136 réponses à ce sujet

[PinkysPain]

JasonPogo wrote...

Now I know allot of people have those systems and played the first two games on them.  But seeing as this game missed the 2013 release window I kinda don't see the scenes in it.  By this time next year the 360 and PS3 will be more or less dead consoles with no new content being put out.  Don't get me wrong I think it's great that they are doing it.  Just from a business standpoint it kinda seems like a bad idea.

As you said, they missed the release window ... my guess that after ME3 and DA2 they decided they really needed the time to make a proper game, which pushed out the release date, but they didn't want to redo a whole lot of content so it remained a last gen title.

Which seems an altogther rational decision, they don't really need top of the line graphics.

[PinkysPain]

EntropicAngel wrote...
It isn't a last gen title--it's cross gen. It's being made for 5 different platforms.

The lowest common denominator drives a lot of design decisions, for instance I doubt they'll have higher polygon density for next gen platforms.

Lets call it last and a half gen.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 04 janvier 2014 - 06:03 .

[Axdinosaurx]

A large portion of non PC players will still be on those consoles when the game releases, makes sense to me.

Modifié par Axdinosaurx, 04 janvier 2014 - 06:33 .

[DarthSliver]

EntropicAngel wrote...

PinkysPain wrote...

The lowest common denominator drives a lot of design decisions, for instance I doubt they'll have higher polygon density for next gen platforms.

Lets call it last and a half gen.

I would like to once again point out that Frostbite, Frostbite 3 in particular, is a scalable engine. It's designed for high fidelity, with the ability to downgrade.

It's full next-gen. But it has the ability to disable features, or perhaps lower fidelity, to save memory, processing power, etc.

I will call BS on that and say Battlefield 4, it has been quite buggy  on 360 and PS3 from what I have been hearing. I aim to get DA:I for next-gen if I can pull it off, but like everyone else reason for sticking with what they have money will be the only issue for me pulling this off like I would like. 

Also per topic:

I would say Current-Gen is here to stay around for while because Microsoft and Sony didnt make XboxOne and PS4 backwards compatible. I don't understand why, backwards has been successful for Sony since PS1 and PS2 days from what I can tell. PS3 and PS4 both use Blurays so I don't quite understand why they didnt make it possible the system can read the disc for games that you can upgrade to PS4. On Microsofts part, I just figured they were being greedy. 

Then to the PC Elitist Comment:

Maybe they should make consoles upgradable like a PC or make it easier to sit in front of your TV on your couch and play games with your PC. That is really what consoles come down to nowadays, being able to sit on your couch and relax while playing some games. Its a matter of convience for people and not every likes to fidle with upgrading a PC to latest specs or whatever the reason is.  But I think there should come a time when PC and Console becomes a blur and it doesnt matter what system you have. 

[AlanC9]

Orian Tabris wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Orian Tabris wrote...
The real question is: Why is BioWare releasing ANY of their games on console in the first place?

Because plenty of gamers don't have gaming PCs?

You see, games like Dragon Age Origins and 2 are suited to PC. The movement is very limited in most BioWare games, and easily controlled on PC.

You never saw games like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights on a console. Consoles are for shooters, adventure games and racing games, not tactical games (whether turn-based or not). They are great for games where the player really needs some physical flexibility (and perhaps require less thought).

And yet RPGs sell on consoles. I guess those poor fools just don't know what they're doing

Mass Effect 1, 2 and 3 are the only games that'd make any sense on console, to actual gamers.

"Actual gamers?" Ye gods.

Anyway, who says you need a gaming PC to play a tactical RPG? It's not like decent computers can't handle such games.

Do non-PC-gamers usually have "decent" computers?

I've got a Dell c521 on my desk now ( it's my backup rig that's been promoted to the front line.) With an upgraded vidcard the c521 is just fine, but DA:O was quite laggy  with the stock x1300 Pro, and the machine couldn't run ME2 at more than 8 FPS. I don't know for sure what the installed base of non-gamer's PCs looked like when DA:O shipped, but there were a lot of machines with crappy Intel integrated graphics kicking around.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

AWT42 wrote...

Neverwinter_Knight77 wrote...

If it was up to me, Dragon Age would be PC-only.  I'm not an elitist... I prefer consoles for Mass Effect.  Anyway, there have been a lot of people who took a very long time to buy a PS3, myself included.  As a result, it will be a very long time for most people to upgrade to "next gen".  Not everybody has money for a new console.

Why? You'd just be locking people out of the series that way. I prefer consoles for Dragon Age. Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age II and other RPGs worked fine on console. As someone who has played them only on PS3 I don't think controls are an issue like some people are trying to make it out to be.

Dragon Age: Origins was designed on PC.  As a result, (I'm not sure how to put this) it feels natural there.  Dragon Age II was designed on Xbox 360, and feels very out of place on PC-- To me, anyway.  At the least, they should design the games on PC, and "port" them to consoles, instead of vice versa as they do now.

And by the way, I would never be able to play Mass Effect on PC, because as far as I know, there's no way to get controller support.  I prefer a mouse with games like KOTOR and Dragon Age, but not a shooter like Mass Effect.

Modifié par Neverwinter_Knight77, 04 janvier 2014 - 08:17 .

[DPSSOC]

darkchief10 wrote...

a good chunk of people will surely wait till the new consoles have their inevitable first price cut before they buy, the 360 at least will receive support till late 2015 before they shut down, so this is a good idea financially.

Personally I'm waiting for the first big hardware failure to be found and fixed.  I didn't buy a 360 until I knew RROD wasn't an issue with new systems.  So I'll be sticking with the 360 for at least a year, probably 2.  If devs stop making games for it before I want to upgrade I'll just enjoy my library as it stands.  But what do I know, I still play NES and N64

[PinkysPain]

EntropicAngel wrote...
a scalable engine

Even the current generation pipelines are for the most part still designed for low poly modeling/texturing techniques because that's what artists are most productive with any way (most of them will initially require daily beatings to change). You can increase particle count, you can increase shading quality, maybe add some extra physics effects ... but the most important stuff isn't scalable (yet).

Once artists do everything in 3D and stop touching vertexes and texels, then we can have scalability.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 04 janvier 2014 - 08:48 .

[Angrywolves]

DPSSOC wrote...

darkchief10 wrote...

a good chunk of people will surely wait till the new consoles have their inevitable first price cut before they buy, the 360 at least will receive support till late 2015 before they shut down, so this is a good idea financially.

Personally I'm waiting for the first big hardware failure to be found and fixed.  I didn't buy a 360 until I knew RROD wasn't an issue with new systems.  So I'll be sticking with the 360 for at least a year, probably 2.  If devs stop making games for it before I want to upgrade I'll just enjoy my library as it stands.  But what do I know, I still play NES and N64

This.

The new machines are expensive. Players can save up money for it, but I agree they should wait until we know all the problems have been ironed out.

[DarthSliver]

EntropicAngel wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

I will call BS on that and say Battlefield 4, it has been quite buggy  on 360 and PS3 from what I have been hearing. I aim to get DA:I for next-gen if I can pull it off, but like everyone else reason for sticking with what they have money will be the only issue for me pulling this off like I would like. 

"Scalable" doesn't mean there aren't bugs. it means that a game can be graphically downgraded from within the engine to allow play on less powerful hardware.

It's almost literally the same thing as computer settings. Just more specialized. Frostbite has it.

Well what I meant by it was that is was alot more buggy on the current consoles vs next-gen consoles, like you can tell it was meant for next-gen. With that I dont want my first play of DAI to be ruined because I played it on my current console, PS3, rather than upgrading for it. I suspect same thing might happen with DAI since it shares the engine Battlefield 4 has. 

[DPSSOC]

DarthSliver wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

I will call BS on that and say Battlefield 4, it has been quite buggy  on 360 and PS3 from what I have been hearing. I aim to get DA:I for next-gen if I can pull it off, but like everyone else reason for sticking with what they have money will be the only issue for me pulling this off like I would like. 

"Scalable" doesn't mean there aren't bugs. it means that a game can be graphically downgraded from within the engine to allow play on less powerful hardware.

It's almost literally the same thing as computer settings. Just more specialized. Frostbite has it.

Well what I meant by it was that is was alot more buggy on the current consoles vs next-gen consoles, like you can tell it was meant for next-gen. With that I dont want my first play of DAI to be ruined because I played it on my current console, PS3, rather than upgrading for it. I suspect same thing might happen with DAI since it shares the engine Battlefield 4 has. 

You could always wait a month or so for the big bugs to be sorted out.  I mean I know it's insane these days to not own every game you intend to buy the day it comes out but it is still something you can do,

[darkchief10]

ames4u wrote...

darkchief10 wrote...

a good chunk of people will surely wait till the new consoles have their inevitable first price cut before they buy, the 360 at least will receive support till late 2015 before they shut down, so this is a good idea financially.

They would not shut down the 360 support. It would create too big of a backlash.

http://www.ign.com/a...s-100-new-games

[katling73]

EntropicAngel wrote...

katling73 wrote...

Well, yeah, I agree you're going to get games made for both old and next gen consoles for 2014 and probably the first half of 2015 but my guess is that from late 2015 onwards, that's going to phase out as the game companies get a grip on what the next gen consoles can do and whether it's worth scaling back for the old gen consoles.

In fact, I think late 2015 and into 2016 is going to be the time of nasty surprises for both consolers and PCers as games go next gen only on the consoles and the PC side goes 64-bit systems only.

64-bit for PCs is already starting. Not much, but it's getting there. It's not TOO much of a concern, though--the 32-bit RAM limitation makes an effective if unrelated incentive to buy 64-bit systems. I suspect that the majority of gaming intensive systems will have 64-bit OSes around the end of 2014.

We're just outgrowing 4 GB.

Yeah, the PC version of Watchdogs is going to be 64-bit only and that's the tiny breeze that is going to herald the end of older computers. Which is making me wince because I've been getting by (on high graphcs no less) with my 5 year old quad core computer. I'm going to finally have to upgrade. But then, I did kind of expect I may have to once they finally released the new consoles, depending on what the specs were. I could get away with my old clunker in the PS3/XBox360 generation because their specs were so poor.

But anyway, Frostbite is going to go 64 bit only in the future if what I've read is correct so if Bioware stick with Frostbite for any future DA games then we can expect that DA will go 64 bit only. I suspect they won't do that for DA:I since they're also releasing it on PS3 and XBox360. From that, I'd say it'll still support 32 bit systems.

[Sanunes]

katling73 wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

katling73 wrote...

Well, yeah, I agree you're going to get games made for both old and next gen consoles for 2014 and probably the first half of 2015 but my guess is that from late 2015 onwards, that's going to phase out as the game companies get a grip on what the next gen consoles can do and whether it's worth scaling back for the old gen consoles.

In fact, I think late 2015 and into 2016 is going to be the time of nasty surprises for both consolers and PCers as games go next gen only on the consoles and the PC side goes 64-bit systems only.

64-bit for PCs is already starting. Not much, but it's getting there. It's not TOO much of a concern, though--the 32-bit RAM limitation makes an effective if unrelated incentive to buy 64-bit systems. I suspect that the majority of gaming intensive systems will have 64-bit OSes around the end of 2014.

We're just outgrowing 4 GB.

Yeah, the PC version of Watchdogs is going to be 64-bit only and that's the tiny breeze that is going to herald the end of older computers. Which is making me wince because I've been getting by (on high graphcs no less) with my 5 year old quad core computer. I'm going to finally have to upgrade. But then, I did kind of expect I may have to once they finally released the new consoles, depending on what the specs were. I could get away with my old clunker in the PS3/XBox360 generation because their specs were so poor.

But anyway, Frostbite is going to go 64 bit only in the future if what I've read is correct so if Bioware stick with Frostbite for any future DA games then we can expect that DA will go 64 bit only. I suspect they won't do that for DA:I since they're also releasing it on PS3 and XBox360. From that, I'd say it'll still support 32 bit systems.

From what I have been reading on the internet most PCs that have been released in the last half decade or so are already include 64-bit processors, so if you meet the requirements as far as speed of the processor you are probably fine.  I think the 64-bit requirement is just to make sure people are using the right version of their OS.

[PinkysPain]

katling73 wrote...
Yeah, the PC version of Watchdogs is going to be 64-bit only and that's the tiny breeze that is going to herald the end of older computers. Which is making me wince because I've been getting by (on high graphcs no less) with my 5 year old quad core computer.

Can't you just buy some extra memory and get a 64 bit vista or windows 7 key from someone no longer using it?

[Karach_Blade]

Not everyone can afford a new gaming rig or the PS4 or Xbox One, OP. The only way I am EVER getting a newer console will be years down the road when prices drop. I have college books, medications and a *very* shakey housing situation to worry about as top priority. Yes, prices are dropping for computer components, but I don't have $800-2,500 to spend on a new computer at this moment.