Degradation via consolification

[Renevent]

Actually, you are missing MY point. Go back and read my first post. You are currently debating against an argument I never made.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Renevent

[Falcon68]

Grr i hate this word...consolification! This was invented by new generation gamers that have daddy's CC in their pocket. Ive had a lot of console in my life such as Sega Mega Drive, Game Cube, Playstation 1 and Playstation 3 but i had my fair share of Pc gaming as well. A console is more practical, you just have to buy the console and thats it while if you rely on the Pc you have to upgrade it once a year. Consoles brake but even a Pc can brake...every electronic device brakes. The Playstation 3 was released in 2006 so I'm pretty curios how well can you play games like Crysis 2 or the upcoming Battlefield 3 on a Pc with a configuration from 2006? Do this test, cry for 1 day and after that re-think. The word "consolification" was made up by ignorant people like you so you won't blame the developers for their failure, console games where on market since 80s and still that did not made developers to make crappy games in the old days...more then that if you check the internet on your beloved Pc you will find out that most of the Epic RPGs where made for consoles. Pc gaming is all about marketing, when someone release a new game Nvidia, Intel, AtI and everyone releases something and people like EA "Runs great on Intel" or "Runs great on Nvidia" make a crappy game with zomg wtf gfx so you can enjoy 5h game play, but in order to do that you need to first stop at the nearest Pc Store to buy something. I agree that Dungeon Siege III was originally made for consoles and ported to Pc but this is a marketing decision, it's all about money. As you can see an average game play duration of an RPG nowadays is 8-10 hours lol, do a little research and check the average game play duration of any RPG from <2000. Anyway this is a very delicate subject and i believe you won't comprehend much because you are an ignorant.

 

No it wasn't... I buy computers with my own money thank you. I have had just about every console out there but I mostly play PC games because in my opinion the PC gaming community is much closer nit then any console community. Ventrilo is a great thing! If you are smart when you purchase your PC you don't generally need to upgrade it for atleast 5 years. My last pc I bought 8 years ago and it was the top of the line at the time and just recently stopped running the best graphical games. Since then I bought a new PC and will not need to upgrade it for atleast 5 years. As long as you buy brand name or good quality PC parts they usually come with a lifetime limited warranty or close to it. Most consoles have 1 year warranty then if a cheap part breaks you have to pay 1/2 the price of the console to fix it. As for the average length of RPGs, games like Witcher 2, Mass Effect 2, and Final Fantasy 13 reach far past 8-10 hours. All the games that generally are shorter RPGs (for the most part) tend to either have re-playability in the form of continuing to lvl up and get new gear for your character. From what I understand this game strangely does not let you continue collecting gear.. you beat the game... grats now your character gets tossed out.

[Bakercompany86]

Please read above.

 

The entire purpose of this thread was stating how the game had to be lowered in features because it was ported from Xbox to PC.

 

My above posts shows how this is incorrect.

[Renevent]

So wait, wasn't Sacred 2 multi-platform? And weren't the versions identical with graphical exceptions?

 

 

So in your own statement, you've proven yourself wrong. DSIII wasn't dumbed down to be on consoles. The design choices made by Obsidian were just that, their design choices. Not some limitation for putting it on console.

 

I think you lost yourself a bit in your own post. We were talking about how DS3 is somehow reduced in every aspect to fit onto consoles. That's just wrong bud. Oblivion is the exact same game on PC as it is on PS3 and 360. So again you are incorrect. DS3 wasn't dumbed down specifically for consoles.

 

If Obsidian wanted a more robust item system, they would have done it. And for all we know they planned on it and may have run out of time and money, and issue with every game that's not developed by Blizzard.

 

Again, remember we're talking about features that would have been removed to fit onto consoles. And it's just not true. If they wanted all of that in DS3, they could have done it and the exact same game would have made it to PC.

 

So all of your crafting/runes/gems/sockets/looks/fluffy bunny shoes could have been in DS3, they just chose not too.

 

Sacred 2 is a PC game ported to the consoles.

 

You're missing the point. The same amount of data fits onto a disk regardless. So why would features have to be removed to accommodate consoles? Are you familiar with the porting process and its limitations?

 

EDIT: Here let me just end this. Porting isn't what you think it is. Porting is just re-writing the code to work on another system. Most games are made for Xbox, and ported to PS3, thus the quality of the game (frame rate, graphics, sound) might take a hit. But in no way does it limit the quantity of the features in a game. It's just copying the code from one platform to another and re-writing it so it functions.

 

Porting doesn't mean they had to dumb down features, it just doesn't make sense. The data limitations for a DVD, CD, or Blu-Ray are the same regardless of system. What can fit onto a PC DVD is the same as an Xbox DVD. Consoles simply have lower graphical potential, which would be the only area affected by porting an xbox game to PC.

 

Understand?

 

Thanks captain obvious

 

What you are missing is in many cases porting is more than just the nuts and bolts. There is differences in user bases. The types of audiences different consoles/pc/ect attract. Different expectations and different ideas of what constitutes a good game in a genre. Different types of game play that works well with one established control scheme, and perhaps not the other.

 

How many war sims are there on the consoles? None or almost none? Why? Is it technically impossible to do on a console? Of course not...is the audience there for these types of games? Probably not.

 

Based on these many variables, when one title get's ported to another system (like say, from PC to console) there different design decisions that need to be taken into account in order to satisfy the expectations of both the consumer and the content provider. Because of this, certain changes or modifications happen.

 

For an already established game (Torchlight, Sacred 2, ect) this usually means more nut's and bolts changes. Controls, graphics, interfaces, ect. For a game like Dungeon Siege 3, since they wer no longer doing a PC exclusive all those other considerations I spoke about probably had a more of an effect on the general design of the game, rather than just porting the nuts and bolts.

 

There's CLEARLY design decisions in DS3 that are more in line with typical console games, and not PC specific games. The influence is clear as day. You would literally have to be blind not to see it.

 

That doesn't make it bad, mind you.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Renevent

[Falcon68]

So wait, wasn't Sacred 2 multi-platform? And weren't the versions identical with graphical exceptions?

 

 

So in your own statement, you've proven yourself wrong. DSIII wasn't dumbed down to be on consoles. The design choices made by Obsidian were just that, their design choices. Not some limitation for putting it on console.

 

I think you lost yourself a bit in your own post. We were talking about how DS3 is somehow reduced in every aspect to fit onto consoles. That's just wrong bud. Oblivion is the exact same game on PC as it is on PS3 and 360. So again you are incorrect. DS3 wasn't dumbed down specifically for consoles.

 

If Obsidian wanted a more robust item system, they would have done it. And for all we know they planned on it and may have run out of time and money, and issue with every game that's not developed by Blizzard.

 

Again, remember we're talking about features that would have been removed to fit onto consoles. And it's just not true. If they wanted all of that in DS3, they could have done it and the exact same game would have made it to PC.

 

So all of your crafting/runes/gems/sockets/looks/fluffy bunny shoes could have been in DS3, they just chose not too.

 

Sacred 2 is a PC game ported to the consoles.

 

You're missing the point. The same amount of data fits onto a disk regardless. So why would features have to be removed to accommodate consoles? Are you familiar with the porting process and its limitations?

 

EDIT: Here let me just end this. Porting isn't what you think it is. Porting is just re-writing the code to work on another system. Most games are made for Xbox, and ported to PS3, thus the quality of the game (frame rate, graphics, sound) might take a hit. But in no way does it limit the quantity of the features in a game. It's just copying the code from one platform to another and re-writing it so it functions.

 

Porting doesn't mean they had to dumb down features, it just doesn't make sense. The data limitations for a DVD, CD, or Blu-Ray are the same regardless of system. What can fit onto a PC DVD is the same as an Xbox DVD. Consoles simply have lower graphical potential, which would be the only area affected by porting an xbox game to PC.

 

Understand?

 

A couple things, first the current consoles such as the XBOX 360 and PS3 are roughly equivalent to a low end PC nowadays. They are way behind as far as the speed of both the GPU and CPUs in the systems. So when you code a game for a console that is far under spec of most $400 PCs nowadays you need to cut out features, textures, and possibly change how the game is played to meet the 30 FPS recommendation for console and in many cases this means stripping down the title to barebones. Then when these games are re-coded for PC nothing is generally added except maybe a few additional lighting effects. So then PC gamers with high end gaming rigs 50x faster then any console currently out is restricted by what features are in the game. THIS is the problem and that is how it works.

 

Given a developer could spend extra time adding all the features back into the game that needed to be cut out to make the game run smooth on console. But this could be hundreds more hours of coding and lots more money. Most developers see a dollar sign and decide to just release the same cut to ribbons version of the game that was released for console.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Falcon68

[Bakercompany86]

So wait, wasn't Sacred 2 multi-platform? And weren't the versions identical with graphical exceptions?

 

 

So in your own statement, you've proven yourself wrong. DSIII wasn't dumbed down to be on consoles. The design choices made by Obsidian were just that, their design choices. Not some limitation for putting it on console.

 

I think you lost yourself a bit in your own post. We were talking about how DS3 is somehow reduced in every aspect to fit onto consoles. That's just wrong bud. Oblivion is the exact same game on PC as it is on PS3 and 360. So again you are incorrect. DS3 wasn't dumbed down specifically for consoles.

 

If Obsidian wanted a more robust item system, they would have done it. And for all we know they planned on it and may have run out of time and money, and issue with every game that's not developed by Blizzard.

 

Again, remember we're talking about features that would have been removed to fit onto consoles. And it's just not true. If they wanted all of that in DS3, they could have done it and the exact same game would have made it to PC.

 

So all of your crafting/runes/gems/sockets/looks/fluffy bunny shoes could have been in DS3, they just chose not too.

 

Sacred 2 is a PC game ported to the consoles.

 

You're missing the point. The same amount of data fits onto a disk regardless. So why would features have to be removed to accommodate consoles? Are you familiar with the porting process and its limitations?

 

EDIT: Here let me just end this. Porting isn't what you think it is. Porting is just re-writing the code to work on another system. Most games are made for Xbox, and ported to PS3, thus the quality of the game (frame rate, graphics, sound) might take a hit. But in no way does it limit the quantity of the features in a game. It's just copying the code from one platform to another and re-writing it so it functions.

 

Porting doesn't mean they had to dumb down features, it just doesn't make sense. The data limitations for a DVD, CD, or Blu-Ray are the same regardless of system. What can fit onto a PC DVD is the same as an Xbox DVD. Consoles simply have lower graphical potential, which would be the only area affected by porting an xbox game to PC.

 

Understand?

 

Thanks captain obvious

 

What you are missing is in many cases porting is more than just the nuts and bolts. There is differences in user bases. The types of audiences different consoles/pc/ect attract. Different expectations and different ideas of what constitutes a good game in a genre. Different types of game play that works well with one established control scheme, and perhaps not the other.

 

How many war sims are there on the consoles? None or almost none? Why? Is it technically impossible to do on a console? Of course not...is the audience there for these types of games? Probably not.

 

Based on these many variables, when one title get's ported to another system (like say, from PC to console) there different design decisions that need to be taken into account in order to satisfy the expectations of both the consumer and the content provider. Because of this, certain changes or modifications happen.

 

For an already established game (Torchlight, Sacred 2, ect) this usually means more nut's and bolts changes. Controls, graphics, interfaces, ect. For a game like Dungeon Siege 3, since they wer no longer doing a PC exclusive all those other considerations I spoke about probably had a more of an effect on the general design of the game, rather than just porting the nuts and bolts.

 

There's CLEARLY design decisions in DS3 that are more in line with typical console games, and not PC specific games. The influence is clear as day. You would literally have to be blind not to see it.

 

That doesn't make it bad, mind you.

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to have seen more loot diversity. And I love sockets/runes/enchantments etc. This all falls under the "more" category and I couldn't agree more. I want more of anything from DS3.

 

What i'm not going to do is sit here and pretend like I didn't hear someone say this game was specifically dumbed down for consoles. That's absurd, and incorrect. Yes i'm defending consoles here, as it is an unnecessary attack and it's wrong.

 

Yes DS3 has camera issues.

Yes DS3 has loot issues.

Yes I'd take "more" in any form from DS3.

 

Outside of these issues however, most of what people have said they find wrong are personal preferences. The stat system is fine, how many stats does a game need? This game has 6 Primary stats, and "on hit" effects, or Chaos: Doom, Fire, Ice, Lightning, Poison, Bloodletting, Weakening, Withering, and Vampire. Not to mention other stats such as Warding, Momentum, Stagger, Retribution, as well auto calculated Sttack/Ability DPS and Crit%.

 

So I really like the stats system in DS3. The inventory is good in my opinion as well, a factor that many critics seem to disagree with me on.

 

Combat, really some of the best in its genre. It's hard to argue the fact when many others barely differ and in Diablo's case, clickclickclickclickclickclick. Diablo's combat is spam, and that's it. This is a very different combat scene and I love it.

 

So yes, I would love to see more from DS3. I'll take more in any format.

 

Dungeon Siege III was not however, dumbed down due its design process and porting it to PC's.

[Renevent]

"This game has 6 Primary stats, and "on hit" effects, or Chaos: Doom, Fire, Ice, Lightning, Poison, Bloodletting, Weakening, Withering, and Vampire. Not to mention other stats such as Warding, Momentum, Stagger, Retribution, as well auto calculated Sttack/Ability DPS and Crit%."

 

That entire list is almost exclusively things that are just chance to proc a simple effect...the majority of it you have no idea if it even proc'd or not. I have never even seen fire/ice/ect proc at all. I have a 56" 1080P TV and have not noticed it once. Beyond that, these aren't really game changing things.

 

Whereas other games items grant things like entirely new skills from other classes, charged spells, elemental effects (real elemental effects, not the lame ones DS3 has), aura's, buffs, ect, ect. These effects are tangible, they have major implications on gameplay and the way you can play and fight with it. Moreover, the way the items are balanced had much more of an effect on a characters power and the way it played, where dungeon siege III doesn't seem to have as much effect or the same amount of options.

 

And of course the absence of sets and the other things I mentioned that are just flat out missing.

 

There's a clear difference in the quality and scope of these games item system.

 

I don't think DS3 has a bad item system...it's serviceable...but that's it. I couldn't with a straight face say there's really no difference between DS3's item system and something like D2 or Titan Quest though. If you've spent enough time with either you know it would be dishonest statement.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Renevent

[metamag]

John Carmack in recent E3 interview talked about the consoles and their future, I think he said they are 10 times inferior to a high-end PC.

 

Although he made some silly point that people still don't know how to squeeze everything out of them despite that we have been having unnecessarily poor texture for years due to multiplatforming, and not to mention that all the physics from ancient Half Life 2 completely vanished, we have less and less physics with each game because in order for console game to look even approximately good(with poor textures of course) you have to toss out all the scope and physics and destructibility.

[rafoca]

The only thing downgraded is the graphics. The rest, if any, is dev

[Renevent]

The only thing downgraded is the graphics. The rest, if any, is dev

[Falcon68]

I love how people who have no concept of what actually happened in development can assume that nothing was cut out of the game to make it work on console. It is absolutely ridiculous to make such an assumption with no proof, the game was designed to run on a inferior machine. When a title is designed to run specifically on an inferior platform things are cut, its common sense.

[Oner]

elemental effects (real elemental effects, not the lame ones DS3 has)

You mean like this?

 

Note: my current rifle does 347 damage.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Oner

[Pidesco]

"This game has 6 Primary stats, and "on hit" effects, or Chaos: Doom, Fire, Ice, Lightning, Poison, Bloodletting, Weakening, Withering, and Vampire. Not to mention other stats such as Warding, Momentum, Stagger, Retribution, as well auto calculated Sttack/Ability DPS and Crit%."

 

That entire list is almost exclusively things that are just chance to proc a simple effect...the majority of it you have no idea if it even proc'd or not. I have never even seen fire/ice/ect proc at all. I have a 56" 1080P TV and have not noticed it once. Beyond that, these aren't really game changing things.

 

Whereas other games items grant things like entirely new skills from other classes, charged spells, elemental effects (real elemental effects, not the lame ones DS3 has), aura's, buffs, ect, ect. These effects are tangible, they have major implications on gameplay and the way you can play and fight with it. Moreover, the way the items are balanced had much more of an effect on a characters power and the way it played, where dungeon siege III doesn't seem to have as much effect or the same amount of options.

 

And of course the absence of sets and the other things I mentioned that are just flat out missing.

 

There's a clear difference in the quality and scope of these games item system.

 

I don't think DS3 has a bad item system...it's serviceable...but that's it. I couldn't with a straight face say there's really no difference between DS3's item system and something like D2 or Titan Quest though. If you've spent enough time with either you know it would be dishonest statement.

 

It's visually very clear when your character causes or suffers from elemental or bleeding damage.

 

What's the difference between real elemental effects and lame ones?

 

DS3 has auras and buffs, by the way, just not on items.

 

The right choices of equipment can alter the optimal gameplay considerably. Still, you're right that equipment isn't as crucial to a player's success as it is in the original titles or in Diablo. however, conversely, player skill and reflexes affect the chance of victory in Dungeon Siege 3 than in the first Dungeon Siege. It's a question of focus.

[rafoca]

Some games are just lame (not saying anything about DS3, btw), and that isn

[Unreal Warfare]

Stop crying just because other people don't want to play with "your" ball.

 

Games are not dumbed down because of control limitation, or even the widespread audience (because games in general target a specific audience like RPG fans or FPS fans). They are dumbed down because gamers in general, over all platforms, cry like little whiny b*****s when they don't have an easy win button!

Edited June 29, 2011 by Unreal Warfare

[XxTaLoNxX]

Stop crying just because other people don't want to play with "your" ball.

 

Games are not dumbed down because of control limitation, or even the widespread audience (because games in general target a specific audience like RPG fans or FPS fans). They are dumbed down because gamers in general, over all platforms, cry like little whiny b*****s when they don't have an easy win button!

 

QFT MFW!

 

In conclusion. DS3 wasn't dumbed down. And specifically it wasn't dumbed down for consoles. Play DS1 && DS2, then come back and play DS3. It's apparent that the combat was NOT dumbed down from previous titles in the franchise. In fact, if anything it's quite the opposite. The combat and game in general is a step up from previous installments.

[Sannom]

John Carmack in recent E3 interview talked about the consoles and their future, I think he said they are 10 times inferior to a high-end PC.

 

Although he made some silly point that people still don't know how to squeeze everything out of them despite that we have been having unnecessarily poor texture for years due to multiplatforming

Dunno, I hear the team responsible for the Uncharted games is pretty much in agreement with Carmack. From what I hear, they're probably the team that managed to get the most out of the PS3's power, and they increase it for each game.

[Renevent]

"This game has 6 Primary stats, and "on hit" effects, or Chaos: Doom, Fire, Ice, Lightning, Poison, Bloodletting, Weakening, Withering, and Vampire. Not to mention other stats such as Warding, Momentum, Stagger, Retribution, as well auto calculated Sttack/Ability DPS and Crit%."

 

That entire list is almost exclusively things that are just chance to proc a simple effect...the majority of it you have no idea if it even proc'd or not. I have never even seen fire/ice/ect proc at all. I have a 56" 1080P TV and have not noticed it once. Beyond that, these aren't really game changing things.

 

Whereas other games items grant things like entirely new skills from other classes, charged spells, elemental effects (real elemental effects, not the lame ones DS3 has), aura's, buffs, ect, ect. These effects are tangible, they have major implications on gameplay and the way you can play and fight with it. Moreover, the way the items are balanced had much more of an effect on a characters power and the way it played, where dungeon siege III doesn't seem to have as much effect or the same amount of options.

 

And of course the absence of sets and the other things I mentioned that are just flat out missing.

 

There's a clear difference in the quality and scope of these games item system.

 

I don't think DS3 has a bad item system...it's serviceable...but that's it. I couldn't with a straight face say there's really no difference between DS3's item system and something like D2 or Titan Quest though. If you've spent enough time with either you know it would be dishonest statement.

 

It's visually very clear when your character causes or suffers from elemental or bleeding damage.

 

What's the difference between real elemental effects and lame ones?

 

DS3 has auras and buffs, by the way, just not on items.

 

The right choices of equipment can alter the optimal gameplay considerably. Still, you're right that equipment isn't as crucial to a player's success as it is in the original titles or in Diablo. however, conversely, player skill and reflexes affect the chance of victory in Dungeon Siege 3 than in the first Dungeon Siege. It's a question of focus.

 

It's not visually very clear...and I have no idea how much damage they actually do. This is all besides the point...I already pointed out a whole laundry list of stuff. Complex systems are the sums of their parts, not just a few here and there. If you honestly think DS3's item system is as complex as say Diablo 2 or Titan Quest, I don't believe there is any evidence I could present that would convince you otherwise. Not the actual loot lists, not lists of all the affixes, rune system info, nothing...you have drunk the cool-aid and made up your mind lol.

 

And right, it does (auras), like many other games, just not on weapons, which was my point when I listed all that.

 

By the way I beat the game with 0 (ZERO) armor on Lucas...attack and stamina are the only stats that count. I only died a single time throughout the entire game too...at the very beginning with the fish bait. Kinda caught me off guard.

Edited June 29, 2011 by Renevent

[hopfrog16]

By the way I beat the game with 0 (ZERO) armor on Lucas...attack and stamina are the only stats that count. I only died a single time throughout the entire game too...at the very beginning with the fish bait. Kinda caught me off guard.

 

You know, I keep hearing that you can beat the game easily when you focus in "insert stat here". It almost makes me wonder how difficult the game would be if you played a character with muddled stats.

[Renevent]

By the way I beat the game with 0 (ZERO) armor on Lucas...attack and stamina are the only stats that count. I only died a single time throughout the entire game too...at the very beginning with the fish bait. Kinda caught me off guard.

 

You know, I keep hearing that you can beat the game easily when you focus in "insert stat here". It almost makes me wonder how difficult the game would be if you played a character with muddled stats.

 

For a warrior having absolutely zero armor is kinda...well...crazy lol. I think my point is no matter what stat you insert where, it doesn't really matter, it's more of an action game now so success doesn't have much to do with smart character building but rather quick reflexes.

[Tigranes]

Considering what a huge difference will, agility, doom, stagger and stamina can make, no. The problem is that some stats aren't as cost efficient and can be too easily ignored - primarily armour and block.

[Bakercompany86]

I'm yet to focus on block even with Lucas, simply because I don't like having my will drained for any reason other than will abilities.

 

I found that armor was nice to mix in with stamina for a generally tougher package while rolling around slinging spells, although I leaned towards stamina.

 

Even with all that there were still moments I was one shotted, even with Reinharts shield active.

[greylord]

I'm yet to focus on block even with Lucas, simply because I don't like having my will drained for any reason other than will abilities.

 

I found that armor was nice to mix in with stamina for a generally tougher package while rolling around slinging spells, although I leaned towards stamina.

 

Even with all that there were still moments I was one shotted, even with Reinharts shield active.

 

I actually focused on Armor and Block and was NEVER one shotted the entire game. Don't know if that's because I'm an artful dodger...or lucky, or a combination fo both, or if it really was because the Armor and Block made a big difference. I played as Lucas.

[metamag]

I actually focused on Armor and Block and was NEVER one shotted the entire game. Don't know if that's because I'm an artful dodger...or lucky, or a combination fo both, or if it really was because the Armor and Block made a big difference. I played as Lucas.

 

Are you talking about hardcore difficulty, if not your comment is false. At the end even an ordinary enemy on hardcore takes 500 health from you.

 

I'm still waiting for the proper armor damage mitigation statistic to be implemented via patch. This was mentioned in a lot of topics by other people but still no word from any Obsidian developer here.

[Bakercompany86]

I'm yet to focus on block even with Lucas, simply because I don't like having my will drained for any reason other than will abilities.

 

I found that armor was nice to mix in with stamina for a generally tougher package while rolling around slinging spells, although I leaned towards stamina.

 

Even with all that there were still moments I was one shotted, even with Reinharts shield active.

 

I actually focused on Armor and Block and was NEVER one shotted the entire game. Don't know if that's because I'm an artful dodger...or lucky, or a combination fo both, or if it really was because the Armor and Block made a big difference. I played as Lucas.

 

What I mean by one shotted was actually many bolts hitting at once as many of the bosses have multi projectile attacks that track you.

 

Such as during the

Modified Automaton

fight, I was getting Anjali up and it was just out of my screen enough where I didn't see it launch them. Thus before I could dodge, all 5 projectiles hit me at once, boom death.

 

This also happened during the final boss, and the fight with

Jeyne Kassynder

.

 

On hardcore if any multi-projectile shot hits you, you're dead regardless of stats.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Bakercompany86