Total War devs go console exclusive

[Nick_i_am]

http://kotaku.com/5023875/sega-reveals-console-rts-stormrise

 

PC fanboys board the crying train to waaahtown

 

ChooChoo!

 

“The Creative Assembly have proven their general leadership in developing RTS games through the award winning ‘Total War’ series on PC”, commented Gary Knight, European Marketing Director, SEGA Europe. “However, Stormrise has been built from the ground up specifically for high def consoles to provide a more intense, frenetic style of game that, coupled with the all new control mechanic, will revolutionize the way RTS games are played.”

Edited July 10, 2008 by Nick_i_am

[Wrath of Dagon]

Meh, I'm only interested in their historical games. And those haven't been that good lately anyway, although Empires looks intriguing.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

I was not interested in the game anyways, although I do hope they continue with the Total War series.

[Kaftan Barlast]

This isnt news, "Viking: battle for asgard" didnt get released for the PC either. And that game pretty much proved that the devs at CA who arent working on total war, are complete idiots. So Im not exactly in tears over this.

[Leferd]

The Creative Assembly needs to get back to their roots. They should be making more Rugby games!

[Xard]

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE

[Humodour]

It'll be **** anyway.

[Humodour]

Edited July 11, 2008 by Krezack

[Nick_i_am]

HAHA, YOU SURE GOT THEM THERE CHAMP!

[Humodour]

Well it invalidates the crux of Hell Kitty's argument.

[Monte Carlo]

Having seen the trailer I think it looks pretty good to me.

 

If there were more decent RTS / strategy games on console I might actually buy one.

[Hell Kitty]

Well it invalidates the crux of Hell Kitty's argument.

 

What, you mean like this:

 

they're more about social gaming, frenetic pace, light-hearted & shallow story and cartoony graphics

 

Wait, didn't you just describe Diablo 3?

 

invalidated your argument?

 

You were obviously never paying any attention if you think I was ever claiming anything close to "PC gamers are exactly the same as console gamers"

Edited July 12, 2008 by Hell Kitty

[Humodour]

Well it invalidates the crux of Hell Kitty's argument.

 

What, you mean like this:

 

they're more about social gaming, frenetic pace, light-hearted & shallow story and cartoony graphics

 

Wait, didn't you just describe Diablo 3?

 

invalidated your argument?

 

Definitely not unless my argument was "Diablo 3 isn't a frenetic or social game". Or "PC's don't have any games which share traits in common with games on consoles."

 

So, let's hear it: what are your thoughts on this, Dan? Clearly this developer is implying that the console market is different to the PC market in its needs and desires w.r.t. video games, no? Different enough that they felt console gamers would enjoy a game specifically catered for them more than one that tried to juggle PC and Console markets.

 

You were obviously never paying any attention if you think I was ever claiming anything close to "PC gamers are exactly the same as console gamers"

 

What, then, do you think those differences are? If the console market is sufficiently different from the PC market to design a game specifically catered for it, as the Stormrise developers clearly feel, then does that not imply that a developer trying to design a game to cater to both markets simultaneously would be making concessions in quality to one market or another - or both, in order to make a solid game that sells well in both markets?

[random n00b]

If the console market is sufficiently different from the PC market to design a game specifically catered for it, as the Stormrise developers clearly feel, then does that not imply that a developer trying to design a game to cater to both markets simultaneously would be making concessions in quality to one market or another - or both, in order to make a solid game that sells well in both markets?

You are making the assumption that the game is console-only because of inherent differences in target groups, between console and PC crowds. That may or may not be the case, as other considerations such as development time and costs, market saturation and more that I'm sure that somebody better informed than myself could point out, also play a role.

 

In short, you are still arguing from the stance that PC and console crowds are fundamentally different somehow, which introduces a bias in your reasoning.

[Humodour]

Based on the article it would certainly seem differences in expectations of console gamers and PC gamers is the reason for it being console only. Suppose it is (and I concede there's a degree of ambiguity); where does that leave games designed to cater to both groups at once?

[sharkz]

It's for the PC too.

 

Trailer here:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36015.html

[Atom523]

It's for the PC too.

 

Trailer here:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36015.html

 

That looks pretty cool, though it kind of looks like an RTS version of Quake, at least when it comes to the units.

[Hell Kitty]

Based on the article it would certainly seem differences in expectations of console gamers and PC gamers is the reason for it being console only. Suppose it is (and I concede there's a degree of ambiguity); where does that leave games designed to cater to both groups at once?

 

If a single console exclusive was enough to prove that console gamers want something different to PC gamers, then a single multiplatform title would be enough to prove that PC gamers and console gamers all want the same thing.

 

A game like Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't prove that multiplatform development is bad any more than a game like Hitman: Blood Money proves that it's good. The quality of a game isn't determined by the hardware it's made for. Games are made multiplatform because they work on variety of systems and are popular with gamers on a number of systems. Games are made multiplatform more now because there isn't such a huge divide between what PC and console hardware can do. And that's not even factoring in the rising popularity of gaming, the rising costs of games production, and the fact that as a business you want to get as many people as possible to consume your product.

 

Even PC exclusive RPGs like The Witcher and Gothic have more in common with current multiplatform RPGs than they do with PC-centric games like NWN2 or older PC games.

 

Recently a Blizzard dev spoke about a possible port of Diablo 3 to console, and the need to change the control from point and click with a mouse to direct control with a gamepad. That's it, just a change in controls (and of course the UI), there is nothing else about Diablo that would need to be changed, and any claims that "oh they would probably simplify it for a console" aren't even specific enough to be anything more than pure nonsense.

 

The problem is your insistence that there are two groups of gamers, and group 1 wants x and group 2 wants y. That simplistic view might work for gaming as a business, where the powers that be decided they want a game to be in genre X because that's currently popular, but it does nothing to show what individual gamers want or like. The fact that turn-based games are rare on PC now doesn't prove that PC gamers don't want turn-based games.

 

PC gamers, console gamers, handheld gamers, Xbox gamers, Sony gamers, Nintendo gamers, European gamers, North American gamers, Japanese gamers, Eurasian gamers, singleplayer gamers, multiplayer gamers, MMO gamers, war gamers, strategy gamers, action gamers, adventure gamers, roleplaying gamers, rollplaying gamers, Crashgirl, hardcore gamers, casual gamers, old gamers, happy gamers, angry gamers, young gamers, fat gamers, skinny gamers, gamers who climb on rocks...

 

PC gamers and console gamers don't belong to some sort of hive mind and all want and like the same things. Games don't cater to "both groups at once", they just cater to gamers.

Edited July 14, 2008 by Hell Kitty

[Gorgon]

This thread made my heart skip a beat, bastards.

 

Then I realised it wasn't Total War, nothing to see here, move along.