PDA

View Full Version : Platforms



D. Denton
24th Nov 2008, 14:46
I used the search function for this but didn't found any topics about it...

So for which platforms is Deus Ex 3 coming?
I like to know because at a Dutch Game site you can create a club but you need to have a source for it... so a moderator should reply else it wouldn't count...
I also like to know so I can save some money for a new PC.... Although I preffer my 360... :D doubt it will only be PC :D

René
24th Nov 2008, 15:10
PC's the only certainty right now!

GmanPro
24th Nov 2008, 15:35
Yay!! :D

This game is sounding better all the time. :thumbsup:

D. Denton
24th Nov 2008, 15:42
Yes it does except that I gotta swave some cash for a gaming PC :P
Yes that's right this will be the first time I will actually by a complete new system.. ( self build offcourse ) for only one game.
Most games I play on the 360 but this one is a must have for me :D

René
24th Nov 2008, 16:17
I can't remember the last wholesale system upgrade I did for just one game. I throw in new video cards and RAM all the time, but I can't remember my last major change for one title. Maybe it was EverQuest II.

imported_van_HellSing
24th Nov 2008, 16:29
For me the last major upgrade was in anticipation for BioShock. Replaced pretty much all the innards of my PC. The game was disappointing, but hey - the hardware still runs all new games like a charm (Fallout 3!), so it wasn't all for waste. Should suffice for DX3 too.

Jerion
24th Nov 2008, 16:41
Yeah. DX 3 is going to be the first time I upgrade everything for a single specific game.

Because if you're going to do it for any game in the next half decade, this is it.

jordan_a
24th Nov 2008, 16:45
I upgraded my whole computer just before Oblivion was shipped. The last time was two months ago for all the games I had missed in 2007-2008 (studies), I was really shocked by how low prices were.

Bloodwolf806
24th Nov 2008, 17:33
Well, when DX3 was announced it was announced for PC and Next-generation consoles

So the 360's a given, and the PS3 is a strong possibility. But the only "official" platform right now is PC.

foxberg
24th Nov 2008, 18:05
Well, I don't have to upgrade anything. I just bought a brand new 17" MacBook Pro. I don't think they will have Mac release but someone will definitely port it.

Kahlell
20th Dec 2008, 01:45
360, please!

I hate having to use a PC, the controls are clunky, and I have to tweak my PC in all sorts of crazy ways, etc...

I jsut want to be able to plug and play, is there anything wrong with that? I don't think a "fun" game should require hardware "work."

Radox Redux
20th Dec 2008, 01:55
If this thing doesn't come out for the PS3 (as I was under the impression) then I won't be able to play it...

GmanPro
20th Dec 2008, 01:56
Sir, while I may not agree with what you say. I'll defend to the death your right to say it. :thumb:

PC > Console. If you had an awesome PC to crank up the settings, then you would understand. Playing on a console is like having someone drive you everywhere as opposed to having your own super-fast sports car. The work you pour into it is what makes it so much more fun imo.

K^2
20th Dec 2008, 01:57
They have the engine already built for PC, 360, and PS3. I don't see any reason not to target all 3.

Big Orange
20th Dec 2008, 02:06
I've got an X-Box 360... :hmm:

Radox Redux
20th Dec 2008, 02:09
Sir, while I may not agree with what you say. I'll defend to the death your right to say it. :thumb:

PC > Console. If you had an awesome PC to crank up the settings, then you would understand. Playing on a console is like having someone drive you everywhere as opposed to having your own super-fast sports car. The work you pour into it is what makes it so much more fun imo.

I don't care how I get there, I just want to without having to find a better car every couple of miles.

GmanPro
20th Dec 2008, 02:31
If you build a good enough PC, then it can and will last you longer than any console. And do much more for you.

Radox Redux
20th Dec 2008, 02:36
If you build a good enough PC, then it can and will last you longer than any console. And do much more for you.

Not without persistant and money-sucking upgrading it won't. It's all a moot point anyway. My console can and will run DX3 just fine... if it comes out that is.

GmanPro
20th Dec 2008, 03:00
I haven't spent any money upgrading my PC in almost two years and it is much more powerful than my Xbox and can still run new games at high settings. I could hold off on any upgrades for another three or four years and still be able to play most games (not at high settings sure, but neither can the xbox).

K^2
20th Dec 2008, 03:03
Not without persistant and money-sucking upgrading it won't. It's all a moot point anyway. My console can and will run DX3 just fine... if it comes out that is.
So will many PCs built before 360 was even released. You really don't have to upgrade anything if you don't want to. But you can if you do.

GmanPro
20th Dec 2008, 03:41
I don't know how easy it is (probably not very), but I remember hearing about some people who did some slight modifications to their Xbox's. It seems to me that an xbox is really nothing more than just a PC that uses a funky operating system, so it should be possible.

K^2
20th Dec 2008, 03:47
Original XBox was just a PC. New one runs on a PPC architecture. Same one used by older Macs. So does the PS3, interestingly enough. The difference is how they handle computations. 360 runs 3 full cores, while PS3 runs two somewhat lighter, but also complete, cores, plus the 7 SPU cores. Each SPU can, in principal, run its own OS, but they aren't very efficient at that sort of thing.

People have managed to do some upgrading on all 3 of these platforms.

NK007
20th Dec 2008, 04:10
My PC is now 5 years old, and the only time I'll be able to play DX 3 is Feb. 2012, but if that's the last thing I do, I'll get a new comp and finish that game at least 3 times.

GmanPro
20th Dec 2008, 05:05
A sound plan my friend :thumb:. Three internets for you. I plan on doing the same.

Necros
20th Dec 2008, 08:44
My last big upgrade was about 2.5-3 years ago, since then I swapped the CPU, bought an extra GB of RAM and a couple of months ago I swapped the graphics card. None of these cost a lot but kept my PC to be good enough for gaming.

jordan_a
20th Dec 2008, 08:52
PC's the only certainty right now!Thus XB360. :whistle:

Bloodwolf806
20th Dec 2008, 16:07
Well, when DX3 was announced it was announced for PC and Next-generation consoles

So the 360's a given, and the PS3 is a strong possibility. But the only "official" platform right now is PC.

:thumb:

Lady_Of_The_Vine
20th Dec 2008, 23:37
I added this topic to 'Important Threads' list for easy reference later. :)

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=75249

Britzel
29th Dec 2008, 14:12
PC's the only certainty right now!

Thats really sad. Why not going the way of Blizzard and program the game for both, windows and OSX, right from the beginning of development?

Mac gamer comunity is not as little as it was some years ago. Especially when it comes to games that walk a path apart from mainstream – as DeusEx or EVE-Online. And porting games from one platform onto another after it was released is most time conected with problems.


I am also sure Apple-Steve would be willing to sign a contract with Eidos that would be good for both companies ;) .


For me: I switched to Mac a year ago - and atm I don't think i will ever buy a PC again (nor a windows coppy :S). Just would be sad, when i couldn' play the 3rd part of my favourite game. And i am sure there are much more out there that share my thoughts.. just had a talk about DeusEx on the Mac channel of EVE-Online recently.. there are a lot of Mac users that would love to see this game on Mac. :)

AaronJ
29th Dec 2008, 16:24
PC's the only certainty right now!

EXCELLENCE.

GmanPro
29th Dec 2008, 22:50
^^ I concur!

it probably wont last though...

K^2
30th Dec 2008, 03:10
One day, there will be a great war between PC and console gamers.

Jerion
30th Dec 2008, 03:48
PC gamers get free rocket launchers from me. :D

GmanPro
30th Dec 2008, 03:54
Bards will sing grand tales of the epic struggle between PC and Console for centuries to come. :D

Games are made using PC's. We could cut off their supply lines in the initial attack...

FreedomForever
30th Dec 2008, 03:55
Im Bi-gamer :( that means double everything

Jerion
30th Dec 2008, 04:39
Thats really sad. Why not going the way of Blizzard and program the game for both, windows and OSX, right from the beginning of development?

Mac gamer comunity is not as little as it was some years ago. Especially when it comes to games that walk a path apart from mainstream – as DeusEx or EVE-Online. And porting games from one platform onto another after it was released is most time conected with problems.


I am also sure Apple-Steve would be willing to sign a contract with Eidos that would be good for both companies ;) .


For me: I switched to Mac a year ago - and atm I don't think i will ever buy a PC again (nor a windows coppy :S). Just would be sad, when i couldn' play the 3rd part of my favourite game. And i am sure there are much more out there that share my thoughts.. just had a talk about DeusEx on the Mac channel of EVE-Online recently.. there are a lot of Mac users that would love to see this game on Mac. :)

I've been a mac user for years, and I agree. But as a workaround I just have a 40 GB windows XP partition and I use it for games (BootCamp FTW). It works very well soley for games. :)

But unless the CD engine is built to use OpenGL (which it isn't), I don't see a mac port of the engine anytime soon. Which leaves the only option for a Mac version to Transgaming's Cider (http://transgaming.com/products/cider/) program. Cider can make for some nice and smooth ports, IF it is done well. Although I hope they don't do what EA has done and do it poorly. EA's Mac games? Except for Spore, the performance compared to the Windows version is pathetic.

Romeo
30th Dec 2008, 06:16
Well, when DX3 was announced it was announced for PC and Next-generation consoles

So the 360's a given, and the PS3 is a strong possibility. But the only "official" platform right now is PC.
Don't count your hatches before they chicken. (And yes, I'm well aware that's backwards before anyone corrects me)

360, please!

I hate having to use a PC, the controls are clunky, and I have to tweak my PC in all sorts of crazy ways, etc...

I jsut want to be able to plug and play, is there anything wrong with that? I don't think a "fun" game should require hardware "work."
Although I'll probably buy it for 360 (assuming it's on it) as well, be careful, you'll be burned at the stake for saying that. lol

Yeah, seriously though, my choices are between a year and a half old computer with a 17" monitor and stereo headphones, or a gaming-only computer with more power than mine, mated to a 32" LCD (Brand new!) and a 5.1 system I personally set-up and tweaked for days just finding the perfect acoustics. Guess which one wins that contest? lol

(I should note that if a mod kit is available at launch, I very well may buy the computer version, as I often enjoy modding more than the games themselves)

GmanPro
30th Dec 2008, 06:39
Lol my 360 uses technology that is about three to four years older than my PC. And my PC isn't new either... I'm totally buying a new sound system for my PC now btw after reading your post :cool:

To me, building/upgrading my PC is like playing with lego's. It's fun in and of itself.

J.CDenton
2nd Jan 2009, 17:31
It'll be on PC at first then on consoles, certainly XBOX360 and the PS3. But so is the better for the order: better on PC first then on console so that we don't have stupid conversions.

Spyhopping
2nd Jan 2009, 19:16
I'd prefer to play it on a PC, but I won't be getting a good gaming PC any time soon. I will hopefully have a nice big LCD TV by then to use if its on 360. :) Just hope that the console version won't deviate from the PC version too much.

I can't decide which platform creates a better experience. My reaction times are much better with a console controller (as opposed to a keyboard and mouse) and behaviors seem more instinctive. Although I'm not sure whether this is due to my lack of practice with a mouse. They do seem more precise when it comes to aiming

Romeo
4th Jan 2009, 01:35
PC gamers get free rocket launchers from me. :D
Console gamers get nun-chuks (Wii joke). And they also get me. I'm the ultimate weapon. I'm like Chuck Norris' and Bruce Lee's lovechild. RAWR!

Romeo
4th Jan 2009, 01:38
Lol my 360 uses technology that is about three to four years older than my PC. And my PC isn't new either... I'm totally buying a new sound system for my PC now btw after reading your post :cool:

To me, building/upgrading my PC is like playing with lego's. It's fun in and of itself.
Yeah. Just like Lego. Really F*@^ing expensive lego, that doesn't necessarily take the shape of a block. Just like Lego. lol

PS, that's a good boy. Audio fidility is the way to go. HD looks nice, but 5.1 actually provides a clear advantage during gameplay.

Larington
4th Jan 2009, 02:04
Assuming that there are non PC editions of DX3:
My hope is that just as they started working on the story for DX3 before even a single line of code had been written by the team, that the design doc includes details of how each platform would have an optimised interface before typing a single line of code (pseudocode being a good exception I suppose), rather than trying a one size fits all approach which frankly, doesn't tend to work even with relatively respectable attempts at porting a game to PC.

Romeo
4th Jan 2009, 05:45
Ubisoft is a good company to look at in terms of optimizing games for all available consoles. Prince of Persia looks good on every platform.

Larington
4th Jan 2009, 21:46
I'm not so concerned about any differences in the speed/performance/looks between different platforms, my main concern (And the thing that is most often gotten wrong on cross platform games) is that the interface will be standardised across all platforms without consideration for the differences between using a gamepad & using a keyboard/mouse setup. Though they did fix it later in a patch, I once had the insult of going to the key-configuration screen in one of the recent resident evil games and getting presented with a diagram of a 360 game pad... Would've been fair enough if one was plugged into the computer, but I haven't bought one so it shouldn't be displaying an interface panel thats somewhat inappropriate for the situation.

On another occasion, I heard how one game was getting slowed down because the game would be polling the USB components over and over again (Multiple times a second) on the off-chance that a 360 gamepad was about to be plugged into the computer, a complete waste of system resources frankly.

Jerion
5th Jan 2009, 00:44
^^ Bingo. Take Fallout 3's HUD for example. Here I am playing away on the PC version, and I'm having to deal with a HUD that's designed for a 42" HDTV viewed from across the room. It wasn't a bad HUD, mind you, but it was definitely tailored for the TV experience.

hem dazon 90
9th Jan 2009, 01:50
'' and so the pc snobs rules the forums everyone but a select few were spared. even the administrator or at least i think he was was held under the sway of the pretensiousness (spelling?) and so the dark times of the deus ex 3 forum had begun"

Necros
10th Jan 2009, 11:16
'' and so the pc snobs rules the forums everyone but a select few were spared. even the administrator or at least i think he was was held under the sway of the pretensiousness (spelling?) and so the dark times of the deus ex 3 forum had begun"
:mad2: http://forums.eidosgames.com/images/icons/icon13.gif Are you saying he didn't make a valid point? :rolleyes:

K^2
10th Jan 2009, 13:49
^^ Bingo. Take Fallout 3's HUD for example. Here I am playing away on the PC version, and I'm having to deal with a HUD that's designed for a 42" HDTV viewed from across the room. It wasn't a bad HUD, mind you, but it was definitely tailored for the TV experience.
I'm playing PC version of Fallout3 on a 42" HDTV from across the room. I'm afraid, this is simply how gaming is going to go. PC or console. Big screens are getting cheaper. What's the point of attaching your PC to a 21" dedicated monitor, when a 42" TV can work well enough as a monitor, TV, and gaming screen. If you need to work on text documents, move a little closer. Want to watch TV, move a bit back. Want to play games, chose a place somewhere in between.

Consoles are no longer limited by a low resolution TV screens. The sole limitation of a modern console is fixed hardware. You can play with a keyboard and mouse. You can download patches. You can play in high resolution. But you cannot put in a better video cards and enjoy better quality. And games that come out a year from now will be aimed at the same hardware as games that come out today. These are the drawbacks. Everything else is superstition.

GmanPro
10th Jan 2009, 19:21
I was thinking about getting three 22" monitors and set up an epic RPG set up. I'd have the game in the middle, my map/inventory on the right, and the left screen would be left on windows, or maybe my character sheet. Lol, it would probably be about the same cost as one big monitor/tv. For now I think I'll keep using my 28" monitor. :nut:

I love talking about monitors and tv's....

only one Deus ex
5th Mar 2009, 13:09
I made it rhyme, badly.. Well will mac be able to run Deus ex 3? (with Mac OS)

Gizmostuff
5th Mar 2009, 14:12
I made it rhyme, badly.. Well will mac be able to run Deus ex 3? (with Mac OS)

No. Get boot camp, install Windows Vista/7 on it. Then you're good to go. Or build a PC so you won't have any performance issues when playing. Macs are basically an expensive PC with Mac OS X on it.

K^2
5th Mar 2009, 14:17
Expensive makes it sound like you are paying for something better. Overpriced is a better word. You can put OSX on PC hardware for a lot less and get the same or better performance.

Gizmostuff
5th Mar 2009, 14:32
Expensive makes it sound like you are paying for something better. Overpriced is a better word. You can put OSX on PC hardware for a lot less and get the same or better performance.

Perhaps. You could put OS X on a PC but you'd be breaking Apple's EULA. Since it sounds like he already has a Mac and/or has no interest messing with Windows, then Boot Camp would be the best option imo. I hope you have an early Mac Pro or better because that's probably the only Mac that'll be able to run Deus Ex 3 when it comes out.

El_Bel
5th Mar 2009, 14:39
Perhaps. You could put OS X on a PC but you'd be breaking Apple's EULA.

Those dirty anti-free market scum faks. I hope they choke and die.

K^2
5th Mar 2009, 14:48
Perhaps. You could put OS X on a PC but you'd be breaking Apple's EULA.
And? Do you even read these? To my knowledge, EULA never stood up in court anyways. The only part of EULA that has some legal meaning is denial of liability. Everything else is junk.

René
5th Mar 2009, 15:07
Right now there is no Mac version planned. Sorry.

Gizmostuff
5th Mar 2009, 15:11
Those dirty anti-free market scum faks. I hope they choke and die.

Eh, did I say that?


And? Do you even read these? To my knowledge, EULA never stood up in court anyways. The only part of EULA that has some legal meaning is denial of liability. Everything else is junk.

Obviously I did considering I brought it up. It never stood up in court but does that make it right? Why should he bother breaking the EULA when he has a more simple solution using Boot Camp. If you have actually something intelligent to bring to the thread then by all means say it. Sadly, everything else you say is just junk...

Lady_Of_The_Vine
5th Mar 2009, 16:14
I made it rhyme, badly.. Well will mac be able to run Deus ex 3? (with Mac OS)

I merged your thread with existing one. :)

Blade_hunter
5th Mar 2009, 18:07
I think there is more chances to get a linux version than Mac unfortunately there is only the first game that be ported to Mac, but does Eidos have planed a linux version ? Just asking ...

K^2
5th Mar 2009, 18:29
Obviously I did considering I brought it up. It never stood up in court but does that make it right? Why should he bother breaking the EULA when he has a more simple solution using Boot Camp. If you have actually something intelligent to bring to the thread then by all means say it. Sadly, everything else you say is just junk...
Ah, so because some company wrote up a EULA that requires their software to run on their overpriced hardware, you should pay twice the money to run it on Macs rather than simply buying a PC and putting OSX on it?

Yeah, sure, if he already owns a Mac, he can simply run Windows on it for games. But my comment was about Macs being overpriced. You are paying money for what exactly? You can run the same software on better hardware for less, without breaking any laws. Yeah, you do end up lying to Apple Corporation. Personally, I don't feel bad about it.

As for your ad hominem, I'm going to let it go. But if you are going to question my intelligence, you better be prepared to back it up.

Edit: Blade, we already know what engine they will be using. Since they are not making the engine, they aren't going to be porting it. That tells us that at most, game will run on Windows PC, PS3, and 360. Most likely, that's exactly what it will run on.

Blade_hunter
5th Mar 2009, 18:44
Are you sure of that ? because the unreal engine wasn't made for linux and we can use the same windows version by using a sort of installer or something (I don't know the exact details of that :hmm: ) and be able to play under linux
But basically I won't contradict you the Engine is made for the platforms you mentioned, but a linux port can be used with the same windows version I think or we are forced to use the emulator for that :scratch:

K^2
5th Mar 2009, 19:01
Are you talking about Wine, by any chance? Keep in mind that CD engine is a DX9 engine. Someone would have to re-write the renderer from scratch for it to run on Linux or OSX.

Blade_hunter
5th Mar 2009, 19:15
Yes Wine I'm talking about :)

K^2
5th Mar 2009, 20:10
I don't think Wine properly simulates DirectX9, and I'm almost certain it does not properly simulate Shader 3 which CD engine uses. So you won't be able to run DX3 on today's Wine. Though, they might fix it up by the time DX3 is released. I'm not entirely sure on details of how it works, so I don't know how much of that is fixable.

theapproach
21st Mar 2009, 09:27
I played the original on PC, and still have it installed now. However as you grow up you have less and less time to fiddle around trying to get programs to run, or continuously upgrade your PC to match the latest games.

Please Please Please launch this game on PS3 as well, for all us people who don't need the hassle of constantly updating their PC, downloading updates for hardware and games and spending hours squeezing an extra couple of FPS from our graphics cards, but who loved the original and really want to play this game in HD on their 40 inch HDTV!!!

To deal with all the PC fanbois that complain about console design, just make the HUD scaleable by the user,:rolleyes: and offer mouse and keyboard play on all platforms, as well as sixaxis for ps3 etc.

Mass effect had excellent controls for both PC and consoles.

Consoles also tend make more money for development companies than PC games! -[> appealing to Eidos' dark side:eek:

Irate_Iguana
21st Mar 2009, 10:44
Please Please Please launch this game on PS3 as well, for all us people who don't need the hassle of constantly updating their PC, downloading updates for hardware and games and spending hours squeezing an extra couple of FPS from our graphics cards

What do you people do with your PC's that you have to do this? I can't remember the last time I updated a driver or installed a new component. Games still look and run fine. PC gaming is not the hassle people make it out to be.

GmanPro
21st Mar 2009, 16:10
Pff, why would anyone want to play games on a 40" tv? At that size, the crappy 1080p would look fuzzy and pixelated. My PC is hooked up to a 28" monitor with 1920x1200, not to mention anti aliasing/ antistrophic filtering capabilities that the consoles cannot keep up with.

Seriously people, there are SO many crappy console shooters out there, with vehicles and coop and regenerating health and cover systems, WHY must you all insist on turning Deus Ex into that?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Mar 2009, 16:33
pha, fyi PS3 is not yet officially confirmed. It is being considered, yes... but definitely not finalised yet. Just take it that whatever isn't mentioned in the FAQs, it is not confirmed.

Oh, I have a 40in HDTV and play console and PC games on it perfectly, I don't see any fuzzy or pixeled graphics; I have to say, it is really nice to play games on a huge screen. :)

Necros
21st Mar 2009, 22:14
What do you people do with your PC's that you have to do this? I can't remember the last time I updated a driver or installed a new component. Games still look and run fine. PC gaming is not the hassle people make it out to be.
:thumbsup: What he said. :cool:

To deal with all the PC fanbois that complain about console design, just make the HUD scaleable by the user,:rolleyes: and offer mouse and keyboard play on all platforms, as well as sixaxis for ps3 etc.

Mass effect had excellent controls for both PC and consoles.
It's a lot more than "just" the HUD and the controls. Mass Effect had good controls but I wouldn't call 'em excellent though.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
22nd Mar 2009, 11:05
Sorry if I caused any confusion, I was referring to the recent interview Ashpolt posted.
Oh, no problem. I just wanted to let everyone know. :)

Bio Denton
22nd Mar 2009, 19:11
PC's the only certainty right now!Does that mean that PC gamers won't get a "Vibration" option in the configuration screen this time? ;)

theapproach
4th Apr 2009, 11:43
This is exactly the type of blinkered response i anticipated. I am not going to bother proving my pc nerd credentials, although i built my own pc, i would rather buy a new exhaust or Bit of trickery for my motorbike or go for a meal in am michelin Restaurant than pay for yet another upgrade for the pc, sorry! I just want more high quality deus ex 1 like goodness with Maximum depth, minimum hassle.

WhatsHisFace
4th Apr 2009, 13:54
This is a guaranteed console game.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
5th Apr 2009, 22:02
This is exactly the type of blinkered response i anticipated. I am not going to bother proving my pc nerd credentials, although i built my own pc, i would rather buy a new exhaust or Bit of trickery for my motorbike or go for a meal in am michelin Restaurant than pay for yet another upgrade for the pc, sorry! I just want more high quality deus ex 1 like goodness with Maximum depth, minimum hassle.

Don't worry too much about response - we're a mixed bunch in here, so lots of different opinions flying around. :)


This is a guaranteed console game.

Nothing confirmed yet, so don't get too excited about firing it up on your XBox, hehe. :D

WhatsHisFace
6th Apr 2009, 03:37
Nothing confirmed yet, so don't get too excited about firing it up on your XBox, hehe. :D
I am so sure that this game will see an Xbox 360 release that I am willing to bet my user account. Want to bet yours?

itsalladream
6th Apr 2009, 04:16
I hope they release it on wii.:gamer: :naughty:

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 08:16
Dugan confirmed it for PS3 and 360 in the Total PC Gaming (UK) interview last month. He then stated a personal preference for the 360 (over both PC and PS3) which explains a lot.

K^2
6th Apr 2009, 08:51
Indeed, it does.

Irate_Iguana
6th Apr 2009, 09:28
Dugan confirmed it for PS3 and 360 in the Total PC Gaming (UK) interview last month. He then stated a personal preference for the 360 (over both PC and PS3) which explains a lot.

Can you give a link to the article? If this is true then I fear that all the negative views will not only be spot on, but also only be the tip of the iceberg.

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 09:34
Sadly, I can't find an online version of the article. I'll post a transcript of that section of the interview when I get home later though.

Irate_Iguana
6th Apr 2009, 09:57
Thank you. I'm looking forward with appropriate dread to the transcript.

Necros
6th Apr 2009, 10:01
Dugan confirmed it for PS3 and 360 in the Total PC Gaming (UK) interview last month. He then stated a personal preference for the 360 (over both PC and PS3) which explains a lot.
Mr K. or René posted something about this, I'll look for it. Got it:

I haven't yet seen the actual TPCG article so I can't comment on exactly what was written, but I've seen the Q&A with the magazine (actually I have it in front of me) and this question was in relation to outside of work in personal time. I'm not sure if it's worded to sound like the development of the game but it shouldn't be.

I hope they release it on wii.:gamer: :naughty:
I seriously doubt it. ;)

Lady_Of_The_Vine
6th Apr 2009, 10:26
Dugan confirmed it for PS3 and 360 in the Total PC Gaming (UK) interview last month. He then stated a personal preference for the 360 (over both PC and PS3) which explains a lot.

When I asked Rene if I could add this info to FAQs, he said nothing had been confirmed yet... and you can't always trust magazines to get everything right. ;)

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 10:32
True, but I'd think a direct quote from the lead designer is fairly conclusive.

And, come on, of course it's getting a console release. As much as I love PC, it's just not a profitable platform compared to the consoles. Add that to the very obviously console gamer targeted design choices such as regenerating health and third person, and then factor in Dugas' history of console versions of established PC series (Far Cry Instincts, Rainbow Six: Vegas) and we've got enough info to make a very, very educated guess, even ignoring Dugas (which is something I wish EM had done!)

In short, I'm willing to trust the quote in the magazine, but even if I wasn't, I'd be willing to trust common sense. Also, of course, every single person who plays games on PC is a pirate, dontcha know, so they've got to release it on consoles to get a single legitimate sale!

Lady_Of_The_Vine
6th Apr 2009, 10:46
Personally speaking, I'm pretty sure it will be released on console too.
I'm just clarifying to all that it has not been officially confirmed/finalised, as yet; that's all. :)

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 11:24
I should point out, by the way, that at this point I'm not at all against the idea of a console version. It'd doubtlessly get the team more money to support expansion packs (real ones, not 30 minute wastes of time or new costumes) and other projects.

Stop reading here if you only like hearing nice things.

More importantly, I'm not against it because the damage has already been done, the console-style choices have already been made - in fact, with this in mind, it'd be a complete waste if it's not released on consoles, so hooray for console ports as semi-justification for the simplification. Across the nation. Can you feel the devestation? Sorry, my rap aug went haywire.

Irate_Iguana
6th Apr 2009, 12:14
More importantly, I'm not against it because the damage has already been done, the console-style choices have already been made - in fact, with this in mind, it'd be a complete waste if it's not released on consoles, so hooray for console ports as semi-justification for the simplification.

You are of course correct. It is just that I was still holding on to the hope that the design choices could be influenced. That maybe we would be getting some form of locational damage back. That maybe the maps wouldn't be small and littered with loading points. That the UI might not be designed with a controller in mind. That there would be a decent inventory system. That perhaps we would get lots of background text in the form of books and data cubes. Hearing that Dugas actually likes the 360 more than PC is a real blow.



Sorry, my rap aug went haywire.

'S all cool. You need to do it to unlock the achievement anyway.

Jerion
6th Apr 2009, 12:39
You will be pleasantly surprised.

JCD
6th Apr 2009, 12:49
You will be pleasantly surprised.
http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2009/2/26/128801478867852286.jpg

:D :D :D

Irate_Iguana
6th Apr 2009, 13:13
You will be pleasantly surprised.

You know, I genuinely hope that. I really hope that I'll be forced to eat my words when more information comes out. As it stands know there has been a complete lack of any kind of information, let alone positive info. The things that we do know hardly inspire confidence.

I just don't understand them being so goddamned tight lipped about the entire game. You could say what you want about Bethesda and Fallout 3, but at least they managed to release copious amounts of information. Sure it sucked, but we knew in advance what we were getting. Or look at Diablo 3. There is no idea how many years that game will be in development, but they are updating every few weeks with new screenshots.

Right now you say that they have toned down the renaissance style. Have we seen even one screenshot? You say they have redesigned a lot of levels and again no screenshots. Even the mystical devblog has been referred to for god knows how long yet shows no sign of actually being released. All we get are vague promises. This in turn leads to a lot of speculation and negativity. They could actually kill most of our concerns with a set of three screenshots. One showing the new art style. One showing the inventory screen. One showing Adam using the cover system.

Jerion
6th Apr 2009, 13:18
You know, I genuinely hope that. I really hope that I'll be forced to eat my words when more information comes out. As it stands know there has been a complete lack of any kind of information, let alone positive info. The things that we do know hardly inspire confidence.

I just don't understand them being so goddamned tight lipped about the entire game. You could say what you want about Bethesda and Fallout 3, but at least they managed to release copious amounts of information. Sure it sucked, but we knew in advance what we were getting. Or look at Diablo 3. There is no idea how many years that game will be in development, but they are updating every few weeks with new screenshots.

Right now you say that they have toned down the renaissance style. Have we seen even one screenshot? You say they have redesigned a lot of levels and again no screenshots. Even the mystical devblog has been referred to for god knows how long yet shows no sign of actually being released. All we get are vague promises. This in turn leads to a lot of speculation and negativity. They could actually kill most of our concerns with a set of three screenshots. One showing the new art style. One showing the inventory screen. One showing Adam using the cover system.

I agree. They have been too tightlipped. I do wish they would finally flip the switch on the website and all that.

Spyhopping
6th Apr 2009, 13:25
I hope taking this long to release new info indicates that they are putting a lot of thought into it. But how long have we been waiting for a devblog now? It must be longer than 6 months

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 16:32
Dugan confirmed it for PS3 and 360 in the Total PC Gaming (UK) interview last month. He then stated a personal preference for the 360 (over both PC and PS3) which explains a lot.

This is ... most troubling :(


You will be pleasantly surprised.

I honestly don't think thats going to happen. If this game was called anything else, maybe. But when they stamp a big Deus Ex logo on the front, I expect near-perfection. If EM wanted a game with which they could test out all the console-y ideas they've been dyeing to try out, then they should have made a spiritual succesor to DX, not a direct prequel.

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 17:37
As promised, below is the transcript of the relevant part of the article. Turns out, there's no direct quote from Dugas saying it's on consoles, but the article claims it is and I'm certain they would've checked the info with him before printing it, especially when he talks about consoles.


Deus Ex 3, as you would guess given this feature is in total PC Gaming, will be released on the PC. But it'll also come out on the XBox360 and the PS3. And as shocking as it may seem, Jean-Francois prefers the 360. "I can be on my couch - a big feature to me - take full advantage of my home theatre system, access online content, play with friends without wondering if it's going to work or not. PC offers those features, don't get me wrong, but the 360 is the first time someone has got it fully right and it's accessible to almost anyone."

He then goes on about piracy, and how consoles are great because you don't have to upgrade them, and then he says:


"Don't get me wrong, I still love PC gaming but I'm not hardcore about it any more."

They then ask about casual vs hardcore gaming, he says both are great, and that the hardcore market can learn from the casual market. This statement also has me worried.

Personally, I think every time the guy opens his mouth he says the wrong thing, but regardless of your opinion of him, I think we can all agree on one thing: Warren Spector he ain't.

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 17:40
Warren Spector he ain't.

True. *sigh-of-disapointment* He could have at least lied to appease us.

Jerion
6th Apr 2009, 17:44
...and I'm certain they would've checked the info with him before printing it...


Hardly. The magazines come to montréal, they talk with the devs, the devs tell them stuff about the game, and then the magazines go back and write whatever they damn well please.

I have a small suspicion that the magazines keep tabs on this forum as a way to judge fan feedback. I also suspect that they then make their articles more controversially worded to incite more drama/negative feedback/whathaveyou in the fans.

That "tentacles" thing? There were never even tentacles in the applied concept. the bungie part was just a basic way to describe how the player perceived things (it would feel similar to a bungie cord by slowing you as you fall near the bottom).

gamer0004
6th Apr 2009, 17:52
As promised, below is the transcript of the relevant part of the article. Turns out, there's no direct quote from Dugas saying it's on consoles, but the article claims it is and I'm certain they would've checked the info with him before printing it, especially when he talks about consoles.



He then goes on about piracy, and how consoles are great because you don't have to upgrade them, and then he says:



They then ask about casual vs hardcore gaming, he says both are great, and that the hardcore market can learn from the casual market. This statement also has me worried.

Personally, I think every time the guy opens his mouth he says the wrong thing, but regardless of your opinion of him, I think we can all agree on one thing: Warren Spector he ain't.

Which issue was it? And how long was that interview? I might order it if it's long enough...

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 17:55
Hardly. The magazines come to montréal, they talk with the devs, the devs tell them stuff about the game, and then the magazines go back and write whatever they damn well please.

I have a small suspicion that the magazines keep tabs on this forum as a way to judge fan feedback. I also suspect that they then make their articles more controversially worded to incite more drama/negative feedback/whathaveyou in the fans.

That "tentacles" thing? There were never even tentacles in the applied concept. the bungie part was just a basic way to describe how the player perceived things (it would feel similar to a bungie cord by slowing you as you fall near the bottom).

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest

Ashpolt
6th Apr 2009, 17:57
^^ It's issue 18, and the interview is 6 pages. It's not worth buying the magazine for, no screens and no info that hasn't already been posted on here.

Strangely enough, there's a thread about Deux Ex 3 and platforms going on 4chan right now. The OP of the topic says it's 360 and PC, but he doesn't post a source so I suspect he's trolling. Someone quoted my update of the Wikipedia page though (only Wiki update I've ever done) so I'm currently having a geekgasm.

[EDIT] For those who want to read it, the thread is here while it lasts (probably not long:)

http://zip.4chan.org/v/res/29607855.html

Usual 4chan health warnings apply.

And hey, they all seem to hate regenerating health, third person etc. Maybe it's not just a handful of people on this board, and everyone else loves those choices? *SHOCK*

Jerion
6th Apr 2009, 17:58
^^ It's issue 18, and the interview is 6 pages. It's not worth buying the magazine for, no screens and no info that hasn't already been posted on here.

Strangely enough, there's a thread about Deux Ex 3 and platforms going on 4chan right now. The OP of the topic says it's 360 and PC, but he doesn't post a source so I suspect he's trolling. Someone quoted my update of the Wikipedia page though (only Wiki update I've ever done) so I'm currently having a geekgasm.

While normally I would be congratualting you on having you wiki update be quoted...This is 4chan we're talking about.

JCD
6th Apr 2009, 17:59
4chan + DX -> We are going to see Bob Page chargin his lazaaaaa soon :lol:

IOOI
6th Apr 2009, 18:30
Hardly. The magazines come to montréal, they talk with the devs, the devs tell them stuff about the game, and then the magazines go back and write whatever they damn well please.

I have a small suspicion that the magazines keep tabs on this forum as a way to judge fan feedback. I also suspect that they then make their articles more controversially worded to incite more drama/negative feedback/whathaveyou in the fans.

That "tentacles" thing? There were never even tentacles in the applied concept. the bungie part was just a basic way to describe how the player perceived things (it would feel similar to a bungie cord by slowing you as you fall near the bottom).

Thats why I don't buy game magazines anymore (that and cause i'm a casual gamer). Now I only buy them if they offer some game. If i want info about a game i read the forums (and GS).

JCD
6th Apr 2009, 18:35
I only buy (sometimes) PC Gamer UK. I trust no other magazine.

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 18:36
I like PC Gamer too. I don't bother with anything else.

IOOI
6th Apr 2009, 18:37
[EDIT] For those who want to read it, the thread is here while it lasts (probably not long:)

Usual 4chan health warnings apply.


What do you mean with that? Its nots for everyone to see?:confused:

Larington
6th Apr 2009, 18:47
Picked up that issue of Total PC Gaming by chance today and had a quick look through the interview. Definately states PC, PS3 & 360, and has to be proded into the whole piracy issue by the interviewers before mentioning it. (Lets not derail into a DRM discussion though please, theres a thread for that already). The picture of the development team was somewhat amusing in a 'demonstrates the shortage of women in games development' kind of way (Not saying it needs to be 50/50, but what appears to be less than 5 in a team of around 90 staffers is somewhat disconcerting).

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 18:49
^^ That's just because girls don't like video games. Its a proven fact :rasp:

IOOI
6th Apr 2009, 19:06
^^ That's just because girls don't like video games. Its a proven fact :rasp:

Are you summoning MyImmortal?:poke:

Now, about magazines, here in Portugal we used to have two main PC gaming magazines (Mega Score and BGamer). Now its just BGamer. Its a good mag but as I said I can get the info in the internet (same for PC hardware).

Larington
6th Apr 2009, 19:13
Whats curious is that in a recent game development magazine, I learned from a salary survey that women in the games industry are generally a little bit better paid than their male counterparts... Maybe the scarcity has some inluence on that, its difficult to be sure.

Spyhopping
6th Apr 2009, 20:02
^^ That's just because girls don't like video games. Its a proven fact :rasp:

Yep. Video games are crap. Hang on... isn't this a video game forum? :whistle:

Mindmute
6th Apr 2009, 20:16
Yep. Video games are crap. Hang on... isn't this a video game forum? :whistle:

Don't be fooled, this is nothing but a social experiment for a conspiracy of the highest level...

Irate_Iguana
6th Apr 2009, 20:59
He then goes on about piracy, and how consoles are great because you don't have to upgrade them, and then he says:

They then ask about casual vs hardcore gaming, he says both are great, and that the hardcore market can learn from the casual market. This statement also has me worried.

He sure as hell is making all the wrong noises. Consoles may be have a fixed hardware configuration allowing for easy optimization, but that is at the same time their greatest weakness. It is what holds back the options for PC's and puts caps on what can be done and can't be done whenever a game goes multi-platform. And again I wonder what he does with his PC that he needs to upgrade so often?

There is absolutely nothing the hardcore market can learn from the casuals. Nothing at all. In the name of the casuals any scrap of intelligence is being torn from games. All content has to be available on the first go. Players shouldn't be allowed to create unworkable characters. If the system requires more than three minutes of reading to be understood it will be replaced. What does he think that casuals can contribute to a solid game?

EDIT:


And hey, they all seem to hate regenerating health, third person etc. Maybe it's not just a handful of people on this board, and everyone else loves those choices? *SHOCK*

To be fair, this is /v/. They hate almost anything.

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 22:03
There is absolutely nothing the hardcore market can learn from the casuals. Nothing at all.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

With the possible exception of "how to become moar stooopid"

Larington
6th Apr 2009, 22:06
Thats so closed minded I don't even know where to begin. Wow. I'll admit I'm not sure what lessons can be taken from casual games, but to just assume there aren't any... Wow.
Just wow.

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 22:13
Their games are simpler, shorter, AND more expensive. Console hardware cannot be upgraded, and gamepad controllers are significantly limited when compared to a mouse+keyboard. Emulate them? No thank you

Spyhopping
6th Apr 2009, 22:13
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

With the possible exception of "how to become moar stooopid"

I think you'll find it's spelled MORE. Peh, you bloody casual gamer, you! ;)

The definition of a casual gamer is quite loose. I'm quite casual at the moment only because there aren't many new games that interest me. Doesn't mean I need things dumbed down, I can demonstrate a very different gaming style when I'm really drawn in to something.

JCD
6th Apr 2009, 22:53
I think casual gamers indeed don't have anything to offer to hcore gamers. That's why they are called casual and the others hcore.

Hoooowever...

Casual games CAN offer sth to hcore games. For example, look at Gears of War. A typical casual console game, with looots of shooting and almost no use of serious tactics. A typical example of a console 3rd person shooter. A typical example of "non-hcore" game. However, it did have tons of artistic design in it, with excellent landscapes/architecture, which could be considered as a new "standard" for these kind of games. In the end, it did "offer" us sth.

GmanPro
6th Apr 2009, 23:40
^^ That's pushing it. I don't care for the artistic style of Gears of War, with its copious amounts of "waist-high walls colored every shade of the dirt spectrum."

IOOI
6th Apr 2009, 23:59
So I entitled myself casual gamer... whats a light gamer? Explain it to me like I was a n00b.:D

(I've been so far away from games that nothing makes sense anymore)

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 00:04
@ GmanPro:

Check these ss:

http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/356472_full.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/248727_full.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/248726_full.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/236670_full.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/210961_full.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/8312/210955_full.jpg
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/reviews/360/gears-war/gears-war-a.jpg
http://theangrypixel.com/blog/wp-content/gallery/gears-of-war-screenshots/25.jpg
http://www.dragonsteelmods.com/Images/articles/gears-of-war/resize/gears16.jpg

The game had a unique feeling of post apocalypse blended with futuristic gothic/ancient greek/roman architecture, I caught myself many times looking at the scenery.

The thing is that, because it was not as good as a game (only the console players adored it so much), people didn't pay much attention to it's artistic value.

Or simply, because I have never seen a 3rd person console shooter having such nicely detailed and artistic enviroments, I tend to overreact a bit :scratch: :D

IOOI
7th Apr 2009, 00:17
Their games are simpler, shorter, AND more expensive. Console hardware cannot be upgraded, and gamepad controllers are significantly limited when compared to a mouse+keyboard. Emulate them? No thank you
I understand what you're trying to say. I as well do not like bad ports or bad configuration/optimization in PC. Although I entitle myself casual gamer for me there's only games that i like and dislike. :thumb:

GmanPro
7th Apr 2009, 00:24
@JCD, there are obviously plenty of amazing visuals to be had with PC games too. But that's not the point. There is no reason why visuals like those cannot be obtained on a PC. In fact, PC's can be pushed much much farther than these consoles and produce even better stunning graphics.

All of that aside, I think that there is something to be said for style over pixel/polygon count. For example, I still think that Thief 2 looks better than Thief 3, and Baldur's Gate 2 looks better than any other BioWare game to come out since.

In short, if your main argument is that consoles have pretty graphics, then sorry, but that doesn't count.

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 01:15
You can't distinguish graphics from artistic design? What I'm telling you is that GoW has artistic design, not good graphics. Crysis has good graphics. I'm not talking about graphics here. All I'm saying is that even a stupid game as GoW has the potential to offer us sth, because it's developers stayed true to their concept art designs, sth extremely rare for console games. Even a casual game can offer the hardcore player sth he can value. GoW's art/architecture is pretty unique and that's what distinguises it from other titles. I only used GoW for an example. I could talk about Quake IV, which has some excellent use of lighting in some levels, giving the game a more artistic look. Thief 3 had lots of such levels ;)

(I just realised: Did you honestly believe that I would give an example of good graphics out of a console game??? :nut: :nut: :nut: You really TOTALLY missed the point :rasp: )

GmanPro
7th Apr 2009, 02:50
Meh. There have already been plenty of PC games that stay true to their concept art and create a beautifully stylized game world with this that and the other thing. We don't need to learn anything from console games.

FrankCSIS
7th Apr 2009, 03:07
The thing is that, because it was not as good as a game (only the console players adored it so much), people didn't pay much attention to it's artistic value.

The problem is that it didn't make use of its environment and all the stylized architecture at all. Think about what actually happened in-game, then think about what story we got, and then consider the artistic world we were offered. What you should amount to in the end is that the setting could have been absolutely anything. Take the exact same game, levels, objectives and story, and throw all of this in, say, a WW2 environment, and the end game and experience are entirely the same, with a different background.

It would be the equivalent of creating an entire universe like Star Wars, and never once refer to said universe, setting some generic story into it that could take place in Australia, or in my basement. It's pointless, and contributes nothing to the movie, other than looking nice or complex. In the end, you'd have people wondering why the hell was any of this set in space.

In comparison, a movie like Alien couldn't take place anywhere else than in its spacecraft, and The Thing was made for the solitude and emptynes of Antarctica. For all of its flaws, Bioshock made good use of its artistic value, game-wise, and couldn't have been set in any other environment.

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 04:40
O-k, since we are not getting anywhere, GoW was a bad example.:gamer:

Let's take Bioshock. It is a console game and I hope you don't doubt it. It isn't System Shock, I believe we all agree to that. It is largely consolised, in order to offer the console gamers a chance to play such a title. If it was a PC-only game, it's interface/gameplay would be a lot different.

They did it right though, didn't they? Wasn't Bioshock a purely artistic experience from which other devs should take example? It isn't purely hcore for sure, so it offered sth to the hcore community.

Fable is another example. Nice ideas packed in a simple RPG experience. Many casual games actually can give us some good elements to be based on.

Halo for example certainly isn't such a title. I was laughing at all these people calling it a revolution, I thought they were on drugs! The repetitive SAME levels all over, the.....walking/flying ONIONS as the WORST ENEMY of the universe, that game was a parody. As many many console titles are.

But some tend to differ. They are not hcore games (only some Racing Titles can be characterised as hcore - GT and Forza), but they have some pretty good ideas/elements in them, things that hcore players can value :thumb:

K^2
7th Apr 2009, 04:44
Hardcore titles for consoles ended with the SNES era.

itsalladream
7th Apr 2009, 04:58
As far as RPGs go, FF has a pretty good hold on consoles, if you could consider them hardcore.:hmm:

GmanPro
7th Apr 2009, 05:19
Nah, FF games are pretty casual/console if you ask me. I hate people who say that FF7 is the best gaming experience ever when I can name a dozen western RPG's that are immensely better.

@JCD. BioShock is a better example but still. The only reason that it was designed to be played on a console was because it is more profitable to do so. If consoles did not exist, then BioShock, and Fable and everything else, would have been made for PC's with all the same artistic style. Being on a console doesn't really have any impact on the visual style of the game. I mean, when a discussion about the visual-style of BioShock comes up, people don't think about the consoles ... they think 1960's America and Atlas Shrugged.

K^2
7th Apr 2009, 08:07
I don't think it's the platform anymore. It's convenient to label the people for whom the games are made as PC and Console gamers, but in this case, it's really more about casual gamers. They are a majority right now, even on PC, and games get tailored to them.

And I'm not sure about the 360, but PS3 can be a hardcore gaming platform. It's set up to utilize mouse and keyboard out of the box, it has solid hardware, hard drive as a standard features, and a number of other things required of a solid platform. But there are no games on it for the hardcore gamer. None. Why?

Irate_Iguana
7th Apr 2009, 08:39
But there are no games on it for the hardcore gamer. None. Why?

The way I see it this is the result of the image of the platform. It is still a console. People developing games for it, or rather their publishers, still adhere to the stereotypical image of the casual console gamer. Someone with the attention span of a gnat, the intellectual capacity of a brain dead squirrel and a willingness to overlook any flaw as long as there is enough bloom.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think all console gamers are like this. I still think that there is plenty of room for hardcore games on the console, but the people with the money have decided that console gamers fall into that stereotype. As long as they perpetuate this myth and the games they release get bought without any critique then I don't see that change. Why bother aiming for the hardcore when you can make more money with easy to construct shovelware?

K^2
7th Apr 2009, 08:47
People developing games for it, or rather their publishers, still adhere to the stereotypical image of the casual console gamer. Someone with the attention span of a gnat, the intellectual capacity of a brain dead squirrel and a willingness to overlook any flaw as long as there is enough bloom.
Can you point me to the last major PC title that was not created using the same reasoning?

Irate_Iguana
7th Apr 2009, 08:49
Can you point me to the last major PC title that was not created using the same reasoning?

No, I can't. Particularly since the only true major PC-Only release I can think of is WoW.

K^2
7th Apr 2009, 09:41
That's my point. I think saying "Publishers gear games towards Console gamers" is just a habit from 5 years ago. They simply gear games towards casual gamer now and release them on anything with a screen. Nobody cares about making a good game anymore. They only care about making a game that sells well. And right now it's a casual gamer game regardless of platform.

Ashpolt
7th Apr 2009, 09:51
Can you point me to the last major PC title that was not created using the same reasoning?

Empire: Total War?

Necros
7th Apr 2009, 09:54
The Witcher?

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 10:22
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

And of course every simulator, Silent Hunter, Flight Sim, GTR/GTL/RACE, Live For Speed, Richard Burns Rally, Jane's F16, etc. Every once in a while we see titles like these emerging. Not pretty often, but we see them.

I also consider the upcoming R.U.S.E. to be a good example. I don't know if it's going to be PC only or not (quite frankly, I heavily doubt that any console can handle such a game), but it most certainly rocks.

P-nut
7th Apr 2009, 10:23
I wonder, what is your (/you guys') definition of a 'hardcore game'? I know decent games are thinly spread nowadays, but still, what, according to you guys, makes a hardcore game? better even, what defines a hardcore gamer?

I have been gaming alot since I was very young (it all started with the first prince of persia for me), so you could call me a hardcore gamer. BUT, 2 years back I bought an XBOX360. Why? I enjoy games like Fifa, GTA or Forza, and honestly they are so much nicer to play on a console (**** a PC with a gamepad). I really enjoyed playing Oblivion and Fallout 3. Mass Effect was decent, though I expected much more from it. Same goes for Assassin's Creed (too much repetitive gameplay imo). Brainless shooters are not my thing, not on the pc nor on the console. Aside from that I enjoy many, what you would call, casual games, but honestly, a casual game can still rock your world, even for experienced gamers.

back to the point, even though the percentage of decent games taken over the entire industry (which is bigger than movies as we all know) has gotten lower and lower over the past few years, that doesnt mean there are less good games coming out than say, 10 years ago, just alot more crappy ones.

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 10:35
I wonder, what is your (/you guys') definition of a 'hardcore game'? I know decent games are thinly spread nowadays, but still, what, according to you guys, makes a hardcore game? better even, what defines a hardcore gamer?

I have been gaming alot since I was very young (it all started with the first prince of persia for me), so you could call me a hardcore gamer. BUT, 2 years back I bought an XBOX360. Why? I enjoy games like Fifa, GTA or Forza, and honestly they are so much nicer to play on a console (**** a PC with a gamepad). I really enjoyed playing Oblivion and Fallout 3. Mass Effect was decent, though I expected much more from it. Same goes for Assassin's Creed (too much repetitive gameplay imo). Brainless shooters are not my thing, not on the pc nor on the console. Aside from that I enjoy many, what you would call, casual games, but honestly, a casual game can still rock your world, even for experienced gamers.

back to the point, even though the percentage of decent games taken over the entire industry (which is bigger than movies as we all know) has gotten lower and lower over the past few years, that doesnt mean there are less good games coming out than say, 10 years ago, just alot more crappy ones.
I had a conversation with a friend about the subject and we were wondering, what if people only played the crappy sequels and not the originals, what would their opinion be?

Imagine someone who has played Deus Ex IW but not Deus Ex. Oblivion but not Morrowind. Fallout 3 but not Fallout 1/2. What would his opinion be?

We both thought that he would be amazed of the games' quality/story and he would consider them as the best games ever, and even think they are the most hardcore ones.

The thing is that he would be wrong. Just try to play Morrowind and the old Fallouts to understand that. Both Oblivion and Fallout 3 had some excellent art and some good aspects, but they are NOT to be compared with their "ancestors". If you play them, you will understand :thumb:

P-nut
7th Apr 2009, 10:55
I had a conversation with a friend about the subject and we were wondering, what if people only played the crappy sequels and not the originals, what would their opinion be?

Imagine someone who has played Deus Ex IW but not Deus Ex. Oblivion but not Morrowind. Fallout 3 but not Fallout 1/2. What would his opinion be?

We both thought that he would be amazed of the games' quality/story and he would consider them as the best games ever, and even think they are the most hardcore ones.

The thing is that he would be wrong. Just try to play Morrowind and the old Fallouts to understand that. Both Oblivion and Fallout 3 had some excellent art and some good aspects, but they are NOT to be compared with their "ancestors". If you play them, you will understand :thumb:

My first encounter with the Elder Scrolls series was daggerfall. Wasn't really interested in it at the time though. I got hooked on rpg's with morrowind (this reminds me to dig up my old copy again for another play). But in my opinion, Oblivion took it to the next level. Only 2 other games managed to totally make me forget my social life and keep me in front of the screen for weeks, Deus Ex 1 and the first Command & Conquer (ah, sweet childhood :rolleyes: ).
On Fallout, I wasn't too fond of its' turn based system, but thats just my taste. I can imagine alot of die-hard fans of the originals hate the direction it has gone, but for me it's perfect.
anyways, dont think you know what I've played and what not ;) and remember, beauty is still in the eye of the beholder :whistle:

Ashpolt
7th Apr 2009, 11:11
[EDIT] This is in response to JCD, not P-nut.

^^ What you've got to bear in mind though is that just because Fallout 3 and Oblivion might not be as hardcore as their predecessors, doesn't mean they're not hardcore. Fallout 3 has a localised damage system very similar to Deus Ex's, stats that actually affect things, a weight based inventory system and so on. Sure it's maybe not as in-depth as the old games (I'm on of those people that started with FO3, so I can't say) but by today's standards, it's certainly towards the more hardcore end of the market. Frankly, rather than *****ing about Fallout 3, we should be praising it for showing that visible statistics and a vaguely complex health system *cough* do not cause gamers to hyperventilate and rock backwards and forwards while sucking their thumb - even console gamers!

This is pretty much what annoys me about the state of the industry nowadays. Developers seem to have got it into their heads that simpler = better, but I don't know where they're getting that from. Fallout 3, for all its faults, was one of the most complex games released on a console last year and it sold by the bucketload. Did it sell because of its depths? Well, you can't put it down to graphics - it was nowhere near the best looking game of its day - and its combat mechanics were lacking compared to other shooters. Normally those two things would sound the death knell for a game, but it still sold amazingly - could it be that gamers are happy to buy pretty much anything with depth nowadays, because there are so few even vaguely deep games being released? At the very least, having stats, a locational and non regenerating damage system and a fairly sedentary pace didn't drag its sales down, so why exactly are we being made to put up with weapon / aug upgrades only, regenerating health and a heavier action focus?

Irate_Iguana
7th Apr 2009, 12:31
Imagine someone who has played Deus Ex IW but not Deus Ex. Oblivion but not Morrowind. Fallout 3 but not Fallout 1/2. What would his opinion be?

Actually I started playing the TES series with Oblivion. I can't say that I was really impressed. The environments looked good up close, but the rest was really disappointing. Nothing you ever did mattered. There were zero consequences to all your actions. Your build did not matter at all. You could achieve anything in a single play through. Combat was boring and repetitive. Stealth was broken beyond belief. The great outdoors was overcrowded with all of the random creatures and the distances felt pitiful. The story was full of holes. The only competent storyline was in the Dark Brotherhood set of missions. The only other missions that I liked were the Thief guild missions.

So you can still judge a sequel on its own and come to the conclusion that the game is subpar. It just depends on the internal standards of the person who played the game.

K^2
7th Apr 2009, 12:56
Yeah. I only played Fallout 3, and I can tell it's broken. I really want to play Fallout 1/2 now, because from Fallout 3, I cannot tell what the hype was all about.

JCD
7th Apr 2009, 16:09
My first encounter with the Elder Scrolls series was daggerfall. Wasn't really interested in it at the time though. I got hooked on rpg's with morrowind (this reminds me to dig up my old copy again for another play). But in my opinion, Oblivion took it to the next level. Only 2 other games managed to totally make me forget my social life and keep me in front of the screen for weeks, Deus Ex 1 and the first Command & Conquer (ah, sweet childhood :rolleyes: ).
On Fallout, I wasn't too fond of its' turn based system, but thats just my taste. I can imagine alot of die-hard fans of the originals hate the direction it has gone, but for me it's perfect.
anyways, dont think you know what I've played and what not ;) and remember, beauty is still in the eye of the beholder :whistle:
If you honestly think that Oblivion took Morrowind to the next level, or Fallout 3 is good with the...VATS, then I have to disagree :)

GmanPro
7th Apr 2009, 18:54
Can you point me to the last major PC title that was not created using the same reasoning?

Neverwinter Nights 2

Larington
7th Apr 2009, 19:27
I think the turn based system of F1/2 and the quasi real time with pauses for VATS/Inventory are about even really, both have some flaws in terms of gameplay flow. I found the turn based system on the early fallout games was boring and VATS suffers from the same problem. The AI in Fallout 3 even scrags the real time gameplay in my personal opinion.

Most reviewers seemed to praise it to the heavens purely because of its ambition, rather than because of a polished and clever execution.

GmanPro
7th Apr 2009, 21:03
[EDIT]
This is pretty much what annoys me about the state of the industry nowadays. Developers seem to have got it into their heads that simpler = better, but I don't know where they're getting that from. Fallout 3, for all its faults, was one of the most complex games released on a console last year and it sold by the bucketload.

It sold because Bethesda made it.

Heres the problem with games being made less complex etc etc. I don't mind these changes all that much. But for crying out loud, Fallout 3 is NOT a Fallout game. Not even close. Call it like "Wasteland" or something, and I'd be much happier.

Larington
7th Apr 2009, 21:28
Also, lots of folks seemed to be pretty pessimistic about the way preview material seemed to focus on the combat rather than the story telling and so on in Fallout 3, but I suspect they were being a lot smarter by doing that than we realised. AKA I think Bethesda are quite good at hyping their games, even if that does result in a backlash from certain quarters of gaming fandom when they finally get to sit down with something that they've probably built up hugely unrealistic expectations for-over-time.

Laokin
7th Apr 2009, 22:39
Yeah. I only played Fallout 3, and I can tell it's broken. I really want to play Fallout 1/2 now, because from Fallout 3, I cannot tell what the hype was all about.

FallOut 3 was OP until I got out of the bunker..... then the game got terrible... like horribly horribly bad. I understand there was a nuclear fallout hence the name, but seriously..... brown... is so ugly. Could have made it more colorful christ. Furthermore, It got super old super fast fighting enemies, they all just RUN AT YOU...... I was like um? Half man half crab with LETHAL claws. I got hit like twice and I was F'd. I was expecting to be able to head shot stuff and ya know kill it.... but not fallout... I ran into a super mutant with a rocket launched like 5 minutes out of the gate..... it was nearly impossible to kill.... took like every single bullet I had found... plus some that I had to FIND whilst he was still chasing me.... just pure UN-FUN.

Also, why add in a thirdperson camera if you don't even have complete animations... that bothers me so much that they did that twice. Obliv was the same way with the incomplete animations.... *Sigh* shoddy development... period, the end.


It sold because Bethesda made it.

Heres the problem with games being made less complex etc etc. I don't mind these changes all that much. But for crying out loud, Fallout 3 is NOT a Fallout game. Not even close. Call it like "Wasteland" or something, and I'd be much happier.


No It definitely wasn't anything like Fall Out. They borrowed the name and the post apoc setting and made their own turd and sort of "reinvented" the turn base action for a game it doesn't really belong in. I mean ****, it would of just been better to give us bullet time, or slow motion with the highlights, instead it was an actual replacement for combat. You could use it practically exclusively with certain builds and decimate stuff ludicrously fast which makes every other possible combination of perks/stats seem like a waste of time to even play.

FallOut 3 had my attention.... while it was looking similar to DX.(creeping around corners stealth in the vault with the trusty police club... oh so similar..... in feel) The second the vault opened and I was set free on the world I didn't even wanna live in... I was immediately bored. There was no life to be found in the world, if I was the main character... I'da just found one of those there guns and shot myself square in the face... rather to live in a world like that.... What a waste of time.....

Horrible Horrible Horrible game with TERRIBLE AND UGLY DINGY graphics. Should of won the award of the year for "Worst Artistic Design." I know it's post apoc and all.... but there are millions of ways to do it better than that.....

Snake04
21st Apr 2009, 19:59
Man i hope this game comes to ps3 or i am gonna be in **** cause my pc is crap and to upgrade will cost alot so please eidos i beg you make it for ps3 also

K^2
21st Apr 2009, 20:08
Also, why add in a thirdperson camera if you don't even have complete animations...
It would have been nice of them to add the animations, but at least the option doesn't hurt anyone. If it bothers you, stay in first person. That's what I did.

A lot of developers would not even bother to include the 3rd person option simply to avoid the work with animations. Here Bethesda says, "Yes, we are just as lazy as the other guys, but at least we don't cover it up!" I'd give them a few points for partial honesty. Not that it would improve the overall score.

GlassAgate
11th Jul 2009, 10:42
Any chance of this? I'd love to see it. Also,
how about "Invisible War"? Not an "X-Box
Originals" release, but an XBLA release.
Of course, that would require a lot of work, I'm
guessing. I don't know, but you surely do.

Kick these ideas around, if you would. If
one or both come to XBLA, I'll be ready
to snap them up.

free2game
11th Jul 2009, 12:46
Any chance of this? I'd love to see it. Also,
how about "Invisible War"? Not an "X-Box
Originals" release, but an XBLA release.
Of course, that would require a lot of work, I'm
guessing. I don't know, but you surely do.

Kick these ideas around, if you would. If
one or both come to XBLA, I'll be ready
to snap them up.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/6920/
there you go, better one

Ashpolt
11th Jul 2009, 15:44
Any chance of this? I'd love to see it. Also,
how about "Invisible War"? Not an "X-Box
Originals" release, but an XBLA release.
Of course, that would require a lot of work, I'm
guessing. I don't know, but you surely do.

Kick these ideas around, if you would. If
one or both come to XBLA, I'll be ready
to snap them up.


Why was this merged into this thread? This is about re-releasing the original games on XBLA, not about what platform DX3 will be on. Mods half asleep when they did this? :D

IIRC, XBLA has a 50Mb limit for games, so they'd struggle just a bit!

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Jul 2009, 17:28
Ooops, yeah.. my bad. So sorry. :eek:
I was half a sleep too, out partying last night. :naughty:

Torquemada
11th Jul 2009, 17:28
Actually I don't really care for how many platforms DX3 is released as long as it comes to my PC at the same time it gets to the other platforms.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
11th Jul 2009, 17:30
Yeah, I'm only going to play DX3 on my beloved PC.

GlassAgate
14th Jul 2009, 11:25
Why was this merged into this thread? This is about re-releasing the original games on XBLA, not about what platform DX3 will be on. Mods half asleep when they did this? :D

IIRC, XBLA has a 50Mb limit for games, so they'd struggle just a bit!

Um, the limit has been changed many times. I think that the current limit
is 2 GB's.

K^2
14th Jul 2009, 17:25
Why was this merged [...]
The most commonly asked question on this board. Beating the "WTF? Health Regeneration?" and "When do we get new info," combined by a good margin.

Ninjerk
16th Jul 2009, 05:49
Let's not forget "IW suxxx!1eleven"

That's not a question; it's a law.

Blade_hunter
16th Jul 2009, 12:46
Sometimes it was asked by persons who said oh it wasn't bad, and arguing the game is good because it has a cool story.
but this isn't the factor what makes a good game, it helps but the good game is made by its gameplay (game mechanics) and if they work well (good AI, good amount of choice, the ambiance felt in the game)

Snake04
16th Jul 2009, 15:31
Rene you sure its only for pc cause then i have to upgrade my pc its got a duel core amd x2 i have to get ram and a new ati card and thats alot of money so tell me is dx3 coming to the ps3

K^2
16th Jul 2009, 17:06
Rene you sure its only for pc cause then i have to upgrade my pc its got a duel core amd x2 i have to get ram and a new ati card and thats alot of money so tell me is dx3 coming to the ps3
Rene never said it was only for PC. He said that it was only confirmed for PC. We don't know what other platforms it will be on. But since the CD engine already runs on 360 and PS3 it seems silly not to have it on these platforms.

Blade_hunter
16th Jul 2009, 18:12
EM made the game for PC first but the 2 major consoles (PS3 and Xbox 360) seem to be planed; most video game websites seems to claim the fact it would appear and there is a strong chance to see it in the 360 and after the PS3 or the console release at the same time ...

Irate_Iguana
16th Jul 2009, 18:28
But since the CD engine already runs on 360 and PS3 it seems silly not to have it on these platforms.

Plus when was the last time you saw a title like this only released for the PC? Add to that the fact that Square Enix is now running things it is a safe bet that it will come to at least one console.

Blade_hunter
16th Jul 2009, 19:51
STALKER was PC only

dixieflatline
16th Jul 2009, 22:12
Also, it sold because Fallout fans had waited for about a decade.

I don't think that it is too huge of a part of the sales. Actually I would bet money that the overwhelming majority of people who bought Fallout 3 did not play Fallout 1 or 2.

I think Fallout 1+2 are pretty much the best RPGs ever made (just my opinion), while Fallout 3 was fun, but it was a RPG-lite in many ways. For starters , whoever mentioned it was hardcore because of the skills, if you actually look closely at the numbers, the system they used was incredibly superficial and weak. First off all , when you start out the game, you can defeat the entire security team of the Vault with your bare fists. You don't even need to distribute your skills points if you don't want -- they don't have as much a impact as you might imagine. Another example, you don't need any weapon skills just to run up to any enemy, hit space bar, and blow off his head in one shot.

What bothers me sometimes about talking about Fallout is that most of the people who say Fallout 3 is the best of the series never played Fallout 1+2, and they just make tons of assumptions. Fallout 1+2 had about 5 times the depth and actual RPG elements as Fallout 3 had.

I see Fallout 3 as a weak RPG merged with a weak FPS, and the sum did not add up greater to the parts.

Just my humble opinion ...

Edit: And another thing that really bothers me about Fallout 3 is that it won writing awards. I really just imagine it won these awards because it was biggest hype RPG of the year, and the judges didn't actually play the game. If they did -- or at least read some reviews -- they would find out that most of the dialogue was merely average, and the main storyline was one of the biggest flaws of the game. Most of the quests of Fallout 3 were actually recycled from parts 1+2:
http://hellforge.gameriot.com/blogs/Hellforge/Fallout-3-A-Rehash-of-Old-Stories

There were a few much more talented game writing teams out there that deserved a writing award much more than did the folks at Bethesda
/rant

FrankCSIS
16th Jul 2009, 22:38
It won writing awards?

Oh man.

I need to start writing game stories. If this is the best of the crop, my amateur writing should do rather well. To think I've actually been working for a living, and all along I could be earning awards with Roman de Gare forgettable half stories.

Malah
17th Jul 2009, 15:08
And I still pray for the day that EM lets go of the totally out of place easy mode kiddie nonsense and makes a proper prequel to Deus Ex. I've been convinced that they have potential, but they should start using it already. Just announce that you'll bring back a detailed health system worthy of Deus Ex. Console **** should remain on consoles.


The least they could do is allow us to remove the useless handholding console gamers need. That was about the only thing Bioshock did right.

dark_angel_7
17th Jul 2009, 15:33
The least they could do is allow us to remove the useless handholding console gamers need. That was about the only thing Bioshock did right.

Whoever said they would have useless hand-holding and that it wouldn't be optional?...

And whats with the multi-coloured post? :p

K^2
17th Jul 2009, 16:17
Can we stop with all that color nonsense?

Malah
17th Jul 2009, 16:54
Whoever said they would have useless hand-holding and that it wouldn't be optional?...

Regen isn't an indicator for you? This game will (hopefully) have a large world in which you need to find your way. The last thing I want is to have a Q arrow that leads me to the right door/person or some stupid hints when I haven't fired my gun for 5 seconds.

K^2
17th Jul 2009, 18:02
One of these days, you'll decide to stop playing for a bit and go make yourself some coffee. Upon return, you will find the game, apparently having decided that you aren't playing because you can't figure out how to, is finishing itself for you. That will be the day that you will throw out your computer out of the window and start relying on a slide ruler for all your computational needs.

Irate_Iguana
17th Jul 2009, 19:36
The last thing I want is to have a Q arrow that leads me to the right door/person or some stupid hints when I haven't fired my gun for 5 seconds.

Wait, who said that you are allowed to NOT fire your gun for 5 seconds? That is like an eternity man. Or did you mean during the hacking QTE?

Malah
17th Jul 2009, 21:49
Wait, who said that you are allowed to NOT fire your gun for 5 seconds? That is like an eternity man. Or did you mean during the hacking QTE?

Oh snap!

It's been some time but AFAIK Vita Chambers were made optional with a patch after the outrage from the players. Likewise, quick save and quick load were added to Invisible War with a patch. What a fiasco.

I wonder if EM expects us to purchase the game first before removing the garbage out of it.
Think of the replay value.

Blade_hunter
17th Jul 2009, 23:20
Really I begin to be sad with this game :(

there is more crap expectations about the features of that game than good expectations.
but the last news we got seems to confirm each time there will be some crap in, and give reason to the persons who said oh there will be some s h i t here ...

dixieflatline
17th Jul 2009, 23:54
pha -=> I dunno man. Just from all the comments I have read on gaming sites (and trust me, I read a lot of them!) my best guess would be that 1/12 players of Fallout 3 played either Fallout 1 + 2. I completely agree with the rest of the stuff you said though.

It actually makes me a bit sad when I read a lot of new gamers / younger gamers refer to Fallout 3 as a more 'hardcore' RPG experience (someone mentioned this in this very thread.) Because compared to Fallout 1+2, Fallout 3 is very much a RPG-lite.

Back to Deus Ex 3, if it turns out the way I think it is going to turn out , then I'll probably like the game anyways. What can I say, I'm a sucker for cyberpunk and hey, I do like shooters like Rainbow Six Las Vegas. But ya I suppose I should be careful about judging it too much before we know more solid details. All the indications are pointing one way, but who knows how it will turn out at this point.

I certainly think this game isn't coming out any time soon though. 2011 would not surprise me honestly.

Malah
18th Jul 2009, 01:42
2011 would not surprise me honestly.

The latest SWAG had the release date sometime around the year 2525. Subject to change of course.

GlassAgate
19th Jul 2009, 12:02
Can we stop with all that color nonsense?

:o

Pretty.

Unstoppable
20th Jul 2009, 11:09
Im pretty sure it will come to at least the Xbox 360.

dark_angel_7
20th Jul 2009, 11:17
Im pretty sure it will come to at least the Xbox 360.

These days multi-paltform is common for "AAA Blockbuster franchises". So I expect them to release it on PC, PS3 & 360.

Malah
20th Jul 2009, 11:27
These days multi-paltform is common for "AAA Blockbuster franchises". So I expect them to release it on PS3 & 360.

Fixed.

These days the PC is seen as a distraction. Even Alan Wake, the zomfg-DX10-Vista-showcase is now a console exclusive. EM can spin all they want, but this game will be made for consoles and then some studio in Somalia will port it to the PC.

Irate_Iguana
20th Jul 2009, 11:39
some studio in Somalia will port it to the PC.

Peg leg and parrot aug here we come!

K^2
20th Jul 2009, 12:35
You know, I can't look at that picture and not remember this picture.

http://www.parliament.ge/files/1__308278_16_08_2008_22_08_36_Saakashvili_Tie.jpg

And this picture makes me think of the current EM's PR strategy.

K^2
20th Jul 2009, 17:30
Are you hinting at the engine?

Jima B
21st Jul 2009, 01:08
Well, I'm always content that the best games are still always released for PC.
If its not for PC, its probably not very good.
The few that are half-decent... They come out on PC a few month after.

gamer0004
21st Jul 2009, 18:18
Perhaps you're not directly referring to DX3, but a few months later than other platforms is unacceptable, especially when they announced it initially for the PC. God knows I hate this "special" treatment because of my platform.

I hate it when a game requires me to do manual tweaking out of the game or wait for 3rd party fixes because of piss poor optimization or totally random annoyances like being incompatible with quad core processors, compels me to use its extra garbage as a way of "copy protection". Or when my mouse feels uncomfortable because the controls are optimized for gamepads. Or when widescreen resolutions are forced on my 1280x1024 monitor with black bars on the screen or worse, with stretched images. Or when games require internet connection for single player. Or when they come with Games for Windows Live which is the single worst thing that has happened to PC gaming. Or...

When they're so badly optimized that the game doesn't even use your available 4 GB of Ram but only your video card memory?

Jerion
21st Jul 2009, 18:25
When they're so badly optimized that the game doesn't even use your available 4 GB of Ram but only your video card memory?

That's just the engine developer being lazy and not adding 64-bit support. There are precious few games out there that are 64-bit. A pity really, because you can optimize your game more efficiently with it. I think once the next generation of consoles come out that have more than 2 GB of system ram built in, we'll see much faster adoption of 64-bit support on PC releases.

gamer0004
21st Jul 2009, 20:13
That's just the engine developer being lazy and not adding 64-bit support. There are precious few games out there that are 64-bit. A pity really, because you can optimize your game more efficiently with it. I think once the next generation of consoles come out that have more than 2 GB of system ram built in, we'll see much faster adoption of 64-bit support on PC releases.

It didn't use any MB of your available RAM...

Jerion
22nd Jul 2009, 13:36
^^ And what game engine is this? O_o

gamer0004
22nd Jul 2009, 14:42
^^ and what game engine is this? O_o

gta:iv.

Mindmute
22nd Jul 2009, 14:56
That's just the engine developer being lazy and not adding 64-bit support. There are precious few games out there that are 64-bit. A pity really, because you can optimize your game more efficiently with it. I think once the next generation of consoles come out that have more than 2 GB of system ram built in, we'll see much faster adoption of 64-bit support on PC releases.

Why would it need 64 bit support for 4 GB of RAM anyway? You can reference up to 4GB with a 32 bit system, you'd only need 64 for 8 GB or up, if I'm not mistaken...

Red
22nd Jul 2009, 15:28
Why would it need 64 bit support for 4 GB of RAM anyway? You can reference up to 4GB with a 32 bit system, you'd only need 64 for 8 GB or up, if I'm not mistaken...

Single process can reference only 2GB (private set) of RAM in a 32-bit threading.

32-bit Windows can allocate approximately 3.5GB of ram (with PAE) for the whole system.

lumpi
22nd Jul 2009, 20:25
I hate it when a game requires me to do manual tweaking out of the game or wait for 3rd party fixes because of piss poor optimization or totally random annoyances[...]

I agree with the rest of your paragraph, but please, remember the first time you tried to get Deus Ex 1 to work on a Voodoo 2... Or avoid the random speed-ups from playing it on modern day hardware.

minus0ne
19th Nov 2009, 23:03
I agree with the rest of your paragraph, but please, remember the first time you tried to get Deus Ex 1 to work on a Voodoo 2... Or avoid the random speed-ups from playing it on modern day hardware.
Sorry for the bump of this old thread, but someone references it and I caught this post.

If you have "random speed-ups" on modern hardware, you've most likely forgot to apply the multicore/hyperthreading patch (or just assign the .exe to one core with task manager). This is a problem with almost all pre-multicore PC games, although easily remedied on most.

Other than that Deus Ex works perfectly with modern hardware. It looked good back then but now with New Vision, HDTP beta and DX9 renderers (there's also a DX10 renderer, although obviously without DX10 effects, purely for compatibility) it looks great. Also remember to apply the OTP UI Fix if you're playing on resolutions higher then 1280x800. I'm tinkering with ENBSeries, which adds Bloom (although on default there's way too much bloom, you can tone it down to tasteful levels)

Currently replaying it on 1680x1050 with 6xAA and 16xAF and it looks a million times better than Invisible War :lol:

Sagamo
20th Nov 2009, 00:59
yeah I played DX1 with newer hardware on high resolutions and its really nice... just to bad it doesnt have the psycho physics IW had.

SageSavage
21st Nov 2009, 22:41
No upgrades for my 2.5 years old system yet. The only noticable performance problems when using high settings I had so far was ironically with one of the first games I installed on it: Crysis. The system I had before that got upgraded served me 5 or 6 years and (performance-wise) only got upgraded with 1 Gb RAM and a new graphics card.