eRe4s3r wrote on Jun 8, 2012, 12:01:
I cringe every time I see comments about Rage saying it has a "great engine" and "looks gorgeous". It was designed for consoles, and is so completely outdated on PC that even the original Unreal engine is superior.
Sepharo wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 08:39:StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 04:04:
The common sense difference there is Coke is always the same fucking thing, every time you have it.
Except when it isn't, and everyone (rightly) throws a shit fit.
Kind of the point of that analogy I assume and you walked right into it.
Verno wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 08:51:StingingVelvet wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 03:50:
Because there are a lot of RPG fans like me who only game on PC, and could not play this game otherwise. I know people on here will rip this game a new asshole for basically being an emulated console game, but I would rather play the game than not.
Having actually played both games on the consoles, I think they're wonderful but not so good that you'd want a shitty port of them just for the sake of being able to play them. All of the port stuff sounds ominous, I'd caution people to wait until other users or a PC centric site like RPS reports in about the port quality.
Jerykk wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 03:59:
As for my analogy, I'm not really sure what you find wacky about it. Makes perfect sense, really. Expectations are determined by labels. That's why labels are important. We rely on labels to make life easier. If I recognize a label, I expect it to be accurate. If I buy a Coke, it should taste like a Coke, not a Pepsi or Dr. Pepper. Likewise, if I buy a Splinter Cell game, it should play like a stealth game, as established by all the other games that carry that label.
You may not care about labels and that's fine but you should at least understand why others consider them important.
DeadlyAccurate wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 11:47:
Sure you can. I can rant all day long about how offensive I personally find the female armor models in TERA. That doesn't mean I think they should be legally required to change or censor them, and if someone suggested it, I would argue just as long about how wrong that is. Doesn't mean I'd play the game, though.
I didn't see anyone saying these games should be censored or that the devs' right to free speech should be violated. But unless you're the government, asking someone to tone it down isn't censorship; it's consumer opinion.
Seems like a lot of these titles are Ubisoft's. I don't play or follow their titles any more due to their DRM policies, and it makes me curious to know if they're trying to drum up sales with some good ol' fashioned titillation.
D_K_night wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 02:48:
If you know you cannot do the port with all your heart and soul into it, and know honestly that it's an amazing port, why do it at all?
Are you even going to make your money back with the port? If the answer is probably no...why even do it?
killer_roach wrote on Jun 7, 2012, 03:03:
RE4 and Onimusha 3 were disastrous ports to PC, but they've gotten better recently. They've been one of the better Japanese developers in terms of developing for the PC, but until recently it was pretty slapdash work.
ViRGE wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 10:23:
A pair of really good articles from RPS today, particularly the one on violence. Why the heck is everything a realistic ultraviolent manshooter this year? Not to bemoan violence as evil, but it's like eating ice cream for dinner every night; it lacks variety.
Jerykk wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 04:59:
I feel it's fairly important to hold publishers and/or developers accountable for their marketing decisions. Labels are important, as they determine expectations and are thus used to judge a product's success in meeting those expectations. If I order a steak at a restaurant, I expect to get a steak, not a salad. The salad might be pretty tasty but it's not what I ordered. I don't care if the restaurant wanted to try something different or appeal to a larger demographic. I ordered a steak. Same thing applies to videogames. If I buy a Splinter Cell, I'm expecting a stealth game because that's what all the previous games have been. That's why I enjoyed the previous games and that's why the brand has any meaning to me. If you give me a shooter instead, I'm not going to be happy because that's not what I wanted, even if it ends up being a perfectly competent shooter.
InBlack wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 03:47:
Dark Forces: Jedi Knight was such a brilliant game, though the gunplay and lightsaber play was much improved in the sequels, the first one was the best IMO. The level design, atomsphere, music, story everything felt right and really immersed you in the world.
No one makes shooters like that anymore.
Hell even the first Dark Forces (in the Doom engine no less) would put 95% of todays shooters to shame.
Tumbler wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 12:24:
Hey guys, Star Wars is so awesome we can just take other games and slap star wars skins on them and people will love it! We made an MMO, people loved it! We made a God of War game, people loved it! Now lets make an uncharted game and call it star wars! People will love it because it's star wars! Everyone Loves Star Wars!
Jerykk wrote on Jun 5, 2012, 12:36:
If Conviction wasn't an SC game, I probably would have been more forgiving. However, if you're going to attach yourself to a certain brand, you need to meet the expectations that brand has established. Conviction failed to do this.