Battlefield 3's lead development platform "switched" to consoles in mid-production, DICE GM Karl-Magnus Troedsson has confirmed.
"We said originally that the PC was the lead SKU of the game, but in mid-production we switched to console as lead platform to make sure we could get all the versions done for release," Troedsson confirmed.
"Our ambition at DICE is to use the power of each individual platform to get the most out of the game," he added.
"In the case of the PS3... I understand that if you compare it to a high-end PC, it's not going to look as good. But if you compare it to other games on the PS3, including other games we've done previously, I have to say I'm very happy with how it looks.
"Hopefully people will agree when they look at it in the same way."
In the press release announcing Battlefield 3's impressive "estimated" 5 million week-one sales, EA said it's making "daily improvements" to multiplayer servers.
Buy PSM3 online and have it delivered to your door.
Comments
66 comments so far...
Gambini on 1 Nov '11 said:
This is pure marketing hyperbole to try and clam people who feel BF3 looks and plays worse than BF:BC2 did... which is true.
There's no denying the new lighting effects are brilliant in BF3, but everything else is toned down from BC2 on consoles. Less destruction, less fluidity (although that could be due to the input lag bug which Dice are currently addressing...), and the graphics look like they have the potential to be awesome (like on PC) but the hardware just can't crank it out.
I was so looking forward to BF3 but I really feel like it needs another 6 months of polish (or now, a big patch or 2) before it truly comes into it's own.
Ganja_Ninja on 1 Nov '11 said:
Consoles. Ruining PC games since 2003.
EvilWaterman on 1 Nov '11 said:
You know what, im having a cracking time on it! Its looks great, plays great bar a few server issues and to be honest I don't know what the fuss is all about!
The complainers are probably people who's parents give them every thing they want because they will have a hissy fit if not.
Im on PS3 by the way.
TallPaul1878 on 1 Nov '11 said:
PC gamers don't half f**king moan.
I'd love to go out and build a kick ass rig, problem is I have 2 toddlers. Anyone with kids will know that they will somehow, despite all your best efforts, gain access to your pride and joy and utterly desgtroy it. Toast in the disc drive, juice down the vents. Then they'll look at you and with that look. "I was only giving your computer something to eat"
Any way. I've got it on PS3, it's great. Graphics aren't quite what I expected but we get used to being shafted on the multi-plats. Online has been a barn storm since day one. I've increasingly noticed a bit of input lag. I thought it was just me being crap with the M416 but it's deffo lag. I get a guy in my sights, fire and he's managed to crawl behind a bush. Not game breaking though, just a pest. I'm sure this will all get resolved in due course.
Gambini on 1 Nov '11 said:
Actually, the PC version is really top-notch... it's the console versions (I'm on PS3 predominantly) which need the most work.
jim2wheels on 1 Nov '11 said:
I couldn't disagree more. I'd say you're making a judgement based in first impressions, that's what it sounds like to me anyway. Anyone who is familiar with modern online FPS knows the drill.
Expect the first few weeks to have teething problems. Which has been nowhere near as bad as BFBC2 was, I couldn't play that for 2 weeks after release last year.
Expect to feel like a noob. Unless your a FPS junky, you gonna start a bit wet behind the ears.
Learn the maps. Staring the obvious really, it's not fun until you know what your doing.
Anyone who loves BF games would know this is the best one released on consoles yet. You like BF games, or you don't. All BF vets I know are loving it, most of those who don't like it are COD vets looking for something different.
TheCrimsonFenix on 1 Nov '11 said:
Oh noez! Game lookz fine on pc and it still not gud enuff for some ppl!
The Bossman on 1 Nov '11 said:
PC gamers. Bitching about other people since before the war.
Drusus on 1 Nov '11 said:
What game are you playing? Do you work for EA? The PC version is very pretty and doesn't work well at all, it has more glitches than the console version and mass reports of rubber banding in all types of server. Plus the texture issue is still not resolved for people using specific nvidia cards.
I've tested this game since alpha and the ridiculous thing is the alpha and beta ran better than the final product on all three of my rigs. (This comparison statement is when using all high settings and no extra dx11 features which were not present in the alpha and beta).
TheRandyNinja on 1 Nov '11 said:
i have noticed alot of problems with bf3 like the aiming lag and what not but its going to be fixed hopfully and it is a great game. for the graphics whores out there i dont see what the beef is this game looks amazing and if you cant see that you must be blind.
ted1138 on 1 Nov '11 said:
For
Read: Profit/Sales
For
Read: 'Gobby sods who think they're the centre of the universe'.
For
Read: 'Nice customers that value the time, effort and money that goes into making games like this, unlike the PC snobs who probably nicked it anyway'.
KK-Headcharge78 on 1 Nov '11 said:
PC gamers: Forcing devlopers to focus on consoles due to the bastards always stealing the product since 1978
Headsrinker on 1 Nov '11 said:
Drusus
What game are you playing? Do you work for EA? The PC version is very pretty and doesn't work well at all, it has more glitches than the console version and mass reports of rubber banding in all types of server. Plus the texture issue is still not resolved for people using specific nvidia cards.
My PC version works perfectly, infact im suprised at how few issues i have encountered. I have many friends with PC's who also have bought BF3, they too have not encountered any problems. (we all have a variety of different graphics cards)
So, i accept some people might have experienced a few issues, but it sounds like your just unlucky mate.
richm74 on 1 Nov '11 said:
For:
Ted1138
Read:
Someone who doesn't know his arse from his elbow and tars all PC players with the same brush.
I refer you to my previous statement above.
I will be the very first to agree that us PC gamers can an amazingly over-entitled lot, and that many have a nasty habit of shooting themselves in the foot by saying they're getting gyped by the devs, only to then pirate the very same games to "teach them a lesson"
but.....
it doesn't excuse the fact that devs/publishers over recent years have made a headlong charge to kowtow to the quite simplistic (and no i'm not being insulting here, just from a tech standpoint) needs of console gamers based purely on money. I understand cash is now the prime driving force for gaming companies these days, but that doesn't mean that they have to put the PC as a very very distant third consideration (yeah I sure as s**t am looking at you Infinity Ward, with or without Lampella).
DICE have proved that making the PC the lead platform (which I would suggest they should have stuck to) does reap big benefits for the console versions. Yes there are issues but please do point me in the direction of release in the last 3 years that is a) technically pushing the boundaries of existing hardware and b) NOT full of bug issues at launch. If this just happened more often, people would feel they're treated better and not as an afterthought.
Drusus on 1 Nov '11 said:
Well I'm glad you're experiencing no problems but looking at the forums it's definitely not an isolated incident in fact it's fairly widespread. If you could detail servers you've had no problems on for us that would be cool if you have the time, eliminating that from the equation has been tough because of the amount of servers saying themselves they have major issues.
I'm sure there is a patch coming but right now, you're in the lucky few.
Warrior24_7 on 1 Nov '11 said:
If anybody believes this garbage, then they nneed their heads examined! It ALWAYS WAS A CONSOLE LEAD GAME! Whenever you overhype a game, you end up doing more damage to it by explaining "why" it didn't live up to the hype than being praised on why it did! In BF3's case, perception is reality... it has some cool parts, but ultimately it's no big deal and maybe worse than it's predecesor! A MW3 killer it's not! But EA has been here before with Crysis and Crysis 2! Hopefully this time they learn their lesson.
gmcb007 on 1 Nov '11 said:
PC gamers: Acting like gaming revolves around them and are never happy.
Very_Silver_Ownz on 1 Nov '11 said:
The game on PS3 has good graphics but the screen tearing totally ruins it. Even in the single player there is screen tearing.
Not impressed.
ryano20 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Just in comparison to the old BF games (1942, BF2, 2142) which were complex and massive, it feels to us that play on PC that PC hardware holds back what should be games that surpass what those BF games did on scale. I like BF3, but it is not a worthy successor to 2 and is more akin to a more progressive version of Bad Company, but is still lacking.
ryano20 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Read above. It's not we're never happy, it's just we expect developers to work from their previous work and build upon it instead of start anew and miss features that should be standard in a sequel (a broader scope in terms of what they want to do in game).
hicken_t on 1 Nov '11 said:
Here hoping any new maps they release have a grouping of buildings which can all be blown up. I have very fond memories of Nelson bay of BC2 which the inevitability of no buildings being left and few trees as well. Snipers Delight!
Papzotic on 1 Nov '11 said:
Lol someone is bad at Battlefield...
lonewolf2002 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Do they, no more than some people that whinge about other stuff.
I have 2 kids, and a nice PC (not a 2 grand machine, about 500 quid) along with PS3/360 which will run this above the consoles visuals/framerate. If they get food into and juice down the vents of your PC surely your PS3 is just as at risk?
beef_mountain on 1 Nov '11 said:
This don't surprise me one bit. I hate Battlefield 3 on PC. You can tell Dice completely game up finishing off the PC version. Shame really cos it could have been a real good game.
Having to play it from a web-browser blows!
Having to constantly switch between gamepad and mouse and keyboard blows!
Dice blows!
Imaduck on 1 Nov '11 said:
Not terribly smart to announce this publicly. Personally, it concerns me. Do your research beforehand THEN make the game and see your chosen line through, don't bounce back and forth as you go.
KMakawa on 1 Nov '11 said:
PC version does actually have quite a few issues, trust me.. I am writing reports on them on a daily basis since launch day.
Console versions (I feel) have the better crop to be honest, beauty may not be something compared to the PC but the pace, community and overall ride of the consoles is quite better at this stage..
fyro11 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Get back in your hole whence you came, you blithering 12-year old. See what I did there?
Howsabout you pipe down your rhetoric?
sonic_uk on 1 Nov '11 said:
Cvg - the game is out now. You can stop with the daily minimum 6 Battlefield "news" stories now.
ted1138 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Yes, you're showing us you've neither manners, intelligence nor a sense of humour. Just the sort of behavior one would expect from a "blithering 12-year old"...
Warrior24_7 on 1 Nov '11 said:
[
Howsabout you pipe down your rhetoric?
Why, because the truth hurts? HALO, Gears of War, has out sold this as well as COD in EVERY form! The EA hype train has derailed spilling thousands of copies of BF3 all over the ground! It does no good to concetrate on hype and graphics alone, while the gameplay suffers. When MW3 hits, people will quit talking about this game.
gmcb007 on 1 Nov '11 said:
Ahh but now they know that the debate about the game being a let down will make em more money off those pesky advertisers.
FunSponge on 1 Nov '11 said:
Is this game worth the purchase? Thining about picking it up along with MW3 for some variety..
Any opinions?
Taus on 1 Nov '11 said:
Difficult to say with playing MW3 FunSponge but overall I think BF3 rocks.
Love a class based shooter, Dice have incentives the objectives sufficiently that the Multiplayer is not solely about Team Death match, kill as many as possible and the vehicles, planes etc add a variety to gameplay that MW doesn't have
What I'm saying is even if you are awful at run and gun (me for example) you can play the game on a different level, be a medic and revive, specialize in planes/helicopter to earn experience points & level up
I thinks it's an awesome online package, albeit much closer, in gameplay, to Killzone 3 than MW or Halo, IMO
luttman23 on 1 Nov '11 said:
BF3 on PC is alright I suppose, the lack of an in game menu and server browser, and the annoying way you're forced to start the game, and the fact you can't even play single player if your internet goes down, and that no one ever seems to play co-op so when you try to play co-op you're instead left staring at a line of text saying 'waiting for player' forever because at that point there's no way to exit the game at all.... these things annoy me. The server problems too but they'll be patched out.
Other than that, and occasionally getting killed half a second after spawning, no tutorials on how to use the air vehicles or in fact anything at all (still don't know how to give commands when I'm the squad leader), not knowing why you were killed is the reason I'm most often annoyed by it.
It's going to get better though and it's worth pushing through because when you sneak up behind some dick who's sniped you 15 times and knife him it feels so good.
PS. It's also sexist, why are there no female soldiers?
FunSponge on 1 Nov '11 said:
Cheers man
KK-Headcharge78 on 2 Nov '11 said:
While good the BF3 play style is more like COD than previous incarnations imo, I would get Gears 3 if you have an xbox for a truly different pace, strategy and looks in multiplayer and obviously it's a 3ps. If you do get BF wait till after MW3 for the cut price deals if you can, although apparently quite a few BF's are already coming back so you may get one cheap soon.
obscured021 on 2 Nov '11 said:
pc version is amazing, but they could have improved the graphics even more. With a pair of GTX570 there is more head room left on ultra @ 1080p/60fps both my cards are only at 60-75% usage even on the big 64 player maps. where crysis 2 dx 11 on ultra looks way better and uses 85-90% gpu same go's for the witcher 2.
GunstarHeroX on 2 Nov '11 said:
PCs. An afterthought since 1999.
Seriously, get with the times and go where the games are. You can't stick with a second-tier platform and give out about the fact that you're not catered to. That's like only owning a Wii, stubbornly refusing to buy a 360/PS3 and then complaining that you're not getting the games they are, or that the ports you receive aren't up to standard. Of course they aren't. If you want to play games as they were intended, buy the platform they're intended for. Not rocket science.
But hey, let's forget all this arguing and go play Arkham City. Oh wait you can't, because it's delayed for PC, as is everything. I hope those extra smoke effects are worth the wait. I've already finished it twice.
Ok well if not Arkham City, how about some Uncharted 3? I mean, uhm, some Gears of W... eh, some... Hell, I don't know. What exclusives does the PC have anyway? You got Starcraft 2 last year, I guess. Play that.
jim2wheels on 2 Nov '11 said:
Football Manager 2012.
I've previously bought a laptop purely to play FM on a sofa. Good times...
Alan_Breen on 2 Nov '11 said:
I have had a couple of goes on the multiplayer of this game and personally I have not got into the game yet. I probably need a good evening to appreciate this game but I have seen no problems with the game. I am on the PS3 and my name is Windsor 102 send me a message if you need an extra body for your troop.
ted1138 on 3 Nov '11 said:
http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/2285771 ... fer=search
"cheep's'chipps"
Chillybigwilly4 on 5 Nov '11 said:
You look like you need some help pulling your head out from you arse.
Happy to oblige!!
90+ PC exclusives for 2011
DCS: A10c - Warthog-IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs Over Dover-Microsoft Flight-Space Shutter Mission Simulator 2-Steel Armor: Blaze of War-GTR 3-rFactor 2-Trackmania 2-Asylum-Black Mirror 3-Gemini Rue-Syberia 3-Bounty Arms-Cargo!-Cobalt-Minecraft-Subversion-The Sims 3: Outdoor Living-The Sims: Medieval-The Swapper-Bloodline Champions-Chivalry: Battle for Agatha-Battlefield Play4Free-Contagion-Depth-Firefall-Garshasp: The Monster Slayer-Ground Branch-M.D.K.2 HD-Miner Wars 2081-Natural Selection 2-Primal Carnage-Red Orchestra: Heroes of Stalingrad-Tactical Intervention-Warface-A Game of Thrones: Genesis-Age of Empires: Online-Anomaly: Warzone Earth-Apox-Chris Taylor's King & Castles-Cities in Motion-DOTA 2-Dungeons-End of Nations-Frozen Synapse-Jagged Alliance 2: Reloaded-Jagged Alliance 3-King Arthur 2-Men of War: Vietnam-Might and Magic: Heroes VI-Magna Mundi-Panzer Corps-Real Warfare 2: Northern Crusades-Shogun 2: Total War-Stronghold III-Sword of the Stars II: The Lords of Winter-Trapped Dead-UFO 2 Extraterrestrials: Shadows Over Earth-Warhammer 40.000: Dawn of War II - Retribution-Xenonauts-Avadon: The Black Fortress-Chantelise-Darkspore-Dead State-Diablo III-Drakensang: Phileasson's Secret-E.Y.E.-Grim Dawn-Inquisitor-Neverwinter-The Age of Decadence-The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings-Torchlight II-Black Prophecy-Blackstar Chronicles-Blade & Soul-Drakensang Online-Earthrise-Everquest II: Destiny of Velious-Guild Wars 2-Infinity: The Quest for Earth-Jumpgate Evolution-Planetside Next-Phantasy Star Online 2-PSo2-Rift: Planes of Telara-Rift-Star Wars: The Old Republic-Tera-Tribes Universe-Warhammer 40.000: Dark Millenniun Online
ted1138 on 5 Nov '11 said:
Wow, PC gaming, 'makes train spotting look like an extreme sport', Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............
KPMaker on 7 Nov '11 said:
Console gamers:
Crying about PC gamers thinking the world evolves around them when the developers cater to their mommies pocket book every chance they get.
Complaining about PC gamers before the foundation of the world.
100% Ignoramus turds thinking console games are not pirated.
Forcing developers to dumb down games since their inception.
Forcing most developers to milk their franchises with small improvements to satisfy their large egos.
Acting like Gears of War was the best MP game ever.
Acting like Halo was the best FPS ever.
Forcing developers to limit game design by making statements like BF 3 is the 2nd game in the series, I
am sooooo looking forward to it, ha ha.
Causing developers to cut back on innovation by buying any game that has a trailer and says "This is the bestest game ever."
Creating the "Fan Boy" syndrome.
Fighting against the greater good of all gaming with their limited intelligent view on hardware.
Happy with 30fps for the rest of their lives.
Negative and uncooperative MP gamers thinking teamwork would cease to exist if there was more than 24 players on a server.
Achievement whores who would sell out their own grandmother for just one more achievement added to their belt; just one more mommy, just one more daddy.
Thinking pulmonary embolisms are only for adults and people that take long plane fights.
Bigger flamers than flamers themselves.
Technology impaired yet highly skilled in eating hot pockets and playing with a controller at the same time.
Contributing to the decrease in size of high school football players; a dumb bell, isn't that a new GoW achievement?
Mediocre drones in a love affair with 5 year old hardware.
TheCrimsonFenix on 7 Nov '11 said:
Idiots:
Categorising an entire group of people as unintelligent based on the actions of a few morons.
ted1138 on 7 Nov '11 said:
"KPMaker", if any of the above makes sense to you then you're in serious need of some psychiatric help...
Seriously, go get some help, I'm sure they've got some pills that will make it all go away.
ffcoppolla on 7 Nov '11 said:
Gamers: bickering amongst each other over an opinion since time began.
bugmenot on 7 Nov '11 said:
ok i just had to come on here to let people know why we PC gamers are so p**sed off.
crysis, release date 2007 (PC) an incredible game, best graphics ever seen (with the right mods it still is).being able to complete the mission however you see fit, it gave a different approach to gameplay.
crysis 2, release date 2011 (multi-plat) better art style, smaller maps, less freedom, giving away ways to complete the mission rather than letting the player figure it out (doesn't reqiure any thinking), not has graphically groundbracking has the first, THEY COMPLETELY CHANGED THE ALIENS >.<.. they now are humaniod.
reaseons for all the above, 1) hardware limitation of the console 2) the console has the younger auidiance, they make it to hard then they wont enjoy the "interactive movie" style singleplayer (like COD) 3) they make more money, 4) they changed the aliens from alien to humaniod simply to appeal more to the FPS non science fiction auidiance.
to most PC gamers thats one strike, an increadible series is now lost.
command and conquar series, that was great untill they did the worst imstake a dev could possibly make, they brought an RTS to a console, i really dont need to explain how they ruined it has chances are most of you know, but for the ones that dont.
smaller maps, less units, less stratagy invlulved, less options.
supreme comander, one of the best RTS games ever, 81km maps over 8,000 units with 8 players and so.. so many units to choose, so many were looking farword to a sequal for so many years.
supreme comander 2, largest make, not even 5km, max units about 2-300 per side with 8 players cramed in such a small map that completely takes out stratagy, another GREAT series bites the dust, thanks to the consoles hardware limitations and its GENARALLY younger audiance.
battlefield 2,(pretty much every BF game before BC) just a legend, a modders paradise, a great game to play with friends, freedom to litarraly do anything you like, no single player but a bot mode instead which was amazing and gave so much re-playabilty to the game it gave you time and space to practice using each gun/car/tank/jet/chopper before going online. like crysis it added something new to the table.
battlefield 3, litarally just another COD, no mod tools (no reason at all), no bot mode, no basic PC features that the PC has had for decades, and for them to call it a BF2 sequal and make the console lead platform is just the final insult.
im sure there are many more these are just the ones i can recall.
so you get my point, great games being ruined by simply moving to the console, it takes out what gaming is all about and turns it into something that they can simply make money from (even though they made allot of money anyways)
that is why we PCgamers are p**sed, and we have the right to be p**sed.
we dont mined if they simply make a console version, but its when they sacrifice the quailty and standerd that was set by the original PC version.
even though the console has what, 8 year old hardware it is MORE than capable of haveing great gameplay and quailty just like the older PC games (exept maybe the RTS genre), making gaming better for everyone.
but instead today, graphics and a cool trailer is what sell the game, and that is sad for both PC and console :'(
ted1138 on 7 Nov '11 said:
@bugmenot, you can't expect publishers to spend triple-A money on the PC if the sales just aren't there to back them up. Just be thankful they still make PC ports of games(even the ones that used to be PC exclusives). Games like the ones you mention just don't shift copies like they used to on PC, and probably never will again. Just look at Battlefield 3, probably the most hardware pushing game to come around since Crysis, yet it's only sold about ten percent of it's copies on the PC, was number one in the PC chart for a week and then got pushed into 2nd by a footy management sim. No way that game got green lit on PC sale forcasts alone. So the current gen of consoles may well be holding back the PC in terms of performance, but without them, all you'd be getting on PC is The Sims and World of Warcraft(plus all the little kiddies "edutainment" titles).
TheCrimsonFenix on 7 Nov '11 said:
It wasn't the first game to allow you to take on an objective anyway you see fit, if anything, Far Cry did that long before Crysis and even that wasn't the first to do it.
And I love how pc players are quick to blame the limitations of the console and the console players on why Crysis 2 turned out the way it did before even considering the main factor. At the end of the day, Crytek are the ones who decided to go the linear structured route. It's not like anybody forced them to make their game that way. They could have easily designed the aliens the same way and could have easily kept the freedom of the first game (see Crysis on consoles) but they as the developer chose to go another route. It was still their game and it was their choice in what to do with it. Sure, they may have felt pressure with the audience they were now presenting their game to but not everybody is this simpleton console gamer. If people are seriously blaming a console audience or the more than capable hardware for a developers decision to change something up all for the sake of more sales then.. something is terribly wrong.
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
the PC doesn't and has never needed "to spend triple-A money on the PC" games are produced pretty cheaply on PC, take crysis for example (and the few PC indie shooters that look like they put allot fo money in), still selling copies today for people who want to test there PCs, and get a good game out of it.
hell if "if the sales just aren't there to back them up" then please explain how call of duty started and battlefield and half-life and all the PC exclusives are still MORE than capable to go on if it wasn't for the devs switching to console.
FACT they make the money from PC exlusives to easily go on and make sequals, so saying "Just be thankful they still make PC ports" is just insulting if you knew anything of what the PC is capable of, and so far no game including crysis has shown that, hell thanks to SLI and X-fire 2 5770s and an i5 quad is pretty much a next gen gaming machine already.
and obviously there are PCs out there that'll make that look like a calculator.
2 mars II cards couldn't run BF3 well at all yet a GTX560 gets very good frame rates, my point is its all software side, going on most console gamers logic then an athlonx2 with an 8800gt and 1GB RAM should get better framrates than a 360/ps3
tahts one way to tell its a crappy port.
well its obvious that the PC was gona sell less from the start, but thats very easily explained by the fact that most PC gamers (who didnt buy it) including myself are not going to get the game, simply because it is a port, the devs lied to us about being the lead plat and the game is simply a re-freshed COD, we have seen it all before, my and others are sticking with the RTS.
the PC was huge, larger than the consoles at one point, the PC can easily survive, its taken huge beatings and backstabbings, but it will go on mainly due to it being a free platform, the RTS genre will stay.
tbh i just wish that AMD/ATI, Intel, Nvidia would actually do something for PC gaming rather than watching on the side lines, after all they benafit the most if it ever gets ontop again.
though consoles and PC will most likely be beaten by services like onlive
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
crysis was the first thing to pop into my head
you pretty much just said what i did
"8 year old hardware it is MORE than capable of haveing great gameplay and quailty just like the older PC games"-me
all i can see is you agreeing with me.
entire reason a game dev moves to console is for the money, in order tog et that money the must appeal to that ordiance, which is mainly young teens who frannkly dont give a s**t about gameplay but more explosions etc, (they dont see to deeply into a game nor care to)
your kidding right, thats the entire reason a dev moves to a console, you litarraly just summed it up right there.
TheCrimsonFenix on 8 Nov '11 said:
So one moment you say hardware limitation is a reason a pc developer change their game on console, the next you're saying the hardware is fully capable.
Open your eyes too, the above is only one thing I was calling you out on, the other being who a lot of elitist pc gamers wrongfully blame. I see a lot of "console held it back/console ruined it/dumbed down for console" type comments on the internet as though the developer was held at gunpoint, is some sort of victim of consoles and as if the pc gaming community is childish idiot free. The blame is entirely on the console from these sorts of people when it should be on the developer choosing to suck up to that particular audience.
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
"crysis, release date 2007 (PC) an incredible game, best graphics ever seen "
"crysis 2, release date 2011 (multi-plat) better art style"
refering to the fact that the first crysis is technically graphically better
"reaseons for all the above, 1) hardware limitation of the console"
the reason that crysis is technically graphically better than crysis 2.
so if it was the only thing you were "calling me out on" why bother mentioning the other stuff in such an argumentative way?
agreed.
well considering the reason for "console held it back/console ruined it" is because "dumbed down for console" then that is true, point out one PC exlcusive that went to console that hasn't needed to change due to the hardware limitatons
child free yes, idiot free definatly not rofl
exactly, but it is the consle audience who eat up the games without complaints, if only they'd complain and actually damand quality and innovation then we'd be getting some AMAZING games.
and we come to the reason why PCgamers are the only ones complaining, and why console gamers are the only ones calling PC gamers whiny and snobby etc (most console only gamers who have never even touched a gaming PC)
TheCrimsonFenix on 8 Nov '11 said:
It was written in a separate paragraph
I think both sides are as bad as one another to be quite honest. It's easy to categorise a group as one thing when that's what you end up seeing from the majority. One side there are elitist pc gamers acting like they're Stephen Hawking because they play with keyboard and mouse and are able to get maxed out performance from their setups which at the end of the day have probably cost a lot more than a console did from day one. On the other we have a lot of console gamers who just ridicule pc gamers probably because they can't afford a decent pc and can't get their head around keyboard controls. Both sides have terrible stereotypes that are alive and well sadly. We have people comparing and saying one box is better than the other when one was designed with video gaming from square one and the other was designed with other things in mind before video games, which is just a bit silly to me. They can be compared yes but the extent people go to to prove one is incredibly inferior when they're both different pieces of technology with different purposes is astounding to me, especially when at the end of the day, both give largely the same experience in terms of gameplay.
All this talk of tech and creativity being held back by consoles though I can't take seriously. I can easily play on my PC at max settings and switch to a game like Red Dead on PS3 that isn't as nicely looking as a PC game. Maxed out graphics look lovely running in 60+fps when I'm pc gaming but that quality that isn't the same on consoles doesn't exactly keep me up at night. Devs once again with all the hype of what is possible yet we won't see it til it's shown properly and even when that happens I'll not be expecting it to have some amazing effect on the way I play a video game. Unless the physics, sound, animation, AI and gameplay show a considerable jump, I'm not bothered. Until that happens, all this talk of "what if" is just heresay and garbage until proven otherwise.
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
its 2 in the f**king morning gimmy a break lol
hey we PC go-ers got good reason for the p**syness,
like a war vet who had his legs blown off by a young nazis lad in his first battle.
if that makes any sence lol.
lol act like him how exactly? not a argument starter here im just finding that one funny, but i know what you mean lol
thats pretty much guranteed
its a shame that the gaming industry kinda goes to them and leaves us PC guys behind because of it
thats like f1 drivers getting snuffed for rally,
all that work on my PC over the years gone to waste, thats what it feels like
Both sides have terrible stereotypes that are alive and well sadly.
it is being held back by the console, for example notice the HUGE change's in tech, graphics and gameplay that were made when the xbox was swapped for the 360, or the transiction from PS2-PS3.
but what allot fo people dont either relise or have never thought about is that about halfway through a consoles genoration the PC already has the tech (DX10,DX11,AI,game engines for e.g) that'll be featured in next gen consoles.
isn't lovely
well like i said so far no game out there has managed to take advantage of the PC yet, and most likely never will
well think about teh changes made in games between ps2 and ps3, would you rather play a ps3 game or a ps2 game?
i personally find it hard ot go bakc to games like pro-street when i can play NFS shift etc
TheCrimsonFenix on 8 Nov '11 said:
As in they like to think they're vastly more intelligent and generally better when they're still sat on their arses in the same spot all the same.
That is true but I believe there wasn't really that big of a difference (if you don't count graphics and certain visual effects) between PS2 and PS3 and I believe the same will happen again if Sony or Microsoft were to dump out their next consoles. From my point of view, something of that jump would be a nice thing to have but at this moment in time after seeing that graphics seem to be what's favoured with games today, it's not really something I can see myself getting genuinely excited for. It's like in my mind graphics like Uncharted, God of War 3 and Gears 3 are of an acceptable level to the point they are good enough to keep that way for the next five years. I want the focus to be pointed to AI, animation and physics but with so many people desperately wanting graphics to be of an Avatar standard, it's looking unlikely that improvement in those other areas is going to get the attention it deserves. It's almost as though devs and hardcore pc gamers will be so thirsty for what's possible that that same attention to detail that's made some classic games special, will be lost all for the sake of getting something photorealistic. If they'd just relax and work on the tech they have, rather than wondering what's possible next month on new updated hardware, perhaps they could push the hardware much the same way a developer would on ps2 5 years post release.
As for old games that are hard to go back to, there are very few great games that I find in anyway irritating to return to thanks to outdated tech. Max Payne, a game which looked absolutely splendid in my opinion due to the way textures were done with actual pictures and is still amazingly fun to play through. Must have completed it 200 times. Deus Ex, a game with terrible animations and no physics other than breaking items and gravity, still amazing to play through today thanks to the story and writing and freeform gameplay itself. These are just two games that stick with me to this day. If I mentioned any more I'd take up this entire thread more than I already have. Games to me just need that right set of ingredients rather than what just looks best, to actually be something worthwhile. That is something I believe is being overlooked and has been for a long time now.
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
huh, i see lol
well, using pro-street and shift ofr e.g the car handling and complexity, plus the AI, only slight iporvements sure but, still when played all together.. it is a very nice improvement
cant wait
im with you on that one, there really is no need to take graphics any further (atleast not make it a top prirority)
i couldn't agree withya more
P.S i wish they would give fallout a new engine already lol
TheCrimsonFenix on 8 Nov '11 said:
Oh I know what you mean! I found Fallout 3 alright but the fact it was using the same engine as Oblivion almost made me want to vomit. The damn thing brings a s**t ton of bugs, glitches and other weird design f**k ups that it makes playing either game a chore a lot of the time. I think it was Metro 2033 that I was playing not long ago and I have to say that game feels more like the original Fallout games in terms of art design and atmosphere. The Gamebryo engine is the one thing that's got me worried about Skyrim before it even comes out and even when Bethesda have said it has been modified, I'm still reserving judgement as it looks, from what I've seen so far, still to be having a few similar problems that I had with Oblivion. Fighting moves can look as slick as they want to be but when I'm being given quests by people who monotonously talk to you before soullessly and robotically going back to their set action.. it kind of breaks the immersion.
ted1138 on 8 Nov '11 said:
@bugmenot, get a grip will you. I'm not a "console gamer", I've been gaming on consoles and computers since the 70's, and don't hold one over the other. All I've done is comment on the industry as I see it, and I've had 30+ years of experience to back that up. Take a look again at what I posted, and this time take off the 'PC fanboy specs'. Maybe you'll see what I'm saying isn't so 'anti PC' after all.
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
"Just be thankful they still make PC ports of games(even the ones that used to be PC exclusives)"
"I've been gaming on consoles and computers since the 70's, and don't hold one over the other"
ye sure looks like it to me
seriosuly that top line is has anti PC has you can get.. well second to "they should just drop the PC altogether" seriously i had a console only gamer say that to me once.
if you cared at all about the PC you wouldn't have even typed that, that may be the developers views but its not right at all.
"and this time take off the 'PC fanboy specs'."
a quote from my first post,
"we dont mined if they simply make a console version, but its when they sacrifice the quailty and standerd that was set by the original PC version.
even though the console has what, 8 year old hardware it is MORE than capable of haveing great gameplay and quailty just like the older PC games (exept maybe the RTS genre), making gaming better for everyone."
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
ROFL we got to admit thought thats some of those f**k ups were so funny and entertaining xD
i admit, i never played the first 2, i only came in at 3.. never liked the top down RPG style
i did love the atmosphere in 2033.. so long has i had a gas mask
i wouldn't be worried about it, i mean we can pretty much guarantee that is going to be a better and "cleaner" than previous games running that engine... plus keeping to the same engine = LOTS OF MODS
thats what im hyped for 
ted1138 on 8 Nov '11 said:
What's the point of even talking to you? You can't even string a few words together without making yourself look like a total moron;
And who are you quoting when you say
?
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
then please explain how exectly what you said isn't anti-PC, rather than resulting to insult strait away and being completely un-able to counter anything at all i said.
"Just be thankful they still make PC ports of games(even the ones that used to be PC exclusives)"
yeah thats anti-PC
from the person who said im making myself look like a moron.
""they should just drop the PC altogether" seriously i had a console only gamer say that to me once."
bugmenot on 8 Nov '11 said:
anyway i only came on here to say exactly why us PCgamers are so p**sed... and rightfully so, if this was happening on the console you'd be in uproar.
ted1138 on 9 Nov '11 said:
The first is anti-whiney-PCfanboy, and the second is something you just made up, then wrote here, to make it look like it was something I'd said. Pathetic!
And why should I respond to your weak and petty nit picking? It either makes no sense or contradicts itself.