Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hello all!

 

Just wanted to say that KotoR was a great game! However it did seem to be a bit limited due to XBox development.

 

One big obvious part which came at a cost of immersion were the multiple compact zones. So the loading screen came a bit too often for my tastes. This was a result of the XBox only handling small sized areas at any given time.

 

Relatively steep system requirements also seem to be a result of simultaneous development and seems unnecessary to me from a PC standpoint.

 

Also if development is kept separate, there might be slightly more hope for a Mac OS X (has vast potential and is widely misunderstood) or Linux port.

 

However, development time is probably helped somewhat as they don't have to create two different bodies of code for the same amount of content.

 

So what does everyone else think? Would you suggest to keep simultaneous platform development for a particular reason? Or would you like to see a grand PC version as it was meant to be! (No... I'm not PC biased at all! :p ) Stated more objectively, would you suggest to keep development separate for a particular reason? Cheers all!

Posted

I HATE simulataneous platform development, but it seems to be a neccessary evil these days....it also means that us PC people get our version at the same time as the Billy Gates Box people. :rolleyes:

Posted

It's all about money. They'll sell more games on a cross-platform release.

 

Just like movies being changed and dumbed down to appeal to a wider audience: more money.

Posted

That may be true, but tell that to the corporations. They'll milk every last drop out of this series, just like Lucas does with the entire Star Wars franchise.

 

It's not really up to the developers to determine whether it's going to be cross-platform release. That's what the marketing whores do.

Posted
They'll milk every last drop out of this series, just like Lucas does with the entire Star Wars franchise.

 

 

I personally liked the Oringinal Trilogy as opose to the new movies that arent very good in my opinion. I really think the only reason they made the new movies is so they can get a whole new generation of kids to buy the toys and t shirts and stuff. But I dont mind they have the new movies I just dont know how sure I am on their motives...

Lou Gutman, P.I.- It's like I'm not even trying anymore!
http://theatomicdanger.iforumer.com/index....theatomicdanger

One billion b-balls dribbling simultaneously throughout the galaxy. One trillion b-balls being slam dunked through a hoop throughout the galaxy. I can feel every single b-ball that has ever existed at my fingertips. I can feel their collective knowledge channeling through my viens. Every jumpshot, every rebound and three-pointer, every layup, dunk, and free throw. I am there.

Posted

It's easier to take a PC game and put it on the XBox (which has Direct X support hardwired) than it is to port it over to Linux and Mac OS X.

Posted

I'd say this is one of the only lucasarts game that they have something to milk. Thus it makes sense that they're trying to take advantage of one of their few good and successful games. Btw, I've noticed a decided upturn in the quality of Lucasarts games recently. Anyone else noticed this?

Posted

Most certainly.

 

Compare Gladius, KOTOR, Battlefront, KOTOR:2, Republic Commando, even Galaxies to their earlier games like Racer Revenge, Clone Wars and Super Bom-Bad racing.

Posted

When do you think the turning point came? Jedi Knight? I say it was definately making better games by Jedi Outcast. Though, Outcast was probably its first really good game. my bad, forgot about Rebellion.

Posted
Btw, I've noticed a decided upturn in the quality of Lucasarts games recently. Anyone else noticed this?

They haven't matched their old adventure games yet, so I'll say no.

Posted
It's easier to take a PC game and put it on the XBox (which has Direct X support hardwired) than it is to port it over to Linux and Mac OS X.

That's what I thought.

 

Isn't the XBox just one "standardized" computer? :unsure:

Posted
It's easier to take a PC game and put it on the XBox (which has Direct X support hardwired) than it is to port it over to Linux and Mac OS X.

That's what I thought.

 

Isn't the XBox just one "standardized" computer? :unsure:

Yes and no.

 

The X-Box features a hard drive, a CPU, and a graphics card. It runs on a version of Windows CE. The graphics and software have Direct X support, so PC games written for Windows and Direct X port nicely.

 

However, the architecture of how the mainboard is designed is quite different.

 

One could contend that it is a very specialized computer. However, it does vary from a PC in a few regards.

 

I have seen hacked XBoxes running Windows or Linux, so it can be used as a PC if you really wanted.

Posted

I heard that the XBox2 is suppose to be very close to the PC. Frankly the OS of the XBox 2 and the next Windows OS is suppose to be the same. If I am wrong on that, somebody correct me. :D

Posted

The next Windows build (code-named Longhorn) is built around this new API that allows full Windows apps to be launched remotely via the web or a network. I doubt the XBox will run off that. However, Direct X 9 (or 10) will likely be at the heart of the XBox Next.

 

I've heard some rumors that the XBox Next may not feature a hard-drive since they're trying to keep costs down while being cutting-edge.

 

What I'd like to see is modular consoles that you can upgrade. Make an affordable (say $200 or $250 at launch instead of the $400 I'm hearing) console. Then if you want to throw in a DVD-Burner, Hard drive, whatever, make that optional. (The PSX - effectively called the PS 2-and-a-half in Japan features a hard drive, and a DVD burner. You can record tv shows with it, and burn them to DVD)

Posted
The next Windows build (code-named Longhorn) is built around this new API that allows full Windows apps to be launched remotely via the web or a network.

Yaw devs, Yaw!!! (

Posted

As far as the security concerns, I'll wait and see, but you're probably right.

 

The reason being that an XBox is dedicated to gaming. It provides more gaming

power for the buck than a PC. And games made for consoles are less buggy because you don't have to worry about hardware support for everything on the planet.

 

Besides, as it has been pointed out recently, Dell's aren't really upgradable.

Posted

Lucasarts had a dip in their game quality....it was good to start.

 

I don't think their dip was that severe though. They started with Monkey Island games, X-Wing, TIE Fighter. They fell off a bit afterwards, but still had good games like Grim Fandango, Sam and Max (or was that earlier???), Dark Forces I & II.

Posted
The next Windows build (code-named Longhorn) is built around this new API that allows full Windows apps to be launched remotely via the web or a network.
Posted

There are advantages to coming out with the PC version FIRST. It's a fact that no games that ship have no bugs. The developer should come out with PC version first, get a patch and fix any major complaints buyers may have with the game and then a month or two later come out with the XBox version. The reason? XBox games can't be patched. And don't mention XBox Live. I beleive Microsoft isn't allowing that to be used to patch games.

 

Consider how better Deus Ex 2 would have been for the XBox if there had been a delay between the PC and XBox versions and the XBox incorporated the fixes they did in the PC patch to fix stealth and other problem areas.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...