomes the baseline and not the PC.

DragoonLordz is incorrect about two things: First, DX11 runs fine on Vista, and, second, XP is less of an issue, because these days XP is used by a small minority of the gamers. According to the latest Steam hardware/software survey:

Windows 7 64 bit: 38.32%
Windows XP 32 bit: 20.39%
Windows Vista 32 bit: 12.95%
Windows Vista 64 bit: 11.44%
Windows 7: 9.84%
MacOS 10.6.7 64 bit: 4.65%
Windows XP 64 bit: 0.94%
MacOS 10.5.8 64 bit: 0.44%
Windows 2003 64 bit: 0.31%
MacOS 10.6.6 64 bit: 0.29%
MacOS 10.6.3 64 bit: 0.26%
Other: 0.18%

His point still stands, though. The adaption of DX11 and Windows 7 is growing more rapidly than was expected. Still, DX11 is used by a minority of the gamers, because they also need DX11 compatible graphics cards.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 04 juin 2011 - 10:52 .

[Dragoonlordz]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

DragoonLordz is incorrect about two things: First, DX11 runs fine on Vista, and, second, XP is less of an issue, because these days XP is used by a small minority of the gamers. According to the latest Steam hardware/software survey:

Windows 7 64 bit: 38.32%
Windows XP 32 bit: 20.39%
Windows Vista 32 bit: 12.95%
Windows Vista 64 bit: 11.44%
Windows 7: 9.84%
MacOS 10.6.7 64 bit: 4.65%
Windows XP 64 bit: 0.94%
MacOS 10.5.8 64 bit: 0.44%
Windows 2003 64 bit: 0.31%
MacOS 10.6.6 64 bit: 0.29%
MacOS 10.6.3 64 bit: 0.26%
Other: 0.18%

His point still stands, though. The adaption of DX11 and Windows 7 is growing more rapidly than was expected. Still, DX11 is used by a minority of the gamers, because they also need DX11 compatible graphics cards.

I don't like you anymore, no cookies for you...

Windows XP 32 bit: 20.39% I'm in that group. I do have Vista on my of my other machines though, I have 4 systems not including consoles, Win XP gaming PC (new one), a Vista spare PC, a XP work machine and a Mac work machine. Might switch one of them to Win7 64bit some point but not yet probably the new system plus I like XP! <3

[Ariella]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Ariella wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Correct Neppa. Porting down is far easier than porting up. Makes a hell of a lot more sense as well.

DA2 isn't a port, it was developed for all three platforms similtaniously, not exactly the definition of a port.

@OP Deal with it. As someone who's played both DAO and DA2 on PC and Xbox, the UI improvements on DA2 are wonderful and more informative than DAO's Xbox version, and gives a very goiod standardized performance on both of those systems. Be offended, fine, but deal with it, as it's not going to change.

Your post lost all relevance when you stated DA2's UI was somehow an improvement, unless you're just stating so for the 360. On the PC it most certainly was not.

DA2 UI was a vast improvement for the Xbox. I could actually tell how much XP I needed to level rather than some bubbling meter with no numerical value. Targeting is actually better on the Xbox when using skills, but that's the game pad. I hate the target curser used in both versions (DAO & DA2) for the PC. It's annoying.

[MonkeyLungs]

Subjective Ariella. I vastly prefer almost everything about DA:O to DA2 (Xbox 360). About the only things I like better from DA2: Friend/Rival System, Companion Quests, Armor graphics. Everything else, UI, controls, camera, world design/graphics, animations, combat, the list goes on. DA:O is superior in almost every way. The new Inventory, for example, SUCKS.

[Ariella]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Some of the things that I find disgusting: vomit, seafood, and long-winded posts about people's "disgust" over dev comments. If you have a serious issue with some aspect of the game, maybe you should stick to elaborating on that instead of writing about how offended you are by what dev <x> said as if the dev was somehow being insulting, etc. The UI was clean and serviceable - if you want something more elaborate for the PC, well, try to make an actual case for it then.

Thank you.

[BrunoB1971]

this has again devolved into a my stick is bigger than yours thread...or sales thread, the intent of the thread was about design choice for the game on pc and on consoles...beating the pc is dead and console topic is old and i am tired of it...

the whole point of my thread was to say that pc quality was sacrificed for the sake of making the game faster and easier to code across the board...not about how many copies COD sold...please get back on topic because it is gonna be locked because it will be worthless...if not already...

Modifié par BrunoB1971, 04 juin 2011 - 11:14 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

I am sorry about that, DragoonLordz. In the business world and in homes of non-gamers XP is probably very popular. Maybe that will put a smile back on your face.

[Skilled Seeker]

BrunoB1971 wrote...

this has again devolved into a my stick is bigger than yours thread...or sales thread, the intent of the thread was about design choice for the game on pc and on consoles...beating the pc is dead and console topic is old and i am tired of it...

the whole point of my thread was to say that pc quality was sacrificed for the sake of making the game faster and easier to code across the board...not about how many copies COD sold...please get back on topic because it is gonna be locked because it will be worthless...if not already...

I have always stuck to the topic and defended your case. All my posts lead back to the OP in some way.

[Ariella]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Subjective Ariella. I vastly prefer almost everything about DA:O to DA2 (Xbox 360). About the only things I like better from DA2: Friend/Rival System, Companion Quests, Armor graphics. Everything else, UI, controls, camera, world design/graphics, animations, combat, the list goes on. DA:O is superior in almost every way. The new Inventory, for example, SUCKS.

The UI from DAO PC to DAO Xbox was so different it could be a different game, paet of which comes from the fact that DAO was ported by a different company that Bioware.

There's more uniformity in the DA2 UI, with the exception, of course, of the hotbars vs skill mapping and the ME like menu for Xbox. Other than that accessablility, look, etc let you know you were playing the same game.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ariella wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Some of the things that I find disgusting: vomit, seafood, and long-winded posts about people's "disgust" over dev comments. If you have a serious issue with some aspect of the game, maybe you should stick to elaborating on that instead of writing about how offended you are by what dev <x> said as if the dev was somehow being insulting, etc. The UI was clean and serviceable - if you want something more elaborate for the PC, well, try to make an actual case for it then.

Thank you.

Don't worry. I am just as disgusted about the behavior of the BW defenders which are clearly indended to fuel flame wars and prevent improvements to future games by denying that the obvious flaws exist. I have no intention of being respectful to that group.