239 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Red Dead Redemption wants a word with you.

Another game that needed a PC port.

Why can't you buy a console?

[AresKeith]

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Red Dead Redemption wants a word with you.

Another game that needed a PC port.

Why can't you buy a console?

Because they don't want to?

[Plaintiff]

AresKeith wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Red Dead Redemption wants a word with you.

Another game that needed a PC port.

Why can't you buy a console?

Because they don't want to?

How does that lead to the conclusion that any game "needs" a PC port?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

Why can't you buy a console?

Because I strongly object to the closed nature of consoles.  Because I hate the way console games are badly compromised to accommodate the limited number of buttons on controllers.  Because I hate their lack of customisability.

[Enigmatick]

Plaintiff wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Red Dead Redemption wants a word with you.

Another game that needed a PC port.

Why can't you buy a console?

Because they don't want to?

How does that lead to the conclusion that any game "needs" a PC port?

Because there's a large chunk of the audience that's been asking for Red Dead Redemption to be ported to PC, they've done it before with GTAIV there was no real reason for them not to. I can't believe you actually just told someone to spend about 200 dollars to buy a console because Rockstar couldn't be arsed with a port. How anti-consumer and dense can you be?

[Sylvius the Mad]

I actually do own a current generation console. I've owned one console for each of the last three generations (PSX, PS2, 360). But I don't like consoles, so I don't play games on them.

The PSX I bought when I got my first real job, because I'd always wanted a game console. I quickly decided I didn't like it, and I sold it to my roommate.

The PS2 I bought because I wanted a DVD player, and it was the cheapest DVD player available at the time.

The 360 was a gift.

[Plaintiff]

Enigmatick wrote...
Because there's a large chunk of the audience that's been asking for Red Dead Redemption to be ported to PC, they've done it before with GTAIV there was no real reason for them not to. I can't believe you actually just told someone to spend about 200 dollars to buy a console because Rockstar couldn't be arsed with a port. How anti-consumer and dense can you be?

Not nearly as "anti-consumer and dense" as everyone who tells me to spend five times that much on a decent gaming rig, even though PCs require much more space, have a smaller game library than the 3DS, and are a secondary concern for every major developer. All for the dubious benefit of an increased framerate on the few games I'd actually be interested in playing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

PCs have a small game library? What?

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Why can't you buy a console?

Because I strongly object to the closed nature of consoles.  Because I hate the way console games are badly compromised to accommodate the limited number of buttons on controllers.  Because I hate their lack of customisability.

Console games are not "compromised", they are designed with console controls in mind from the word go. Porting it to the PC doesn't improve the control scheme, a console game already has all the buttons it needs.

[Enigmatick]

Plaintiff wrote...

Enigmatick wrote...
Because there's a large chunk of the audience that's been asking for Red Dead Redemption to be ported to PC, they've done it before with GTAIV there was no real reason for them not to. I can't believe you actually just told someone to spend about 200 dollars to buy a console because Rockstar couldn't be arsed with a port. How anti-consumer and dense can you be?

Not nearly as "anti-consumer and dense" as everyone who tells me to spend five times that much on a decent gaming rig, even though PCs require much more space, have a smaller game library than the 3DS, and are a secondary concern for every major developer. All for the dubious benefit of an increased framerate on the few games I'd actually be interested in playing.

What the **** am I even reading? How can one man be this uniformed? Just stop, please.  I don't see how can actually think that releasing GTAIV AND L.A Noire on PC and leaving out RDR was a good idea.

[Enigmatick]

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Why can't you buy a console?

Because I strongly object to the closed nature of consoles.  Because I hate the way console games are badly compromised to accommodate the limited number of buttons on controllers.  Because I hate their lack of customisability.

Console games are not "compromised", they are designed with console controls in mind from the word go. Porting it to the PC doesn't improve the control scheme, a console game already has all the buttons it needs.

Wait you actually think that something like ME3 where you had like 6 actions bound to one button was a good thing? You actually think that consoles limiting your ability to map the controller buttons as you wish and instead force feed you THEIR control scheme is a good thing?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

Console games are not "compromised", they are designed with console controls in mind from the word go.

By bunding together multiple commands on the same button?  That's hardly the optimal design.

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

PCs have a small game library? What?

Yes. I'm speaking purely from anecdotal experience.

While the PC might have more exclusives, its library of (reasonably current) games, if stores in my area are any indication, is smaller than that of any console. Sure, if I wanted to wade through the past three decades of gaming history, I would find that the PC has the largest game library overall, because it never "dies" like console generations do. But why would I do that? I want to play relevant games.

[happy_daiz]

Yeah, so...character creators...

[Sylvius the Mad]

Most PC games are distributed digitally. Yes, in physical retail locations, there are very few PC games.

On the internet, there are thousands upon thousands of them.

[Plaintiff]

Enigmatick wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Enigmatick wrote...
Because there's a large chunk of the audience that's been asking for Red Dead Redemption to be ported to PC, they've done it before with GTAIV there was no real reason for them not to. I can't believe you actually just told someone to spend about 200 dollars to buy a console because Rockstar couldn't be arsed with a port. How anti-consumer and dense can you be?

Not nearly as "anti-consumer and dense" as everyone who tells me to spend five times that much on a decent gaming rig, even though PCs require much more space, have a smaller game library than the 3DS, and are a secondary concern for every major developer. All for the dubious benefit of an increased framerate on the few games I'd actually be interested in playing.

What the **** am I even reading? How can one man be this uniformed? Just stop, please.  I don't see how can actually think that releasing GTAIV AND L.A Noire on PC and leaving out RDR was a good idea.

Yes, what are you reading? I said nothing like that.

[happy_daiz]

Popcorn does sound good, actually. I'll just watch, if you all don't mind.

Oh, and in regard to adventure games, I played a TON of them, a million years ago. The entire Myst series, Syberia, The Longest Journey, etc., etc. I kind of miss them. The funny thing is that at the time, I actually played pretty much exclusively on a Mac, and still had a huge collection.

I didn't have much of a point there.

Modifié par happy_daiz, 02 août 2013 - 06:06 .

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Console games are not "compromised", they are designed with console controls in mind from the word go.

By bunding together multiple commands on the same button?  That's hardly the optimal design.

As opposed to having to memorize what more than fifty different buttons do?

Yes, console games often bind several functions to one button, and the set up works perfectly because the function changes based on context. Any sensibly designed PC game works the same way; for instance you use the movement keys to control your character and also to navigate menus.

It makes far more sense to have a few buttons that perform differently in different situations, than to expect gamers to memorize whole new sets of controls.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Most PC games are distributed digitally. Yes, in physical retail locations, there are very few PC games.

On the internet, there are thousands upon thousands of them.

The same applies to consoles, but as I said, I'm talking about relevant games. Not the vast swathe of self-published indie games that get no recognition from anybody.

[Eternal Phoenix]

In Exile wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Seriously that game has a better story than many linear "story-based" games.

RDR has a very a linear story, like Skyrim. It just happens to also have a persistent world. 

I meant linear games with no open world just focusing on story.

Vapaä wrote...

happy_daiz wrote...

DD is an open-world game, and as such, should imply a little weaker story than a plot-driven game like what BW does, yes?

As an open-world game, DD is pretty bad

Just one city and one town, one mine, a couple of small castles, and the same forest again and again. Also the map doesn't give you much choice since areas are linked only by tiny passages (especially egregious in the sive Quina quest when the only way is guarded by a massive beef gate)

DD has great CC, fantastic combat, and great creatures, but the story is shallow, the open-world aspect is badly excecuted, the narration is plain bad, and the romances were made by a LSD junkie on withdrawal

Well that's not exactly true. The southern forests look different from the northern ones for instance. The northern trees pass Windbluff Tower are giant pine trees (or something of the sort). Then there's the Greatwall swamp but tbh you are right. The world doesn't have much variety but apart from the linear Witchwood area, there are many ways to get to different destinations.

The ruins weren't worth exploring and there were too few caves (again not worth exploring). Exploring the world came a point of hunting for boss creatures rather than for caves and dungeons.

Bitterblack Isle of course has actually improved the exploration element by focusing on a small underground but with secret areas and passages with loot actually worth collecting.

Capcom need to get some good writers and flesh the world out more for the sequel. The story is only kept going because of some good quests and side quests (put the board quests aside and the side quests you get from NPC's can actually be interesting and fun).

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 02 août 2013 - 06:06 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Honestly, I'm trying to think back to the last PC game I bought in a brick & mortar retail store. Everquest 2, maybe?

[Plaintiff]

Enigmatick wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Why can't you buy a console?

Because I strongly object to the closed nature of consoles.  Because I hate the way console games are badly compromised to accommodate the limited number of buttons on controllers.  Because I hate their lack of customisability.

Console games are not "compromised", they are designed with console controls in mind from the word go. Porting it to the PC doesn't improve the control scheme, a console game already has all the buttons it needs.

Wait you actually think that something like ME3 where you had like 6 actions bound to one button was a good thing? You actually think that consoles limiting your ability to map the controller buttons as you wish and instead force feed you THEIR control scheme is a good thing?

Many (if not all) console games allow you to configure commands. And even if they didn't, it's an extremely minor benefit that I wouldn't utilise if I did game game on PC.

Yes, having less buttons, whose function changes based on context, is a very efficient way to do things.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

The same applies to consoles, but as I said, I'm talking about relevant games.

Major publishers sell PC games online.  Steam sells most new games, and while many of them do have physical versions you can buy, those don't move in large enough volumes to warrant shelf space.  You can buy physical media from Amazon, but that doesn't fill space in your local store, so you wouldn't see it.

Plaintiff wrote...

As opposed to having to memorize what more than fifty different buttons do?

Can you type?  Then you've already managed that.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 02 août 2013 - 06:09 .