xXBatmanXx wrote on Oct 7, 2011, 22:34:
Why not make the PC the leading platform - isn't it easier to DUMB DOWN the game than to make it better after it is so shitty for a console?
Makes no sense. Wish I had never bought it.
I won't buy anymore of their games after his statements.
I would say no its not easier to scale down than to scale up. When you make a design decision around a certain performance or system characteristic, the whole design revolves around that. So it would be easier to design for the lesser power system and then scale up than to make a design for a high power system and then try to make it work on something less powerful. Its like trying to make a modern game play on a Pentium 1, the results wont be good.
In this case, the "best" way to approach the console and PC issue is to have two separate engines. One for consoles and one for the PC. This way each can be tailored to fit the system better. But now your talking even more development time, more people, and a lot more money. People can cry "greed" all they want but these games are not cheap to make. You want to reach the biggest audience possible and the consoles have a huge market share. I am not a console fan but its just the way it is right now.
I think the issue here is when they started Rage's development, consoles and the PC were about equal in performance. But obviously PC will always out scale consoles faster.Just a shame really. I have yet to finish the game but I don't feel its as bad as everyone is claiming. Its different.