patch

[213374U]

That is why Consoles do not suck because its all in a nice premade package which one doesn't need to worry about hardware incompatibilities.  They can just play the game.  Thank you for proving Jag is right.

 

*whispers to himself*My diabolical plan worked.  Tee hee.

 

YOU LOSE! 

No, you don't need to worry about hardware compatibilities, but the problems are worse, as is the quality, in a format that can't get a patch to fix any issues. Truly, a measure of greatness.

 

And no, I didn't prove Jags right. I have never, ever had a compatibility issue. I take great care when purchasing hardware.

 

But if your "diabolical plan" was not making any sense, as usual, then yes. It has worked. I'm impressed.

[Judge Hades]

If a game is screwed up enough that it needs a patch on a console its just best to either return the game for a refund or trade. Besides with the tech support KotOR 2 got, which is next to nil, it didn't matter if KotOR 2 was on console or PC except the fact that the console version can be returned while the PC version can't.

[kumquatq3]

I just wandered into this forum and was shocked to learn people actaully think this game will get patched at all, much less lost content.

[jaguars4ever]

I WIN?

[Judge Hades]

Yes, indeed. I have a baby Darth Sidious plushy just waiting to be cuddled. BWAAHAAAHAAAAAA!

 

...pickles... yumm....

[jaguars4ever]

Ender made a very intertesting point in the other thread, which seems to have relevancy in this PC vs console debate of ours:

 

There is more.

"There's no doubting that NVIDIA's new 7800GTX is the ultimate in PC graphics technology. The card's G70 GPU, which is more than twice as powerful as two of NVIDIA's previous top-of-the-line 6800 boards, shares a lot of similar workings with the PS3's RSX chip - only it isn't as fast. Oh, and it retails for $599."

So the 7800GTX sells for $600 where as the PS3 will likely be in the $300-$400 range and have a more powerful GPU overall.

 

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/9132/PlaySta...n-GeForce-7800/

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Could it be that consoles offer more bang for your buck - more than my sweet, precious PC?! Now either I'm seeing the light, or I'm falling from grace...depends on your POV.

 

[213374U]

Could it be that consoles offer more bang for your buck - more than my sweet, precious PC?! Now either I'm seeing the light, or I'm falling from grace...depends on your POV.

 

Apparently so. Still, I like the PC better. Exclusive PC games + Keyboard & mouse for teh win.

[Judge Hades]

PCs are a waste of money and not cost effective. Also they too varied and games are bug prone because of this.

 

I use to be a big PC gamer but withthe quality of the games going six feet under Consoles are the safer bet for those on a budget.

[Nur Ab Sal]

PC means a gambler risk and that's half of a PC charm. You risk - but profits are great. Consoles are for cowardly peasants.

[Judge Hades]

WHAT FREAKING PROFIT?

 

Name one solidly built, relatively bug free, finished CRPG that has been released in the last 6 months to a year.

 

There hasn't been a single one that has been worth the time or the money. Spending $2000 on a up to date PC system is stupid. The games just aren't there. In order to have that much money spent it seriously needs to be worth my while. That means at minimum 4 to 6 finished and good CRPGs released in a fiscal year.

 

Not going to happen. We are lucky to get 2 decently made CRPGs in 4 to 6 years. SCREW THAT.

 

Consoles have a steadier stream of high quality games, better resale value, and overall more cost effective than PC.

[213374U]

Consoles have a steadier stream of high quality games

No.

[Judge Hades]

Yes. There have been more games on the X Box of late that I have enjoyed moreso than on the PC therefore the X Box is worth more to me in terms of quality.

[213374U]

So what? Console games are of less quality than PC games per norm, regardless of bug issues. If you can't deal with bugs, it's your problem. But that has nothing to do with the quality of game design.

[kumquatq3]

Maybe consoles combined have a larger stream of HIGH QUALITY games, but not just X-box or PS2 or GC alone.

 

of course, for the next gen systems, your looking at easily $1,000+ for all three.

[Master Dahvernas]

So what? Console games are of less quality than PC games per norm, regardless of bug issues. If you can't deal with bugs, it's your problem. But that has nothing to do with the quality of game design.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Please. Not another, "I am so L33T because I play games on a PC and not console" debate.

 

News Flash:

 

PLAYING VIDEO GAMES ON ONE SYSTEM, OR ANOTHER DOES NOT MAKE YOU SUPERIOR NO MATTER WHAT YOUR EGO TELLS YOU!

 

There is a reason why console systems are now more profitable and more user-friendly than PC games as much as die-hard PC gamers don't want to admit:

 

1) They innovate.

 

Have you played the game "Mercenaries"?

 

It is a third-person, Grand Theft Auto-style, freeroam, over-the-top military style shoot'em up that has a MINIMUM of 52 open-ended levels PLUS side-quests and mini-games you can do along the way and you can even play the game AFTER you finish the main quest (52 mission/levels).

 

And this is on a system that is basically a 1999-era PC (a 733 Pentium III and GeForce 2 graphics card with a total of 64 MB of RAM).

 

How about Fable?

 

This is one of the most fun, open-ended RPGs on any system. Sure, it's not as "serious" as KOTOR -- If that is even possible considering this is freakin' Star Wars in the first place -- But it is a persistent world that has day and night cycles; you can interact with NPCs a hell of a lot more than in any of the KOTOR games; what you do actually DOES change the storyline AND how NPCs view you -- and not in scripted cut-scenes either; actually IN THE GAME as you play -- As well as your character ages; can get married; there are Same-Sex relationships allowed; You can buy real estate AND play the game beyond the core storyline just like Mercenaries when you are done just to name a few.

 

Again, this is for an "obselete" system and hardware the XBox carries.

 

2) Console games must meet an established set of standards (for all consoles) before they are allowed to go gold.

 

This is fact. There is no way in Hell the PC games segment would survive with such standards in place because half of the stuff that is put out these days would never make it to gold status (which would be a good thing for consumers in the long, but bad for companies because it would force them to complete their games and make sure they are of the highest quality).

 

Sure. No game on any platform is perfect... BUT they have to be a lot more functional and complete than KOTOR II was/is to be allowed on the console as a majority of console games are [KOTOR II is the anomoly because I am pretty sure it was allowed to pass "as is" purely based on the popularity, aka profits, of the first one as well as LA's name].

 

Again, ironic there exists more standards for systems with outdated hardware than the latest and greatest rigs that either Intel or AMD can put out, huh?

 

3) The new XBox 360 and PS3 are going to be basically high-end gaming rigs with hardware that not even the PC gaming enthusiast market is going to have yet.

 

This means no longer will the games be restricted by 1999-era hardware and this should let developers innovate even more which means BETTER quality products in all areas including visuals, gameplay, sound and online as well.

 

But if you want to keep telling yourself that you are superior because you play games on a PC than a console... Please, do us all a favor and get a life.

[Judge Hades]

So what? Console games are of less quality than PC games per norm, regardless of bug issues. If you can't deal with bugs, it's your problem. But that has nothing to do with the quality of game design.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The best game design is irrelevant if the game itself doesn't work.

[Nur Ab Sal]

So what? Console games are of less quality than PC games per norm, regardless of bug issues. If you can't deal with bugs, it's your problem. But that has nothing to do with the quality of game design.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Please. Not another, "I am so L33T because I play games on a PC and not console" debate.

 

News Flash:

 

PLAYING VIDEO GAMES ON ONE SYSTEM, OR ANOTHER DOES NOT MAKE YOU SUPERIOR NO MATTER WHAT YOUR EGO TELLS YOU!

 

There is a reason why console systems are now more profitable and more user-friendly than PC games as much as die-hard PC gamers don't want to admit:

 

1) They innovate.

 

Have you played the game "Mercenaries"?

 

It is a third-person, Grand Theft Auto-style, freeroam, over-the-top military style shoot'em up that has a MINIMUM of 52 open-ended levels PLUS side-quests and mini-games you can do along the way and you can even play the game AFTER you finish the main quest (52 mission/levels).

 

And this is on a system that is basically a 1999-era PC (a 733 Pentium III and GeForce 2 graphics card with a total of 64 MB of RAM).

 

How about Fable?

 

This is one of the most fun, open-ended RPGs on any system. Sure, it's not as "serious" as KOTOR -- If that is even possible considering this is freakin' Star Wars in the first place -- But it is a persistent world that has day and night cycles; you can interact with NPCs a hell of a lot more than in any of the KOTOR games; what you do actually DOES change the storyline AND how NPCs view you -- and not in scripted cut-scenes either; actually IN THE GAME as you play -- As well as your character ages; can get married; there are Same-Sex relationships allowed; You can buy real estate AND play the game beyond the core storyline just like Mercenaries when you are done just to name a few.

 

Again, this is for an "obselete" system and hardware the XBox carries.

 

2) Console games must meet an established set of standards (for all consoles) before they are allowed to go gold.

 

This is fact. There is no way in Hell the PC games segment would survive with such standards in place because half of the stuff that is put out these days would never make it to gold status (which would be a good thing for consumers in the long, but bad for companies because it would force them to complete their games and make sure they are of the highest quality).

 

Sure. No game on any platform is perfect... BUT they have to be a lot more functional and complete than KOTOR II was/is to be allowed on the console as a majority of console games are [KOTOR II is the anomoly because I am pretty sure it was allowed to pass "as is" purely based on the popularity, aka profits, of the first one as well as LA's name].

 

Again, ironic there exists more standards for systems with outdated hardware than the latest and greatest rigs that either Intel or AMD can put out, huh?

 

3) The new XBox 360 and PS3 are going to be basically high-end gaming rigs with hardware that not even the PC gaming enthusiast market is going to have yet.

 

This means no longer will the games be restricted by 1999-era hardware and this should let developers innovate even more which means BETTER quality products in all areas including visuals, gameplay, sound and online as well.

 

But if you want to keep telling yourself that you are superior because you play games on a PC than a console... Please, do us all a favor and get a life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

These are all subjectives. I don't think Mercenaries are that good and Fable is just a crap. But keep telling yourself that consoles are superior and more fun, if that allows you to sleep at night.

[Judge Hades]

Fable is a good romp of a game but its not something you can take seriously like JE or KotOR. In many ways it kind of makes fun of the genre but think on this. You have a PC and you get a game that is worse than what you think of Fable. You spent $50 on it and now you can't take it back and even if you did you are stuck to get only a new copy of the same game.

 

On a console you could take the game back and at least get some of your money back.

[BattleCookiee]

Since we got 2 threads now, and they they get largely the same amount and content of posts, we close this one and continue here:

 

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?showtopic=35098

[BattleCookiee]

Since we got 2 threads now, and they they get largely the same amount and content of posts, we close this one and continue here:

 

And since that one no longer talks about the patch, this one takes back over...

[JamieKirby]

well, i ain't really concerned since its just a one complete and it gets shelved, but Lucasarts might get off as butts and get the patch out, but i doubt it.

[vaxen83]

I don't really see much of a difference between the results of not having a patch 1.0c and the Restoration Team's efforts. Quite a few things have been left out in both.

[Judge Hades]

The patch is dead and so is the game support. Just let it die.

[Mark Havel]

You mean stop buying LucasArts games ?

[Musopticon?]

Nobody buys Lucas games anymore. Not after they raped their legacy.