PDA

View Full Version : Hello, im a dumb xbox user who likes smashing buttons and shooting stufz!



Prohass
5th Jul 2003, 06:44
I like it how the majority of people on this forum have claimed that the PC version will suffer a dumbing down as a result of its xbox counterpart being dumbed down for xbox users.

Why would it be dumbed down? The only thing that would change would be the controll setup and graphics. Xbox is the console closest to a PC, the majority of people who own xboxs are serious gamers, who weren't lured by the casual gaming properties of the ps2.

Xbox is the thinking mans console, and it has the most PC-like games on any console. The way some of you casually pass it off as a system that inferior dumbass idiot gamers use infuriates me.

There is so little evidence to go on that these assumptions have no grounding and insult xbox gamers. Morrowind wasn't 'dumbed down' for xbox. And I do understand the fact that the PC and xbox versions of DX2 are being made side-by-side, and that is why some of you fear a dumbing down.

But there has been no indication that the system that replaces the skills system will be less advanced than DX1. Eidios are intelligent enough to realise that xbox owners can recognise a good game and can handle one that requires a little brain power.

Loreleye
5th Jul 2003, 10:31
The thing is my friend, that if a game is made for a console, it cant be to complex, since the keybord do have a hell of a lot more buttons than a gampad can. and therefore I could never have wrote this message so nicely!
For a long time ago I owned a Sega megadrive, 16 bit! I know that a game like simcity never could be on that console. And therefore I would never think that a game like europa universalis would be as fun on a console than it is on PC. the genre which do make the difference is strategic, you can say that you could play civ3 on a console, but I dont think that would be as fun. It might not be absolutely objectiv, but we can never forgett the mind you know. You have to agree that the gameplay have to be difference in a game on console, then it is on a pc game, if you dont talk about the typical console games like racing fighting and 2d platforms! You dont got a mouse nor a keyboard on a console, though I wonder why?

Trollslayer
5th Jul 2003, 11:06
The controls will be streamlined to be more simple, but still present enough to go around. I don't see the problem some people pose, that the controls will be dumbed down - its fairly redundant saying console and pc controls are different, and also, how can DX2 not allow you to customize controls? There will definetely be an option. I personally don't want 30+ keys to tackle if the game is action-based. If this was a simulator, or a god-game of sorts, that would be fine, but its an FPS, and FPS, save some exceptions, don't need a high number of buttons to be pressed. If there's one thing that detracts from gameplay in an action-based game, its that you have to fumble for buttons.

"Dumbed down"? No. Simplified? Yes.

Lawnboy360
5th Jul 2003, 13:21
If you think our complaints are bad, don't go to the Ion Storm forums!

But I'm sure you want a quote :
"And then people say console games aren't dumbed down versions of PC games....... It played an important role in the PC version and if its out...well I think I have said more than once that 'streamlining' is another term for 'dumbing down for Xbox'. "

Anyway...

As for the XBox being the thinking man's console, remember that Dead or Alive : Xtreme Beach Volleyball sold pretty damn well. Maybe *you* are a thinking man, but I don't think you can speak for all the XBox owners.

Trollslayer
5th Jul 2003, 13:52
Originally posted by Lawnboy360
"And then people say console games aren't dumbed down versions of PC games....... It played an important role in the PC version and if its out...well I think I have said more than once that 'streamlining' is another term for 'dumbing down for Xbox'. "


Im sure the person who said that feels proud of that line, however, just because he/she/it has some kind of bias with adjusting a game for a specific platform, that doesn't mean his/her/its line of thought is correct.

A developer's job is to develop a game taking into measure a platform's pros and cons. Its not like they should forget about those pros and cons, and decide to place 30 hotkeys in a platform which can only amount to use about half of that, at best. Its being developed for both platforms, so i think its fairly obvious an amount of testing and adjustment in the controls department will take place. That person in the quote is acting like consoles only have a directional pad and two buttons, and that the PC version will follow that standard. The person in said quote can bleat all he/she/it wants, if the product isn' t to his/her/its liking, then kindly avoid it and move on to the next.

Note I'm not even saying that the control issue isn't important, merely stating that just because people took a liking to the "dumbed down" catch phrase, said phrase isn't a letter of the law by which everyone should address this issue. Specially by people like those in the quote, who have no idea of what kind of procedures are being taken by Ion Storm to assure a good functioning and use of the controls by PC users, and think they know all about the gaming industry just because they read some interviews, reviews and because they have an internet connection. :mad:

Yes, i'm nervous today. Too much caffeine.

Trollslayer
5th Jul 2003, 13:53
And no i don't think the complaints in this board are bad, i've dealt with far worse in the past, actually.

Skylink
5th Jul 2003, 14:11
Look what they've done to Full Throttle2 and to the Brotherhood of Steel. Yack

Lawnboy360
5th Jul 2003, 14:30
Trollslayer,
it seems you assumed my post where adressed(?) to you, they were to Prohass. I don't think they're really dumbing down the game myself; the lack of skills, the lack of location-based damage for the player character, the different inventory, the HUD, etc, doesn't matter much to me. The story/dialogue/music/atmosphere is what is important to me, and I won't be able to judge that until I play the game.

Trollslayer
5th Jul 2003, 17:31
Originally posted by Lawnboy360
Trollslayer,
it seems you assumed my post where adressed(?) to you, they were to Prohass.

Actually i wasn't, i was actually just adressing that quote. I wasn't adressing you back or anything. Sorry if it seemed that way.

Bio Denton
5th Jul 2003, 23:56
Originally posted by Loreleye
For a long time ago I owned a Sega megadrive, 16 bit! I know that a game like simcity never could be on that console.

Uh, it was on the SNES...

Bio

"The I Hate Hamsters & Wooha Rules Conspiracy"

Leo
6th Jul 2003, 08:32
simple test: what would you prefer better when getting in your car:
a keyboard controlled car [A Z gears, arrow keys steering etc]
OR
a gamepag, joystick

Prohass
6th Jul 2003, 10:48
How is that a simple test? Its subjective so has no definitive awsner. If your going by anything, most racing games are on console. So yeah, just adressing that fairly strange point you made there.

And yes DOAX sold a lot, but mainly in Japan, and no offense to anyone whos japanese, but they got some pretty funked up tastes. Most people who have played that horrific game are in agreement that its utter crap.

When talking about xbox being the thinking mans console, I mean it has more intuitive games being developed for it. DX2 and Halflife are exclusive in the console market to it, and thats not just due to its technical capabilities, as Gamecube has roughly the same (or almost as good). Morrowind sold exeedingly well, enough for them to warrent the release of the expansion packs for xbox.

People (and I know im generalising here but bear with me) who buy ps2s often buy it because its the 'default' console, if you catch my drift. The reason why it initially sold so much, is due to its DVD capabilities and grounding from the first console.

People who buy xbox however, buy it strictly for gaming, and the feature of LIVE attracts gamers who dont just game casually, but are serious players who take their gaming experiences seriously.

In response to the issue of the keyboard mouse vs the game pad, I dont see their being a need for more than 11 buttons, i mean, aside from the fact that you wont be able to type in your name as fast with the console version.

CluelessMorgan
6th Jul 2003, 18:00
On the test: Keyboard. In gta vice city on the computer I drive like a pro on the ps2 I am the side walk horror.

I have played many games and I personaly dont like consol ports, something always get screwed up. (enter the matrix for example and vice city has its problems too) But thats just my opinion

Big Ragu
6th Jul 2003, 18:50
Originally posted by Leo
simple test: what would you prefer better when getting in your car:
a keyboard controlled car [A Z gears, arrow keys steering etc]
OR
a gamepag, joystick

I'd go out and buy a computer steering wheel. duh :rolleyes:

Bio Denton
6th Jul 2003, 21:48
"Thinking Man's Console"

What does that mean?! Every console has it's share of retarded and kiddie games on it, the PC also.

I think it's people deluding themselves; "Damn, the GameCube is cheaper and has games I like too, but hey, this is the Thinking Man's console!" No it isn't!

The XBox happens to be the most up-to-date console, with regards to technology, but name a game that requires a lot of skill in it, really. You got Racers, FPS, Plaform, Kiddie games and then Wierd games. A few RPGs, ok, fair enough, but true RPGs don't require skill, they require knowledge. Some console simulation games are ok too.

I had the NES, SNES, PS and PS2, just for the RPGs. I'll probably get the GameCube for the next line of Final Fantasies, but games other than RPGs on consoles are second rate, in my opinion; They lack depth.

Bio

"The I Hate Hamsters & Wooha Rules Conspiracy"

Lawnboy360
6th Jul 2003, 21:59
games other than RPGs on consoles are second rate, in my opinion; They lack depth.

FPSs in general don't seem very deep to me, PC or console.

Trollslayer
6th Jul 2003, 23:49
Originally posted by Bio Denton
but true RPGs don't require skill, they require knowledge.

Actually, "true" RPGs require both knowledge and skill.

Prohass
7th Jul 2003, 02:11
Originally posted by CluelessMorgan
On the test: Keyboard. In gta vice city on the computer I drive like a pro on the ps2 I am the side walk horror.

I have played many games and I personaly dont like consol ports, something always get screwed up. (enter the matrix for example and vice city has its problems too) But thats just my opinion

well everyone else drives much easier on the ps2 version, it really depends what one you played first, or if you play consoles a lot or PCs a lot.

And Enter The Matrix was crap on all systems, including PC, it was just a crap game. And it wasn't ported, it was multiplatformed, and if you look at most review sites on the net, the xbox version ranks up their with the PC version, sometimes even better.

And do you mean ports from console to PC or the other way around? Since Vice city was good on PC and ps2, and it was ported from ps2 to PC.

And to the dude that asked me to name games that require thinking and skill on the xbox, i allready named them. And any game requires skill, so i dont know what you were on about there.

Breadman
7th Jul 2003, 18:19
Originally posted by Prohass
well everyone else drives much easier on the ps2 version, it really depends what one you played first, or if you play consoles a lot or PCs a lot.


That sentence really goes against itself. You are implying that he is the only one that played it on the PC first and that he is the only one that plays PCs more than consoles. How'd I come up with this? Simply because "everyone else drives much easier on the ps2 version." Yeah, well I for one have never played the ps2 version of the game, and I can drive 100x better with the keyboard. I've even hooked my steering wheel up to my PC, and the keyboard is still better. Same goes for joystick. Okay, but yeah this is all just criticising when I really should be staying on topic...

Now that I made you think that I expect all console ports (and whatever you'd call this XBox/PC deal w/ DX:IW), I'll take a step back and say that I'm not too worried. We PC users will only need W, A, S, and D (movement), along with our mouse wheel (zooming), our left and right mouse buttons (firing and picking stuf up), an action key (could be the right mouse button even), and all of our numbers (for switching weapons). I cound a total of 18 buttons total there at the absolute max. Take out the number keys for weapon switching and you can just use "q" to scroll through the weapons like any other game, which brings it down to like 9 buttons max. Getting kind of consoley now? You really think you used a lot of buttons when playing Deus Ex1 on the PC... but in reality you didn't. A lot of those less-streamlined menu systems and stuff were interacted with by using the mouse to drag crap. The absolute only way I see Ion Storm being able to fail us PC users is if they take away the customizable controls and make us use our mouse to select everything and do everything. I don't think they'd do that to us, and if they do... I'll still buy the game. I just will be extremely displeased with it.

Talk about a huge paragraph that doesn't make a whole lotta sense... don't you hate it when you have a good thought but you just can't get it out?

NoNicknameForMe
7th Jul 2003, 20:29
Originally posted by Prohass
I like it how the majority of people on this forum have claimed that the PC version will suffer a dumbing down as a result of its xbox counterpart being dumbed down for xbox users.

Why would it be dumbed down? The only thing that would change would be the controll setup and graphics. Xbox is the console closest to a PC, the majority of people who own xboxs are serious gamers, who weren't lured by the casual gaming properties of the ps2.

Xbox is the thinking mans console, and it has the most PC-like games on any console. The way some of you casually pass it off as a system that inferior dumbass idiot gamers use infuriates me.

There is so little evidence to go on that these assumptions have no grounding and insult xbox gamers. Morrowind wasn't 'dumbed down' for xbox. And I do understand the fact that the PC and xbox versions of DX2 are being made side-by-side, and that is why some of you fear a dumbing down.

But there has been no indication that the system that replaces the skills system will be less advanced than DX1. Eidios are intelligent enough to realise that xbox owners can recognise a good game and can handle one that requires a little brain power.




Ion Storm is making the game.


I agree, PC Snobs are idiots with small a small ***** and who think girls are some rare creature that only lives in the land of Porn...

grow up kiddies.

Reanimated
8th Jul 2003, 00:09
Originally posted by NoNicknameForMe
Ion Storm is making the game.


I agree, PC Snobs are idiots with small a small ***** and who think girls are some rare creature that only lives in the land of Porn...

grow up kiddies.


LOL!!


Hey Breadman... I'm in Hsv, AL too!

Small world.

Trollslayer
8th Jul 2003, 00:40
Originally posted by NoNicknameForMe
and who think girls are some rare creature that only lives in the land of Porn...

But but but... they do!!!!!







Don't they???? :eek:

mikepayne666
8th Jul 2003, 01:17
Originally posted by Prohass Why would it be dumbed down? The only thing that would change would be the controll setup and graphics. Xbox is the console closest to a PC, the majority of people who own xboxs are serious gamers, who weren't lured by the casual gaming properties of the ps2.

ok listen im have all 3 systems and by far PS2 has the best games, its xbox user who were lured in by good graphics, how many good lengady games does xbox have?!?!? halo, um well thats pretty much it but ps2 got MGS, Final fantasy, GTA, tony hawk used to bee only for PS, PS has lots of stuff, plus when xbox has an exclusive, its usally remade for ps2 and has more stuff. take Splinter cell, it added more levels and more guns and stuff. all you xbox users ever say is "uh well its got good graphics" and sum times you say its got better games even though you never played PS2 but over your friends house for a little bit. so **** xbox lovers!!

TheDerf
8th Jul 2003, 02:48
I'm a proud owner of a PS2 but I will say that Xbox is better in every way over PS2 except for the controller size, and its games. You can always get a smaller controller for Xbox, sure, but what's a game console without games?

I'd like to be able to save my memory inside of the console instead of buying several memory cards that can only store a very limited amount of data. I'd like smoother running and more detailed graphics, and that can also be delivered by the Xbox, but first and foremost, I want some decent ****ing games. Halo was lots of fun, for a while, but I prefer shooting people over aliens (probably one of the reasons why I was attracted to Deus Ex). If it wasn't for Halo, Xbox would be a total failure.

Here's a webpage about this guy's opinion of the Xbox: (http://maddox.xmission.com/xbox_suckit.html)
Beware bad language and sugestive terms.

Prohass
8th Jul 2003, 10:52
Actually xbox does have good games, and since its purely subjective, you cant argue against that.

And to Mikepayne who was going on about splinter cell, first you were complaining about Xbox just having ps2 ports, then you say how great the ps2 port of splinter cell was. wtf?

Fable, DX2, HL2, Doom3, Morrowind GOTY edition, Halo 2, counterstrike, operation flashpoint. Games I, personally, am looking forward to for Xbox. There are plenty more, for many different tastes, so you cant say there are no good games comming out for xbox.

And xbox allready has a wide selection of games, some of them have done better than Halo, so Halo is not Xbox's surviving feature, its not even LIVE, and LIVE has managed to keep itself afloat without Halo.

And dont bash me for liking Xbox and regarding ps2 as a casual gamers console. It has 2 controller ports, the worst technical capabilities out of the lot, and relies on the sucess of the original to build its empire.

I like ps2, i like gamecube, I like Xbox the best, because of what its trying to achieve, a bridge of the gap between computer and console, between splitscreen battles and online 16 player tournemants. Xbox may not have brilliant games out at the moment, but it took the original PS 4 years to get off the ground, because it was a new console, with not many games and was being developed by a company that hadn't made any consoles before.

So before you go bashing the xbox for its slow start, think of what is to come, it will be the first console to be able to host MMORPGs, the full graphical power has not been explored (and graphics dont just mean purdy things, they mean physics systems and gameplay elements can be enhanced).

I own these games, Morrowind, Halo, Splinter Cell, DOA3, Yager, Deathrow, Timesplitters, Burnout 2. Each one has been just as fun as the ps2 games I have played, so there is no reason to find either one a more enjoyable console. However, the limitations I have seen in ps2s capabilities are more apparent with every passing day, I cant play 4 player timesplitters on my ps2 without forking out the extra money for an adapter. Where as with my xbox I can hop on live and play mech assault against 10 people. Or play Halo 4 player, or 8 player LAN, which is something that still amazes me after 2 years of playing Halo.

Kinda got off track here. Just wanted to say, dont dismiss consoles as nothing but vessles for sports games and ****ty ports, they can, and will be, so much more.

mikepayne666
8th Jul 2003, 19:03
what there are no xbox ports!! and allthem games you mentioned are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better on pc, yeah i admit that ps2 dont have the best graphics but who the hell cares!!! which would you rather have a horble game w/ no story, but it has the greatest graphics in the world(which is most xbox games), or a game w/ the best story ever and great gameplay that has ok graphics (which is most ps2 games)

Lawnboy360
8th Jul 2003, 21:30
game w/ the best story ever and great gameplay that has ok graphics (which is most ps2 games)

Most ps2 games? Name them please.

mikepayne666
8th Jul 2003, 22:07
im just sayin xbox is all about the graphics, ps2 works hard for good graphics but it dont matter as much, as long as you got a good story, take MGS, i didnt mean most i just said it with out thinkin, but i have all 3 system and my list goes as this:
best gameplay/ story:
PS2
GameCube
Xbox (gamecube and xbox are the same)

best graphics:
Xbox
ps2
gamecube

Prohass
8th Jul 2003, 23:37
You havent done your research well have you mikepayne?

First off, Gamecube has infinitely better graphiced games than ps2. Secondly, you can't categorise the stories of games by their console. Some may argue Splinter Cells story was better than MGS2, I find them both good in their own way. Also, games are not allways based on excellent stories. Besides, Morrowind has one of the most extensive stories any console game has ever seen, it takes like 40 hours to beat. And yes it is on PC, and better on PC, but my point is, its not on ps2.

And ps2 works harder? Who are you to judge who works hard when designing games? Xbox isn't a magic maker, it still takes a lot of effort to make good graphiced games.

As I said in my previous post, if you read it all, and not just immediately went to 'post reply' after you read my response to your post, give xbox some breathing room. Its a new console, by a company that many believe do not belong in the console market, and its trying new things and trying to achieve something never seen in consoles previously.

If any of this sounds familiar, its because the original playstation did the same thing, it took 4 years to really become popular at all. Many people saw it as a non-console company (sony) trying to cash in, how times have changed haven't they?

Lawnboy360
9th Jul 2003, 00:01
Technically the XBox is a good console, but if I go to http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/simpleratings.asp , and look at the top30 for the XBox, I see Halo, Splinter Cell, Timesplitters 2, MechAssault, MGS2, Morrowind, Hitman 2, and a bunch of racing/sports games. A total of 7 interesting titles, 8 if you like rail-shooters (panzer dragoon orta) = :/

It seems there's quite a few promising upcoming titles (Fable, Halo2...), but still... with the XBox technical similarities with the PC, there should be much more titles coming out on both.

Prohass
9th Jul 2003, 00:04
Both what? And I have previously mentioned many more games comming out on xbox than just fable and Halo2.

and 8 interesting games is just as good as the ps2s, or gamecubes. Not including games that are 3 years old more morso on the ps2.

Lawnboy360
9th Jul 2003, 00:12
Both what?

On both PC and XBox. Fable could come out on PC, and Vampires - The Masquerade - Bloodlines could come out on XBox (and probably will).


and 8 interesting games is just as good as the ps2s, or gamecubes.

I know, recently I tought about buying a console because it's so much cheaper than a PC, so I looked at interesting titles from the top30 on gamerankings, I came out with 14 on PC, 7 on XBox, 4 on PS2, and 7 on Gamecube. Of course this represents my personal tastes...

Prohass
9th Jul 2003, 00:16
But personal tastes are everything, since in the end, nobody else can convince you that a game you like is crap. And Fable is Xbox exclusive according to its trailer, but I wouldn't be suprised if it ended up comming out on PC. If it does, thats cool, more people to share the love with, hehe.

Lawnboy360
9th Jul 2003, 00:30
And Fable is Xbox exclusive according to its trailer

If you're talking about some sort of "only on XBox" logo at the end of the trailer, sometimes that only means it's the only -console- to have this game. However, so far, I've never heard anything about Fable possibly coming out on PC.


If it does, thats cool, more people to share the love with, hehe.
Isn't sharing the love the whole point of the gaming industry? ;)

Prohass
9th Jul 2003, 00:33
The PC world is all about sharing the love, but sadly, all to often the console world becomes a battle of the fanboys, and its all to tempting to get caught up in yet another console V console argument that leads nowhere and leaves you feeling tired and stupid.

TheDerf
9th Jul 2003, 00:41
Originally posted by mikepayne666
best graphics:
Xbox
ps2
gamecube [/B]

I heard that the gamecube can run better graphics than the xbox, but PS2 is still sucks. In a game like Timesplitters 2, xbox couldn't handle a lot of the graphics that gamecube could. (electronic gaming monthly)

Lawnboy360
9th Jul 2003, 00:56
Technical specs; of course that doesn't tell anything about the features of the graphics processor (gpu).

Xbox----------------------
CPU : 733 mhz
GPU : 233 mhz (nVidia)
Total memory : 64 mb

PS2-----------------------
CPU : 295 mhz
GPU : 147.5 mhz
Total memory : 32 mb

Gamecube---------------
CPU : 405 mhz
GPU : 202.5 mhz (ATi)
Total memory : 43 mb

crimson_stallion
9th Jul 2003, 01:54
Originally posted by Lawnboy360
If you think our complaints are bad, don't go to the Ion Storm forums!

But I'm sure you want a quote :
"And then people say console games aren't dumbed down versions of PC games....... It played an important role in the PC version and if its out...well I think I have said more than once that 'streamlining' is another term for 'dumbing down for Xbox'. "

Anyway...

As for the XBox being the thinking man's console, remember that Dead or Alive : Xtreme Beach Volleyball sold pretty damn well. Maybe *you* are a thinking man, but I don't think you can speak for all the XBox owners.

I don't think you can say that all pc users are *thinking* men either. Most people who I know who own x-boxes have some dencent knowledge of computers. Most people i know who are computer illiterate have playstations. Obvisously this is not the case for ALL users. How many stupid computer illiterate sit around playing the sims and sim city and the like. games like barbie party or whatever lol. All systems have their *dumb* users, and I cant make it a fact as i dont know a list/description of every buyer who bought an xbox, but I can confirm that every friend/relative of mine who has an x-box has some decent knowledge of computers and is relatively smart.

I think the fact that the x-box is a microsoft system, added to the fact that is the most computer-like console scares alot of computer illiterate people away. Alot of them are [practically scared of computers and dont want anything to do with it, and think of the playstation as a console and the xbox as a little computer. Many parents who have limited computer knowledge dont want to buy an xbox for their little kids because the "computer like" reputation makes them think it might be too complicated for them. I cant prove this, but it's my theory based on my general thoughts as well as based on the buying patterns of people i know.

Playstation type buyers also tend to hate the xbox's chunky controllers, after being used to the tiny (terrible if you ask me) PS ones. While pc controllers tend to be chunky, and even the keyboard/mouse setup is a more relaxed spread out controll style, so many pc people prefer the chinky control to the tiny cramped PS one.

Personaly, i am a big pc person, i will always buy on pc over console as long as my computer can run the pc version. However, i also have an x-box, and i can confirm it is an excellent console, good games tend to run very smoothly on the controls (halo, sega gt, etc) and the graphics are very high quality without the major slowdowns. Unlike the PS2 etc, it has a hard drive so you dotn have to keep buying memory cars. It's probablyt he most practical gaming system iMO.

Pc's arent for everyone. Even if you know your stuff, unless you are very sound financially, you will not be able to afford to have a computer that will run every game perfectly for a year. Such a system probably doesn not exist. I can almost guarantee that a top spec system atm will chug a little on some games released in a years time. However, in a year or 2 (if they are still around) an xbox will still play very game smoothly and efficienctly. The downside is that it doessnt give the option of upgradability generally, and so the games by then will be limited by the capabilities of the system. A perfect example was perfect dark on the N64. it was a great game, at the time had excellent graphics, but the 64 couldnt handle it as well as many would have liked, and slowdowns were very common (as were graphical reductions in split screen mode etc).

In the end, if you have a good job that gives you the cash to be able to afford to upgrade every year (which you pretty much have to to never have a obscolete system), (or if you have rich parents)and if you dont care for sports or fighting games, then the PC is definately the best option.

If you arent so fortunate (i'm a uni student and dotn ahve time for a job) then you might only be able to afford an upgrade every 2 or so years (maybe even close to 3). If that is the case, you are better off having a computer and a console (such as an x-box) so thatyou can use teh computer for soem great older classic games (deus ex, etc) and for other tasts (word processing, image editing, internet etc) and use the xbox for newer games.

As you can see from my specs my system isnt great atm, ive had it about 2 years, and it will be close to another year before i will be able to afford an upgrade. This system today runs all games, but alot of them will pass out and die if you try high details high res and 32 bit colour. People like me have to bascially rely on game designers to create efficient, hardware friendly engines, or play our x-box's.

Another console advantage is that never once has my x-box crashed during a game leading me to think "$hite i should have saved!" and feeling like throwing the computer over the back fence. It doesnt need scandisk runs, defragmenting, or the like. It's essentially maintainance free.

Main line : everyone has different needs. Many people who have x-boxes also have pc's, so calling x-box users stupid is pretty stupid in itself, because you are indirectly calling pc users stupid. If i can find new games that a re great that run decent on my system then ill buy pc over xbox. When i get taht upgrade, if i can run DE:IW and half life 2 ill be happy. whatever i cant run, ill get on xbox. simple. how abotu we just respect the preferences of others, rather then insulting them because they think diffrent to us for a change? We all have diffeent fingerprints, different minds, and different preferences. get used to it.

Prohass
9th Jul 2003, 02:22
Crimson_Stallion you articulated perfectly what I was trying to get across. I agree with you 100%. And like you, I have a 2 year old computer which is very similar to yours, and am unable to get my momey and daddy to fork out the price of upgrades needed to keep up with games.

Xboxs supliment PC gaming, because you can allways be sure that the game your playing was optimised and looks the same as your mates. Also, I have never had a crash on Morrowind on Xbox, and oh dear lord the amount of times its crashed on my PC (and my flatmates PC, which is quite a beast, is no different, it still crashes like a Nascar into the sidewall).

Basically, I agree with everything you said, well done.

Lawnboy360
9th Jul 2003, 13:01
I don't think you can say that all pc users are *thinking* men either.

That's why I didn't say that. ;)

As for the crashes, a friend of mine as a XBox and it did crash occasionally in Morrowind, and there were some noticeable slowdowns.

My current computer was bought in November 1999, P3 450 mhz, 64 mb, and integrated graphics. Upgraded to 320 mb and GeForce 2 mx summer 2001, for a cost of, like, 150$.
Definitely not cutting-edge, but I was able to play many 2002 releases, like Warcraft 3, GTA3, Medal of Honor, Age of Mythology, Mafia and Freedom Force.
So a lifetime of 3 years, with cheap upgrades along the way is tolerable, and I can always play the few games I missed (like Morrowind) when I upgrade.

Stupid thing is, I have plenty of money to buy a new computer; the problem will be convincing my parents... I really don't look forward to that, as the 150$ upgrade was pretty damn hard... I already know what it will be like... "But it's only 4 years old!" :rolleyes:

mikepayne666
10th Jul 2003, 01:07
it only crashes cause you got an old computer get new **** and it wont crash my computer has never crashed once and neither has any of my games and if your gonna pay for a bunch of game that will be out dated very fast on xbox why not use it for comp parts , save your money, just buy the really good games that come out for xbox ( which not is to often)

Lawnboy360
10th Jul 2003, 01:26
it only crashes cause you got an old computer get new **** and it wont crash my computer has never crashed once and neither has any of my games and if your gonna pay for a bunch of game that will be out dated very fast on xbox why not use it for comp parts , save your money, just buy the really good games that come out for xbox ( which not is to often)

Wow. Only one sentence. If you can call that a sentence... ;)

Big Ragu
10th Jul 2003, 01:35
Originally posted by Lawnboy360
That's why I didn't say that. ;)


Stupid thing is, I have plenty of money to buy a new computer; the problem will be convincing my parents... I really don't look forward to that, as the 150$ upgrade was pretty damn hard... I already know what it will be like... "But it's only 4 years old!" :rolleyes:

I'm glad my dad upadates his computer almost as often as me. I have a 1500 athlon with a GForce 2 card. But, I'm buying ,in a week, a new 3.0ghz Intel with 800mhz bus, and a Radeon 9800 Pro.

And yes I earned all the money that will be paying for it.

crimson_stallion
10th Jul 2003, 02:55
Originally posted by mikepayne666
ok listen im have all 3 systems and by far PS2 has the best games, its xbox user who were lured in by good graphics, how many good lengady games does xbox have?!?!? halo, um well thats pretty much it but ps2 got MGS, Final fantasy, GTA, tony hawk used to bee only for PS, PS has lots of stuff, plus when xbox has an exclusive, its usally remade for ps2 and has more stuff. take Splinter cell, it added more levels and more guns and stuff. all you xbox users ever say is "uh well its got good graphics" and sum times you say its got better games even though you never played PS2 but over your friends house for a little bit. so **** xbox lovers!!

I'll hand it to you that GTA3 is great, but the PC version absolutely annihalates teh PS2 version.

Final Fantasy to me is a very sad game (just my preference). I just dont dig the while little blonde pansy guy with a shword double his size who goes fighting cartoony monsters that look more like fuzzy toys then dangerous enemies.

Tony hawk is on all systems and is does not appeal to me whatsoever because of the subjet on which its based. The only PS2 games i would go for if i had a ps2 would be GT and MGS. I'd get GTA3 on pc. I've played tekken 4 ( think it was 4, the latest one) on my cousins PS2 and Dead or alive on xbox absolutely kills it (in gameplay not just graphics). Sega GT IMO is a better game then GT (it has less cars, but the handling characteristics, sound effects and graphics are all far better, as is the xbox control IMO). You may say its only a graphics thing, but features like graphics and sound contribute greatly to the immersion factor, and thus the enjoyment. Whats this about great stories? My freind went on about the great story in Syphon Filter, when he explained it i realised it was basically a big ripoff of rainbow 6 (the story that is). The cars in Grand tourismo handle with a serious lack of realism. It feels like an arcade game more then a simulation IMO. Every car seems to just understeer to hell and all cars feel almost the same. If you play Sega GT on xbox, you will see that every car feels unique in its handling depending o nwhetehr its rear drive, 4wd, front drive, the age, etc. All upgrades make a REAL difference, not just making the car faster. Standard suspensions on most cars have big bodyroll, and on stock tyres you will have limits as to how hard you can push the car. Turbo cars have the turbo whoosh, boost guages, etc.

Halo is not just a grphical game, the gameplay is excellent as are controls and interface (when you get used to them). Personally i like the chunkiness of the xbox controls. When i use a ps2 one all the buttons are too close together, and feel cheapy. The analog controls are pretty bad interms of range of inputs, etc. The need to buy countledd memory cards is just plain annoying and a waste of money, and without them you cant enjoy the games.

Every review ive seen of games on both PS2 and Xbox have given a better ratign to the xbox version (the ones ive seen anyway), and the display seems more fluid and the frame rates smoother. Playstation 2 is simply a generation behind in terms of technology, and this efects experiences. You can say a top line pc is nothign special over an old oen because the games jsut have better graphics and arent more enjoyuable then those old pixelised pac man type games, but fact is you want the latest graphics and sound, not just entertaining gameplay (which i dotn think many PS2 games have anyway). Generally, xbox is superior. Of course it comes down to taste, and for this reason you cant say all games on one sytstem are better then those on another. I prefer xbox games, you may prefer PS2 games. That is a taste thing, it's subjective. f judging the console itself, on features, power, etc, the xbox IS superior. On the other hand, PC is superior again.

crimson_stallion
10th Jul 2003, 02:58
Originally posted by mikepayne666
im just sayin xbox is all about the graphics, ps2 works hard for good graphics but it dont matter as much, as long as you got a good story, take MGS, i didnt mean most i just said it with out thinkin, but i have all 3 system and my list goes as this:
best gameplay/ story:
PS2
GameCube
Xbox (gamecube and xbox are the same)

best graphics:
Xbox
ps2
gamecube

PS2 graphics better then Gamecube? I think not...(my humble opinion)

Story wise i do also not consider PS2 as great as you seem to.

mikepayne666
10th Jul 2003, 03:01
thats cause GT was an arcade game

crimson_stallion
10th Jul 2003, 03:23
Originally posted by mikepayne666
it only crashes cause you got an old computer get new **** and it wont crash my computer has never crashed once and neither has any of my games and if your gonna pay for a bunch of game that will be out dated very fast on xbox why not use it for comp parts , save your money, just buy the really good games that come out for xbox ( which not is to often)

When i got my 1ghz athlon it was abotu the 2n fastest consumer processor on the market. I think at the time onlyt the 1.2 athlon was faster. At the time my 192mb or wram was also heaps as teh average then was i tihnk about 64-128. My Geforce DDr was also decent. Yet my computer crashed constantly. It's not abotu havign a faster computer. Computers dont crash because they are old/slow. Ive had a hell of alot of old computers (286, pentuim 90) that barely crashed and otehrs that did (k6, k6-2). Its about minimising software/hardware conflics, its about not hacing fauly ram modules, its about trying to get your computer to run cool, its abou thacing the latest drivers, etc etc th elist goes on. Soem pc components jsut dont like others. I remember once that on my mainboard my soundcard and videocard were stuck on the same address and thus were conflicting, and windows 2000 didnt want to let me change it. Took alto of F*ing around and still never solved it. Another time something in my comp blew (still dont know wat it was) but my mainboard, videocar, ram and CPU all went with it. (as did my power supply). Very expensive problem. Fact is, these problems arent there on an xbox or other console because they have been thorougly tested in the only configuration they come in. THIS is why they dont crash (for me at least). miscrosoft only have to test one configuration in different situations (make sure it handles heat in different positions/ locations, make sure software has no conflicts, make sure all hardware is happy together etc). Just because you have a 'top pc' means nothing. My friend bought an athlon system for almost AU$7000 when the athlon XP first came out and had nothign but problems, crashing, restarting randomly, etc. Turns out a ram module was faulty, and this small thing caused all the problems. not its fine. Problem is, when my athlon was crashing i tried everything (more cooling, updated software, bigger power supply, hardware conflicts, etc) and nothing fixed the problem. It's down to pure luck (almost) when it comes to gettign such things. For all i know the motherboard may have had a bent chip or may have been faulty (or the cpu for that matter, or ram module).

Fact is, pc's are very conplicated things, and sometimes they will run perfectly (my current system has never given me reliability problems) and sometimes they will give you absolute hell for no apparent reason. I never buy brand name package computers because
1) waste of money
2) dont know what you are getting
3) reliability has been questionable when friends have bought them

I always buy seperate components and get it put together properly. This way I know i am only getign the best brands (brand names make a significant difference when it comes to pc components). Regardless of this i have still at times had conflict problems inthe past and stability problems. I have known otehrs wiht the same systems who have had no problems. It's largely about luck.

My xbox i dotn ahve to worry about. I know i can drpo down teh shop one day, see a good game at a good price and buy it, (or hire a game to try) and i know it will work. i know it will run at a decent framerate, i know it wont crash, i know it will run. And i know it wont stuff up my computer somehow or waste HD space. I never by a pc gaem without first playing a demo. Why? One reason of courze, is to see if i like it. the other is to see if the damn game will run (and run smoothly). If i have to turn every detail off and run it in 640x480, and it looks inbearably horrible, i wont buy it. If i can run it acceptably with decent detail levels, then i will buy it. On xbox i dotn ahve to waste my time with this. Also its compact. I can go on a holiday to another state or something, and take it along. I can go to a friends place and take it. I dont have to carry a 50kg screen, my huge case (i've have a maxi tower sice i got my 1gig athlon for airflow) and my mouse, jeyboard, speakers or headphones, etc. i take my console and 1 or 2 controls. It's so much easier. If my comp is being upgraded, or isnt workign properly, or someone is using it, and im realllly bored, i can jump on my exbox for a little while. Its a ood quick solution as i dont have to wakt 2 mins for it to boot up and for all my system resident programs to lead up (virus scanners etc). Dont ahve to worry about my fans makign weird noises or anything. Its EASY.

This is the purpose of a console. Can i type assignments on it? no. Can i scan a photo with it? no. Can i use to to burn cd's? no. But i can play good games, have fun, enjoy impressive graphics, and kill boredom, and i can do it quickly any time anywhere (almost).

crimson_stallion
10th Jul 2003, 03:25
P.s. sorry for all the one-after-the-other posts. I dont usually check forums that often, so when i do i have more things to reply to :P I like to be thorough ;)

eNRGy
12th Jul 2003, 10:05
A) All the consoles are perfectly good in their own right.

B) I agree with most of everything everyone has said (Even the contradictory stuff - go figure :p )

C) After all that there is no getting away from the fact that there is a history of great original *PC only* games having their sequels developed simultanously for PC and consoles - and the sequels being either dumbed down, streamlined or otherwise worse than the original.

Hitman was one of my favorite games - it has some feeble level design, but where the level designers clicked with the idea of the game it REALLY is great. (Try the level in the Bucharest hotel for one of the greatest and most detailed enviroments in any game ever) - Hitman 2 however was dumbed down in the extreme, it has drastically improved graphics but they didnt seem to have learned anything from the original, it had all the bad level design and very little of the greatness of the original. (+ they took out the bullet wounds :mad: )

Raven Shield, third sequel to the Rainbow Six series is the first game in that series to have a streamlined (obtuse and featureless now) command system - and just so happens to be the first of that series to have been simultanously developed on multiple platforms. You cant accuse it of dumbing down because its REALLY hard, but the streamlining ruins the depth.

GTA3 and GTA-VC were released first on consoles and then on PC - why in the name of hell does my 2600XP 1gb GF4 4600 ninja rig need to do all the annoying memory and performance saving stuff that the console versions need - spin through 360 degrees and all the cars and pedestrians in the (very limited) range have changed/respawned. Garages wont open if I already have a car or two inside because I might run out of memory card space (I have 120gb of RAID diskspace FREE atm, I think I can afford a few k more in save files..)
These are great games, but they would have been better without that sort of "suspension of disbelief" breaking stuff..)

I could list more games but I have to stop somewhere..

Developing games for multiple platforms means either you spend time and money developing a whole new game for each platform - or you develop for the lowest common denominator factors. The latter is much more cost effective - but also the most dissapointing for anyone with a high end PC. (Or console, although none of the consoles have much of an edge in that department at the moment)

Lawnboy360
12th Jul 2003, 14:40
Hitman 2 however was dumbed down in the extreme

Raven Shield, third sequel to the Rainbow Six series is the first game in that series to have a streamlined (obtuse and featureless now) command system

Both console and PC gamers like these games in general. A better example would be franchise taken to a different genre for consoles. Like Baldur's Gate : Dark Alliance. Doesn't have too much to do with Baldur's Gate IMHO.

Montial
13th Jul 2003, 05:45
A console is a small computer. The difference is in the fact that it uses predominantly basic controls. Consoles can get keyboards and mouses, but games aren't designed to use them. The control systems are different to the computer because of the fact that you are using a gamepad, get over it. No matter what you say a game being developed for the pc and console simultaneously will be 'dumbed down'. Not because console users are dumb, but because consoles are different. An example? Splintercell is a great game. I find it incredibly difficult to play on an X-Box, but relatively easy on the PC (after moving the jump key from backspace to somthing else). However it has a very consoley feel to it, mainly in the menus. I don't know if it was developed simultaneously (I believe it was) but I think it would have been far different if it had been done primarily for the PC. This is what people mean by 'dumbing down'.

Adema1983
21st Jul 2003, 06:56
Originally posted by mikepayne666
ok listen im have all 3 systems and by far PS2 has the best games, its xbox user who were lured in by good graphics, how many good lengady games does xbox have?!?!? halo, um well thats pretty much it but ps2 got MGS, Final fantasy, GTA, tony hawk used to bee only for PS, PS has lots of stuff, plus when xbox has an exclusive, its usally remade for ps2 and has more stuff. take Splinter cell, it added more levels and more guns and stuff. all you xbox users ever say is "uh well its got good graphics" and sum times you say its got better games even though you never played PS2 but over your friends house for a little bit. so **** xbox lovers!!

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

As for the listed games:

MGS2 - Also on Xbox
THPS - 2x, 3, 4, Thug, all on Xbox
GTA - Coming to Xbox this winter
Splinter Cell is even on both systems. PS2 has cutscenes and it's own extra level with a new gadget or two. Xbox has the better graphics, earlier release date, it's own extra level, and no chopped up levels.

Console wars are stupid. Just play what you like and stop bashing other products.

WolfJaguar
22nd Jul 2003, 08:57
As an owner of all the consoles(starting with the Amiga and MSX systems WAY back when), I can firmly say that I love them all.

While Sony has essentially bastardized the entire gaming industry with it's cheap licenses and 85% silly/stupid games, the PC/XBOX/GC and for lack of a better system, the DC, have all had great games.

Don't get me wrong, the PS2 does have some nice franchises, but like I said, 85% of the crap that's spewed out nowadays is on Sony's systems.

The rest is mostly PC, considering alot of the games are cheap copies of older ones now. Just like the movie industry.

The PC does however, have some of the BEST RPG style and Adventure style games. Quest for Glory, King's Quest(Ah good ol Sierra, before it's purchase), System Shock series, Thief Series, and of course, the Deus Ex series.

System Shock begat Deus Ex, but that's a small and little known fact. Warren Specter is still my personal god.

All in all, every system has their good and bad games. Personally, I'll play a game regardless of what console it's on, as long as it's a fun game. End of story.

Hannibal
29th Jul 2003, 20:22
Consoles also have a huge rental market. That's probably a big driving force behind the shortening of the game (and every other action game on the market). The trend is for a great game to come out on the PC, and then a couple of years later, a shorter, shallower, albeit prettier multi-platform sequel gets released. Examples: Hitman 2, NOLF 2, DX 2, and I'm sure that there's others that I can't think of right now. I'll bet dollars-to-doughnuts that when Half-Life comes out, it will be no more than 2/3 the length of the original.

So the reason why us PC gamers show some animosity towards consoles is:

A. Some of us are tired of the X-box being propped up by swapping PC games to the console. Examples: Halo, Star Wars: KOTOR

B. We have noticed that games released simultaneously on more than 2 platforms universally suck ass. I can't think of one single exception to this rule.

SoloX2
29th Jul 2003, 21:20
XBOX just steals the best of the PC games and makes them there own nuff said.

Trollslayer
29th Jul 2003, 23:12
Remember people, don't hate XBox - hate Microsoft.

SoloX2
30th Jul 2003, 03:01
I just have to say that XBOx is the product of Microsoft which deserves the same hate i have for micrsoft. XBOX samething as Microsoft because it is micrsoft ahhhhhhhhhh. Okay im done

Trollslayer
30th Jul 2003, 09:19
.... Right... :rolleyes:

crimson_stallion
30th Jul 2003, 12:56
Originally posted by Trollslayer
Remember people, don't hate XBox - hate Microsoft.

Nicely put :)

And in all fairness, as much as ihate Microsoft, they have some damn good products. Windows made them big, but you cant neglect soem fo tthe excellent peripherals they have (mice, keyboards, joysticks, steering wheels, etc) as well as programs (Win XP is a pretty good operating system whtn it comes to a combination of ease of use, compatibility and reliabilty). They also make some excellent games.

After all this, it is not all that much of a surprise for them to make a very good console, and that is what the X-box is.

Like Trollslayer says, hate microsoft, not their products :)

From_God
31st Jul 2003, 18:56
Man all these people with PS2 saying Xbox is a p.o.s. because it has no good games. Halo, Morrowind, MGS2 (yes it has MGS2),Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, Doom 3 (coming soon), Shenmue II (shut up I like it) etc. etc. I think that the only reason PS2 has better games right now is because it has been out longer. Soon The two consoles will have the same amount of good games.

nukey
31st Jul 2003, 20:23
i've had c64, speccy128, atari st, amiga 500, snes, megadrive (genesis to the US), ps1, saturn, dreamcast, jaguar, ps2, xbox, gamecube, and quite a few pc's (from about 7 years ago till now).

One thing thats been consistent is that EVERY system has had games with truly atrocious control systems as well as utterly fantastic ones! Often with the same game on different systems - but just as often with different control methods working equally well over different console/computers.

To look at it another way, who'd dare ruin Deus Ex 2 over a control system? ( well, ok.. probably EA would dare, but we can ignore them for just now :D )

I think its safe to assume it'll be done well - and i doubt anything OTHER than the control system will be changed to a great degree. That can't possibly be called "dumbing down" the game!

Nukey

Andrewd0
1st Aug 2003, 18:24
A console is a small computer. The difference is in the fact that it uses predominantly basic controls. Consoles can get keyboards and mouses, but games aren't designed to use them. The control systems are different to the computer because of the fact that you are using a gamepad, get over it. No matter what you say a game being developed for the pc and console simultaneously will be 'dumbed down'. Not because console users are dumb, but because consoles are different. An example? Splintercell is a great game. I find it incredibly difficult to play on an X-Box, but relatively easy on the PC (after moving the jump key from backspace to somthing else). However it has a very consoley feel to it, mainly in the menus. I don't know if it was developed simultaneously (I believe it was) but I think it would have been far different if it had been done primarily for the PC. This is what people mean by 'dumbing down'.

Well put. The important thing here is that Deus Ex: Invisible War (hey.. remember that game? :) ) will have the same content either way, which is what made it great more than its menus or controls (and when I play Deus Ex on the PC I use two mouse buttons, a mouse wheel, and a total of 7 buttons on the keyboard - I haven't played a console in a few years but I recall their controllers have an ungodly amount of buttons in all sorts of wierd places, so I doubt it will *really* influence the controls as much as the general layout of game options, HUD, etc).

Frankly I think that the XBox version will be more "dumbed down" in the first place, so PC users shouldn't be complaining. Consider that while this console (XBox) is arguably the most technically advanced of any to date, it was developed with technology that's at least a year old. My computer has a 3ghz processor, a gigabyte of RAM, and both a graphics and sound card that use technology not in existence at the time of the XBox's development, and by the time Deus Ex 2, Doom 3, Half Life 2, etc. are released, even more advanced components will be inside some PC's while the XBox will not have changed a bit. The level of detail in games like these will not be as great on an XBox as they can be on a fully upgraded computer (which - granted - many people including myself will not have). Consoles make this easy by not requiring upgrades, but sooner or later they simply can't run the new games, and game engines seem to be getting more complex, more quickly than ever. Conversely, while the PC gives more "freedom" in that respect and is capable of keeping up with software advances indefinately, it's a hell of a lot more expensive in the long run. This is why PC gamers are stereotypically more "mature." It's not that the PC is inherently more sophisticated or some nonsense like that, but that you simply won't find a lot of punk teenagers who can afford to keep a PC up to date - at least not as many as you'll find who can afford a console.

Bottom line - if the game is good it will be fun on any system. If you want "top notch" graphics and such, you need to spend money, whether for a new console every few years or for PC upgrades once or twice a year.

As for stupid PC gamers.. I bet most of them operate on a Dell! Hah! (this is a whole new debate, though :D)

sneelock
2nd Aug 2003, 00:41
i dont know why everyone thinks the xbox won't be as good. the xbox is a pc in all aspects it has a motherboard(itx) a cpu and a video card. unless IW totally blows todays systems away there should be no problem. If they truly make the game run at 30fps on a 800mhz cpu with a geforce 3 ti than the game will run fine on a xbox. plus because a console is always the same they can optimise the code easier and further boost the frame rates.

on the dell thing... anyone who calls a dell a gaming machine should be shot.:D :p

SoloX2
2nd Aug 2003, 08:59
Sneelock the keyword is that it will be playable on a 800mhz cpu and Geforce 3 TI and will run at 30fps. But you fail to notice that it will be playable on probably low graphic settings and low resolution of 800X600 and yet the xbox is a little more powerful than this it will be able to go medium-low settings but will be displayed low res with visible jagged lines as i have seen in other xbox games. Then we get to a real pc of today that will run it at hi resoultions 1024X768 and beyond and have all features turned up to the highest setting. Also you probably wont see so much of the ragdoll effects on the xbox as ragdoll physics take alot cpu power. they may set it as in Unreal 2 game i have were there only a limited amount ragdoll animations can happen because if there's to many animations happening you feel a slow down. I doubt the Pitiful 700mhz Pentium 3 on the xbox can take more than 2 or 3 ragdoll animations at the same time. Another thing i think will be bad on Xbox is the load times i expect them to be longer than usual games. In my computer Unreal 2 loads after 20 to 40 seconds if you think thats nothing just sit there waiting for something to load and it will feel long. I have good ram too 256mb DDR 333mhz. Xbox only has 128mb i dont remember if its DDR but i know that it is connected fast. Even though its fast Unreal games need alot of memory Unreal 2 needs 256mb minimum and since Deus Ex:IW's unreal engine is a engine that has been tweaked to the extreme by ion i would expect it to have higher requirements for everything. Bottom line is that the best version will be on the PC.

"I wish they would take off auto aim for XBOX version you would see all thise console gamers dying every second"

sneelock
2nd Aug 2003, 18:55
very good point solo i wasnt thinking about the playable issue

but on the ram note might i recomend getting another 256 even going up to agig wont hurt you

lol at console gamers with auto aim:D

Lawnboy360
2nd Aug 2003, 20:21
Xbox only has 128mb i dont remember if its DDR but i know that it is connected fast.

Only 64 mb in fact, so sometimes when porting PC games to XBox (like Serious Sam) they have to cut the maps in several smaller ones so it "fits" in the memory; also there's no OS or antivirus using ressources on consoles.

Montial
10th Aug 2003, 05:32
remember, consoles don't have to run a big cluncky os in the background, and xp takes up a fair chunk of resource. I think its for this reason the xbox dosen't need to be so powerful to run a game smoothly (smoothly, not graphically intensively). I run Splinter Cell on my pc at 800*600 and it slows down on the occasion (my pc aint a gaming pc, AMD 955mhz, 512mb DDR RAM and a Ge-Force 4 MX-440 + XP). But, predominantly, as previosly mentioned, the difference between a pc game and a console game is the control system. Consoles have (in my opinion) crappy control. For FPS's anyway. Touch that analogue stick and the view whips around 270 degrees....instead of the 2 degrees you needed. Oh well, im no veteran consoler and this is just my opinion, but for FPS, avoid consoles like the plague.

Dragosani
10th Aug 2003, 06:20
It may just be me, but I think this goes deeper than DX:IW.
I don't think they'll 'dumb down' anything. The only difference I can see between PCs and modern consoles is the control. And IMO for a FPS, there is no better combo than a Keyboard/Mouse.

However, as a PC only gamer, I will admit I am geting a little paranoid. Watching commercials for an obviously great game, and seeing at the end that it's only available for a console. While it was never a big deal, there are plenty of worthwhile titles being released for PCs. But one day, I became ferociously protective of PC gaming. Blizzard (the always and forever PC only company) released StarCraft Ghost, for consoles only.

So I start thinking, If Blizzard can release a console only title, how many of my other favorite series' are going to end up as console games? Maybe this is the start, DX1 PC (to start anyway, not sure if it ever hit a console), DX2 PC and XBOX, and DX3 (assuming it's ever made) XBOX only?!?!
I really doubt (hope, may be more fitting) this will ever happen, but if Blizzard can turn, so can Ion Storm turn to the dark side.

I could be paranoid, I could just be tired, but that's what I'm thinking.

Montial
10th Aug 2003, 06:35
Midtown Madness 3 is advertised as only on XBox. I tend to ignore all adverts and the like and do my own research. Midtown Madness 3 is coming out on PC, and if it aint? Three words.

BAD


MARKETING


DESCISION.

Andrewd0
11th Aug 2003, 06:06
Regarding great PC games going exclusively to consoles.. I think there is only one reason for this to happen: piracy!

Very many millions of dollars are lost to this industry each year (though to be honest I don't think most of the people ripping off these games would buy them even if they couldn't steal them), and while it is possible to pirate console games, it is a far more complicated matter and doesn't happen nearly as often as it does for PC titles.

Frankly I didn't understand what possessed Blizzard to release Ghost exclusively for consoles. The PC market for that game has been growing steadily since the release of Warcraft, all the way up through Starcraft and Warcraft 3. It turns out that Blizzard's games are some of most ripped-off out there, however. They're probably doing it just to spite the jerks who don't want to shell out the dough. Bad news for the rest of us, but what can you do?

Trollslayer
11th Aug 2003, 11:19
Originally posted by Andrewd0
Frankly I didn't understand what possessed Blizzard to release Ghost exclusively for consoles. The PC market for that game has been growing steadily since the release of Warcraft, all the way up through Starcraft and Warcraft 3.

Its kinda like field testing, on another field. They probably had the same idea that Interplay had when they decided to finance the godawful upcoming Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel for consoles. They decided to try something new with the license but were unsure of how fans would react if such a deviation from the series was released on the original platform. One look at the hate most hardcore Fallout fanatics spewed against Fallout: Tactics (which was only deserving of about half the criticism it got) is enough to make companies weary of what they should launch, and on what platform (of course, FO:BOS will be very bad regardless, as Interplay is financing a clueless sod who thinks the pinnacle of interaction is asking for a beer to the bartender, sleeping with the town hooker, or pissing off the Mayor. I'm betting a 5 year old could do better).

Regardless, some companies still decide to go with it - C&C Renegade is pretty much, in terms of premise, the equivalent to Starcarft Ghost, as far as genre variations go. SG seems to have more going for it in terms of gameplay as the game apparently includes various gameplay elements from various sources (while Renegade was too straight-forward). But not only that, the fact it will be a deviation from the franchise's main genre is enough to make some companies aware that it might not please the original market, PC users. Releasing it on consoles will be sort of like field testing - if its sucessful, it might just be ported over to PC.

Bio Denton
14th Aug 2003, 10:39
Originally posted by Trollslayer
Actually, "true" RPGs require both knowledge and skill.

"true" RPGs being.. real-time RPGs? I don't see how they require any skill. Can you elaborate?

Trollslayer
14th Aug 2003, 10:59
Originally posted by Bio Denton
"true" RPGs being.. real-time RPGs? I don't see how they require any skill. Can you elaborate?

No, true RPGs being al kinds, from PC to console. Action, or real time RPGs, usually need much more skill, given real-time battles.

I said "true" because the term true RPGs is strange and useless. There aren't "false" RPGs, let alone "true" RPGs. There are "just" RPGs. :p

Bio Denton
14th Aug 2003, 15:31
*Wipes the blood away from his eyes* Oww, stop typing things like that, Troll.

However, I mean't, could you elaborate on the aspects of RPG's which require skill.

Trollslayer
14th Aug 2003, 16:26
Quick answer:


Originally posted by Bio Denton
*Wipes the blood away from his eyes* Oww, stop typing things like that, Troll.

Things like what exactly? :confused:


However, I mean't, could you elaborate on the aspects of RPG's which require skill.

If we're speaking on CRPG terms, i don't think its that hard to puzzle out the fact that 1) you need a degree of knowledge regarding the rules and possibilities available in a CRPG; and 2) the skill to use implement that knowledge, specially in real time. One thing is knowing what works in a given situation, the other things is acting accordingly in a responsive, objective matter to make it work.

If you want specific game examples, knowing that the Chromatic Demon in BG2:ToB is occasionaly vulnerable to certain types of damage is good knowledge to have, but not doing something about it will take longer to bring about a solution. Another example in the same game, knowledge that Protection from Magical Weapons protects enemy spellcasters against weapons of +X value is not only essential, but using one of 2 possible ways to counter that is another. Other game, other example - the knowledge of Boss tactics in games like Zelda, Dark Cloud 2, or Blood Omen 2 is useless unless you skillfully use that knowledge in combat. I could also point to any other console Action-RPG, like Terranigma or Light Crusader or Soleil or Landstalker. Those need more skill (like DC2) because they require more coordination and dexterity to use learned knowledge.

Or you can take DX's example: knowledge that stealth is usable and rewarding in DX1 is one thing, effectively using it (specially since its in real time) is another thing. Turn-based RPGs also require a degree of skill, but more tactical, as you need to use the knowledge of enemy strengths and weaknesses to devise defenses and strategies against them (though given in SRPGs you usually don't implement them in real time, examples: Shining Force, Hundred Swords, Gownlanser, FF Tactics)

There, examples.

And i'd appreciate being called either by my full handle, or Slayer; Troll, as i'm sure you know, taken out of contest, is derogatory.

Thank you.

[Note: Sorry if this seems rude or something, its not, i'm in a hurry finishing packing up ;)]

Bio Denton
14th Aug 2003, 20:39
Things like what exactly? :confused:


There aren't "false" RPGs, let alone "true" RPGs. There are "just" RPGs.



If we're speaking on CRPG terms, i don't think its that hard to puzzle out the fact that 1) you need a degree of knowledge regarding the rules and possibilities available in a CRPG; and 2) the skill to use implement that knowledge, specially in real time. One thing is knowing what works in a given situation, the other things is acting accordingly in a responsive, objective matter to make it work.

If you want specific game examples, knowing that the Chromatic Demon in BG2:ToB is occasionaly vulnerable to certain types of damage is good knowledge to have, but not doing something about it will take longer to bring about a solution. Another example in the same game, knowledge that Protection from Magical Weapons protects enemy spellcasters against weapons of +X value is not only essential, but using one of 2 possible ways to counter that is another. Other game, other example - the knowledge of Boss tactics in games like Zelda, Dark Cloud 2, or Blood Omen 2 is useless unless you skillfully use that knowledge in combat. I could also point to any other console Action-RPG, like Terranigma or Light Crusader or Soleil or Landstalker. Those need more skill (like DC2) because they require more coordination and dexterity to use learned knowledge.

Or you can take DX's example: knowledge that stealth is usable and rewarding in DX1 is one thing, effectively using it (specially since its in real time) is another thing. Turn-based RPGs also require a degree of skill, but more tactical, as you need to use the knowledge of enemy strengths and weaknesses to devise defenses and strategies against them (though given in SRPGs you usually don't implement them in real time, examples: Shining Force, Hundred Swords, Gownlanser, FF Tactics)

There, examples.


That's all good and well, but that is all just knowledge. Zelda for example, as you pointed out, requires knowledge and "the skill to put the knowledge to use", but surely that is simply knowledge of which way to move and which items/weapons to use, not real skill.

Then again, what is, if you really think about it. Let's say.. uh, ping pong. Isn't that all down to the knowledge of knowing which way a ball will move/spin/slide and speed/distance, etc. I wonder if there really is such a thing as skill.



And i'd appreciate being called either by my full handle, or Slayer; Troll, as i'm sure you know, taken out of contest, is derogatory.


Is it? I didn't know. Must be a US thing. Sorry.

Trollslayer
8th Sep 2003, 21:04
Sorry for not having answered this one before i went on vacation. Here's the quick resolve.


Originally posted by Bio Denton
There aren't "false" RPGs, let alone "true" RPGs. There are "just" RPGs.

Well it wasn't me who started it, was it? :rolleyes:


That's all good and well, but that is all just knowledge. Zelda for example, as you pointed out, requires knowledge and "the skill to put the knowledge to use", but surely that is simply knowledge of which way to move and which items/weapons to use, not real skill.

Then again, what is, if you really think about it. Let's say.. uh, ping pong. Isn't that all down to the knowledge of knowing which way a ball will move/spin/slide and speed/distance, etc. I wonder if there really is such a thing as skill.

Ok, lets hit it one more time, for the last time. Skill is the application of knowledge in solving problems - be it mental or physical problems, your skill is needed to overcome them. But since i seem to not be getting trough to you, here's a description besides mine:

(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)
skill: noun
>an ability to do an activity or job well, especially because you have practised it.

skilled: adjective
>having the abilities needed to do an activity or job well.

>Skilled work needs someone who has had special training to do.

Of course we also have this definition from Merriam Webster's:

Main Entry: skill
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English skil, from Old Norse, distinction, knowledge; probably akin to Old English scylian to separate, sciell shell -- more at SHELL
Date: 13th century

>the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance
>dexterity or coordination especially in the execution of learned physical tasks
>a learned power of doing something competently : a developed aptitude or ability <language skills>

Hope this clears it.

Sadokitty
14th Sep 2003, 14:26
One thing for sure, if they keep all the original features and functionality from the PC version in the X-BOX one, it will be a hell of a lot more fiddly with the less versatile game controller than with a mouse.

Anyone else noticed that the semi-circular HUD bits on the left and right of the screen seem not to exist in the X-BOX version? My guess is that they will probably have some kind of seperate window that opens up for selecting all your augmentations and so on, so you need to press start or whatever and then select from there.. annoying ~shrug~

Lawnboy360
14th Sep 2003, 19:30
Anyone else noticed that the semi-circular HUD bits on the left and right of the screen seem not to exist in the X-BOX version?

Maybe you were looking at old screenshots. Both version have the circular HUD with weapons on one side and bio-mods on the other.

Trollslayer
14th Sep 2003, 19:32
And it should be noted that the HUD's opacity is scalable.

schrambal
15th Sep 2003, 10:34
I can imagine there'll be some minute differences between the interface of the PC and Xbox. A mouse-cursor just navigates through menu's in a completely different way than a D-pad on a controller.

But spector said in a few interviews that the two games will not be different from eachother. The PC version will look better, off course.

Montial
21st Sep 2003, 23:56
Originally posted by schrambal
The PC version will look better, off course.

Which means it'll run like crap on my machine :(

God damn Terrorists
23rd Sep 2003, 20:58
Well,here is a blast from the past,you all remember DOOM64,right? Well doom originated for the PC(obviously)
If i remember correctly the 64 version did very well on a quality and playability scale.It was like going from
plane ass Quake to a supercharged GL Version.Not all of the pc -to platform have sucked,there are more examples but you get my drift-