Weisman: MS "Destroyed" FASA Dev Culture

In any event, this debate seems to have finaly died.

Neither side is going to concede so yeah I'd say it's dead.




Playing: Super Mario 3D Land, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS Watching: Hannibal, Community, Life

177.

Re: MS

Sep 1, 2009, 01:51

Yeah, the removal of meaningful interaction is a rather disturbing trend these days. QTEs, aim assist, cover systems... they all remove the amount of control players actually have. I thought Mirror's Edge was a rather refreshing change, as it gave the player a great amount of control over their character and actually required it. Unfortunately, the game didn't sell too well so maybe that only reinforces publisher's belief that games need to be dumbed down to sell. I'm glad you liked Mirror's Edge... very underrated game in my opinion and it had a relatively good PC port. Dead Space was also a favorite of mine that, while simple for the most part, certainly forced the player to engage and play, rather than run on auto-pilot. Both EA games... the tide has truly turned. In any event, this debate seems to have finaly died.

176.

Re: MS

Sep 1, 2009, 01:13

I have complete belief in the fact that eventually games will all be extremely simple interactive movies, for the most part. I am trying to enjoy my real games while they still exist. Yeah, the removal of meaningful interaction is a rather disturbing trend these days. QTEs, aim assist, cover systems... they all remove the amount of control players actually have. I thought Mirror's Edge was a rather refreshing change, as it gave the player a great amount of control over their character and actually required it. Unfortunately, the game didn't sell too well so maybe that only reinforces publisher's belief that games need to be dumbed down to sell.

175.

Re: MS

Sep 1, 2009, 00:47

I dunno about that. At the very least, the interface would have been better. Also remember the general mentality that PC developers have towards console gamers. If you read any interview about a PC developer making a console game, the dev almost always mentions accessibility. Console gamers simply carry the stigma of being casual gamers with short attention spans, whereas PC gamers carry the stigma of being hardcore nerds who hunch over their keyboard and perfect their min/maxing skills. Well, perhaps a better way to say it would be that it would have been simplified either way, perhaps not as much, but it would have been done. My main point though was that all developers, on every system, are aiming more and more for accessibility... even on PC exclusives like Dawn of War 2. They want larger and larger audiences and more and more are trying to get my girlfriend to play videogames, which she will never do. I have complete belief in the fact that eventually games will all be extremely simple interactive movies, for the most part. I am trying to enjoy my real games while they still exist.

174.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 23:07

I'd like to see him say that. If you insist... OMG PC WOULD NEVER HAVE GONE CONSOLE. On a more serious note, that's obviously not what I've been saying. As mentioned earlier, I can't predict the future. However, I can examine the past. The past shows that the majority of PC developers shifted their focus to consoles with the arrival of the Xbox and 360. The past shows that MS made it really easy for PC developers to transition and tried their best to get them to do so. The past shows that neither Sony nor Nintendo have ever cared about PC developers and have made no efforts to convert them to console developers. The past and present show that the overwhelming majority of multiplatform games use 360 as the lead platform and that all the big 360 developers once focused on PC development instead (whereas almost all of the big Sony and Nintendo developers have always been console developers). It's certainly possible that Nintendo or Sony would have completely changed their business philosophies and tried to attract PC developers had MS never created the Xbox. It's also possible that another company would have created a new console and done the exact same things as MS. However, history doesn't support any of these assumptions. Oblivion would have been equally stripped down even if it was PC only. I dunno about that. At the very least, the interface would have been better. Also remember the general mentality that PC developers have towards console gamers. If you read any interview about a PC developer making a console game, the dev almost always mentions accessibility. Console gamers simply carry the stigma of being casual gamers with short attention spans, whereas PC gamers carry the stigma of being hardcore nerds who hunch over their keyboard and perfect their min/maxing skills. This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 23:15.

173.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 21:15

I'd like to see him say that. Well, I hope he will. I could see arguing that eventually the same thing would have happened, at some point, through some means. I think it would have taken a long while though. As I recall, the PS3 at first was supposed to just have two cell processors, rather than a GPU, and that changed when the specs of the Xbox 360 were revealed... Sony really was not focusing on PC style development at all back then, and Nintendo still isn't. I think Xbox did all of that. But yes, you are probably right, someone would have at some point... My thing is more that mainstreaming the industry, which is twisted by most people into "consolized," would certainly have happened either way. Even PC only games like Dawn of War II and WoW show a great amount of simplification for larger audiences... Oblivion would have been equally stripped down even if it was PC only. In that regard, I don't think it was the Xbox's doing nearly as much as simple mainstreaming due to higher production costs. But on the matter of PC games being all console ports now, for the most part? Xbox did that, and I don't know who else would have without them in the picture. Someone, sometime, probably... but it's all speculative based on little fact.

172.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 18:20

Wowbagger_TIP

As for the new MechWarrior game, I can't wait. Tech 1 stuff only, gonna be beautiful. I'm really looking forward to it too. Now I just wish they could make a real Shadowrun game again :-/

171.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 17:18

AnarKane

I have to agree with Jordan. Once Micro$oft got their hooks into FASA, that was it. Problem is, Sam Lewis couldn't see that. However, in defense of Sam, he wasn't greedy, he just wanted to expand to a bigger market. The flip side of that coin is that signing any contract with Micro$oft is like signing one with the Devil, you're gonna get hosed in the end no matter what.

As for the new MechWarrior game, I can't wait. Tech 1 stuff only, gonna be beautiful.




"We can do this one of two ways. There's the hard way, which involves hours of discussion, tons of negotiation, half a dozen bribes, and no guarantee of success." "What's the easy way?" "Liberally placed high explosives."

170.

Re: MS "Destroyed" FASA

Aug 31, 2009, 17:05

The PC Warrior

He is not saying "OMG PC WOULD NEVER HAVE GONE CONSOLE" I'd like to see him say that.

169.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 16:47

I think that everyone has mostly come around to seeing Jerykk's point now. If the XBox hadn't come along, then of course it's possible that something else could have come along, or that eventually some devs would have made the change anyway. You can't prove a negative, so we have to believe it's possible. That said, who knows how many more years or console generations it would have taken if Microsoft hadn't jumped into the console fray. Neither Sony nor Nintendo were doing anything at all to encourage or entice PC developers to make the switch, and they certainly didn't do anything to make it easy for them. Microsoft did these things. Without them it could have taken a MUCH longer time to get to the point we're at today. Nobody can know for sure how long it would have been EXACTLY. I said it before, this thread reads like a bunch of people trying to nitpick on Jerykk when for the most part they agree with him. He is not saying "OMG PC WOULD NEVER HAVE GONE CONSOLE" like you guys are pretending he is... he is speaking of what the catalyst was, and how no one knows what would have happened and when if not for that catalyst. It is a pretty freaking common sense statement to make, and everyone here is just twisting it to make it seem like it is something else. I mean, now we're arguing about exclusive games? How is that at all relevant? The point is PC gaming used to be the lead platform for FPS and RPG games, and now it is the Xbox, and Microsoft was mostly responsible for that. If MS had not done so, maybe someone else would have, but no one knows when or how well. That's it. It amazes people can't just agree with that and move on, they have to battle Jerykk out of some misplaced hostility syndrome. This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 16:48.

168.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 16:28

Zipper. Hey, look at that, they jumped on the PS2. True. That's one. Or Titan Studios, who may be new but are almost exclusively people straight from PC development. That's reaching a bit. Titan Studios has only made one game. They may have members from the PC industry but most devs do. SOE Seattle, from The Matrix and Planetside to The Agency (PS3 lead) It's a Sony studio and they don't make PS3-exclusive MMOs. So basically you have one third-party developer with a record of PC games becoming a Playstation developer. Shall I list all the former PC developers that now develop with 360 as the lead?

167.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 16:23

The only title with any real meaning is exclusive. The fact that all systems get the games regardless of the dev model(which doesnt matter to the end consumer at all unless it affects game quality) in the majority of cases. Incorrect. There's a very obvious difference between a game designed for the PC and game designed for a console. In the majority of multiplatform games, 360 is the lead platform and the game is designed for it. That means it's designed around the memory limitations, the disc capacity limitations, the videocard limitations, the CPU limitations and the controller limitations, as well as the general expectations of what a console audience wants. A PC game that doesn't have PC as the lead platform is a port. Compared to what exactly? Naming off some big name titles present on the console platforms as well isn't convincing evidence of anything. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove here. You stated that having console ports of PC games before the Xbox was evidence that the focus was already shifting to consoles. Now console games are getting ported more frequently to the PC and you claim it means nothing. Try to be consistent.

166.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 16:17

Beamer

Uh, which PC developers are now PS3-exclusive developers..?

Zipper.
Hey, look at that, they jumped on the PS2.
Or Titan Studios, who may be new but are almost exclusively people straight from PC development.
SOE Seattle, from The Matrix and Planetside to The Agency (PS3 lead)




------------- Music for the discerning: http://www.deathwishinc.com http://www.hydrahead.com http://www.painkillerrecords.com

165.

Re: MS "Destroyed" FASA

Aug 31, 2009, 16:08

I don't think you understand what multiplatform development actually entails. There is one lead platform. The game is designed for this platform and this platform is the focus of development. The other versions are simply ported during development. In the vast majority of cases, 360 (not PC or PS3) is the lead platform.

Oh I understand quite well, I am simply pointing out that they are meaningless labels. The only title with any real meaning is exclusive. The fact that all systems get the games regardless of the dev model(which doesnt matter to the end consumer at all unless it affects game quality) in the majority of cases.

t's true that the number of multiplatform games has increased greatly since the 90s. However, it's also true that more of these games have been showing up on the PC as well. The number of console games getting ported to the PC is definitely increasing.

Compared to what exactly? Naming off some big name titles present on the console platforms as well isn't convincing evidence of anything. That's the norm, that's what the industry wants. You're not getting anything except parity because no one wants to waste money making several versions of the game completely separate.




Playing: Super Mario 3D Land, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS Watching: Hannibal, Community, Life

164.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 15:54

No because what you consider ports are in fact multiplatform titles released for most or all platforms. I don't think you understand what multiplatform development actually entails. There is one lead platform. The game is designed for this platform and this platform is the focus of development. The other versions are simply ported during development. In the vast majority of cases, 360 (not PC or PS3) is the lead platform. Nothing's really "increasing" either, the industry in general has simply shifted away from having many third party exclusives. It's true that the number of multiplatform games has increased greatly since the 90s. However, it's also true that more of these games have been showing up on the PC as well. The number of console games getting ported to the PC is definitely increasing. Capcom, for example, is now porting almost all of their games to PC. Bionic Commando, Devil May Cry 4, Resident Evil 5, Street Fighter 4, Dark Void, Dead Rising 2, etc. EA is porting more games as well. BF: Bad Company 2, Mercenaries 2, etc. The first entries in those series were not ported to PC. Square is porting more games too. Last Remnant, Front Mission Evolved, etc. I'm sure FF13 will eventually show up on PC too. Why else does Microsoft need to "BRIBE" devs and pubs to release exclusive content? Microsoft doesn't need to do anything. They choose to bribe devs and pubs for exclusives because that's how MS rolls. They want everyone to game exclusively on the 360 and the best way to do that is to make sure people can't play the games they want to play on other platforms.

163.

Re: MS "Destroyed" FASA

Aug 31, 2009, 15:34

I've already addressed this flawed logic numerous time during this debate

No you haven't and I'll defeat that point below.

In the past few years, the PC has received an increasing amount of console ports and the quality of these ports has been increasing as well. Does this mean that console developers are shifting their focus to PC and that, one day, PC will inevitably be the lead platform again?

No because what you consider ports are in fact multiplatform titles released for most or all platforms. Nothing's really "increasing" either, the industry in general has simply shifted away from having many third party exclusives. Why else does Microsoft need to "BRIBE" devs and pubs to release exclusive content? Ohhh snap there it is again, your own argument working against you.




Playing: Super Mario 3D Land, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS Watching: Hannibal, Community, Life

162.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 15:20

If the Xbox is the sole reason for this, why are some PC devs making PS3 exclusive games? Uh, which PC developers are now PS3-exclusive developers..? Why is anyone bothering with the PS3, period? Same reason anyone bothers with the PC. Easy profit. Maximizing your potential audience increases sales. Multiplatform development makes this easy, since ports are cheap and low-risk. This is why so many PC games were ported to console (and vice versa) before the Xbox came out too. This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 15:26.

161.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 15:18

Ports that increased in both quality and number as console technology advanced as people have been saying for quite awhile now. I've already addressed this flawed logic numerous time during this debate. In the past few years, the PC has received an increasing amount of console ports and the quality of these ports has been increasing as well. Does this mean that console developers are shifting their focus to PC and that, one day, PC will inevitably be the lead platform again?

160.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 14:57

Wowbagger_TIP

If the Xbox is the sole reason for this, why are some PC devs making PS3 exclusive games? Is it a PC dev making a PS3 game, or a developer that happens to have a PS3-focused team in addition to one or more PC-focused teams that is making the game?

159.

Re: MS

Aug 31, 2009, 14:40