(08-28-2012, 05:31 PM)Prelauncher Wrote: [ -> ]Why oh why does pc gamers go all butthurt as soon as a consoles are mentioned?
Amnesia is ment to be played on pc? It is ment to be played with mouse and keyboard? No, Amnesia The Dark Descent was developed for pc, and please, do tell me: What actions do you do in Amnesia that makes it impossible to be replaced with a 360/Ps3 controller? You walk and move your head, you jump, crouch, sprint, interact with objects and use a lantern. All of these actions can easily be replaced with a controller, I mean c'mon people it's not friggin' starcraft! And hey, some people preffer controllers over mouse and keyboard, I'd pick a controller over a keyboard any day unless I was about to play a game that actually requires a keyboard i.e. a RTS. And does Amnesia really have that complex gameplay that it can't be translated to a console? I'm not questioning the quality of the game in any way, belive me, I love Amnesia, but you the things that you do in the game are quite basic - lift and move objects, pull leavers etc.
The Xbox 360 and the PS3 are not bad consoles, they are not weak. Yes, they are not as advanced as a computer and are not capable of handling the things a computer can handle but there's still plenty of juice left in them. "The Xbox 360 can barely handle its own games", I'm sorry but that is the stupidest thing I've heard in quite a while. Sure the Xbox is old and could really use an upgrade, but there's still power in it. Just look at Gears of War, those games have really good visuals, sure they use the dull brown and grey color pallet (as does many pc games), but they still look bloody good, even the first GoW looks good to this day. As CliffyB said, you can make great graphics for the xbox as long as you script it properly. And there are many other good looking games for the 360: Forza Motorsports, Bioshock, Skyrim etc. Sure they are not as fancy looking as BF3 or Crysis on a pc, and sure, pc games overall has better graphics than console games, but if you measure the quality of a game by its graphics then I say you don't know how to judge a good game. Example, To The Moon, it does not have good graphics, sure it looks nice but it is not advanced. What it does have is an amazing story, a beautiful story that are very engaging. Could a console not handle that game? That is a problem that I have with many developers and gamers; they all want their games to look more and more realistic, but we don't need them to look any better in order to be a better and more engaging game. They are all so eager to play with the new and latest toys that they forgett that they already have the tools they need to make a truly great game.
And why why why does anyone have a problem a console version of Amnesia The Dark Descent?! You already own the flippin' game! What difference does it make if someone could play on a PS3? It's already made on pc. And do you really think that Frictional Games themselves, a group of pc developers, would all of a sudden go "Hey guys, do you know what would be great?! If we all stopped developing games for pc and instead started to develop for the xbox 360 and then ported the game to pc!"? Answer: NO!
So stop clenching them buttocks and wanting to deny people to take part of a master piece.
Um... Well, I must say we have no problem sharing our games, the problem is that we usually get screwed over when that happens. Consoles are out dated, that's a fact. They are very very outdated at this point. Most teams don't want to worry about the conditions for building on a console. Making console ports while getting the intended quality on PC is a tough job, it means you have to create multiple versions of the same game, WHICH IS A BIG JOB.
Gamers tend to get a sense of entitlement if they support someone for a long time, and a lot of them do not want to see things go console because it usually means that we are getting less then what we pay for (at least when it comes to the mainstream market). People buy PCs for a reason. Its so we don't have to worry about the conditions of console gaming. When a company purposefully invests into making games on the PC for that very reason, and PC gamers invest in them only to have them take that console route, it pretty much means that they have been wasting their money supporting them because in the long run they were paying for products that don't get pushed forward and pretty much get recycled. When it comes to releasing games on a console you have to deal with companies like Microsoft and their policy for even be able to release a game on their console. Its not about keeping games to ourselves, its about making sure things stay balanced for our community. If you don't understand that, then whatever. But don't call PC gamers butt hurt and greedy or whatever because you don't.
Frictional games are indie for a reason mostly likely VERY similar to what I was talking about, if not the exact same. They don't like the idea of having to work corporately which is understandable and releasing for consoles means exposing yourself to that a little. I mean, do you even know what Microsofts policy is for even being able to make a game on their console, not too mention making a PS3 game? Look it up and then you'll understand peoples concerns. I have no problem for frictional making console games, but when stuff like this happens it usually means a drop of quality for us or a total flop in the long run. I mean, lol...I don't think you even know what your saying...no offense. Your on a whole other page dude. If people are saying that only PC gamers should enjoy these games, that's totally dumb, but that is NOT the big picture here. Just because one guy said it doesn't mean that PC gamers are like this.
The fact is people fear that console stuff leaking into the PC gaming world. I mean, console gamers get consoles for their own reason, we got our own reasons for playing on PC, its that simple. Most companies usually invest in on one or the other. Frictional talked about making a "watered down" version for consoles and keeping the PC quality as high as they intended and that's great, that's exactly what they should do. However, NO company that I can think of does this kind of thing. When the battle field series was put on console the community was pissed. You know why? Because the gameplay and the technology was downgraded for consoles and they got all that crap on the PC. That community invested and supported those developers to...pretty much get back stabbed by them. This is why PC gamers do not like the idea of their games going onto consoles, and I think its a damn good reason as well, lol. Man, I haven't got to enjoy a good game sense 1996 until I discovered frictional games because of how the concept of "mainstream development" has ruined gaming. All companies care about now is money.
I personally think indie development has brought life back into video games. For someone like me, keeping them independent is a priority, because when you work for a company like EA, or Activision, you don't make games, you follow orders. EVERY single indie developer will agree with me on that, guaranteed. AND THAT'S WHY they are indie in the first place, because they want to be able to do what they love. We like to keep enjoying what we and they love, its as simple as that. When you step into console territory you put yourself at risk for all that bad stuff leaking in.
When you want to play console games, you get consoles. When you want to play PC games, you get a PC. Its as simple as that. Some games are meant for consoles, others are meant for PC, its just how things work. You gotta make an investment in one or the other, or both, whatever you prefer. If it was a gigantic melting pot, I honestly don't think we would even have Amnesia or Penumbra at all. If gaming wasn't corporate we wouldn't have that problem, but it is. The big boys at the top see what sells the most and they pull the strings to make sure games get made like that.
Look at resident evil, and silent hill. LOL, THOSE ARE PERFECT EXAMPLES OF WHAT I AM SAYING. Resident evil is a shooter and silent hill is just being rehashed poorly because Team Silent split from all the BS. Even the creator of resident evil left capcom for the same reasons I have been talking about. The last resident evil game made by the creator was resident evil 4, and he had to make 2 difference versions of that game because his first concept of RE4 wasn't mainstream enough, I AM DEAD SERIOUS. Eventually RE4 was released as the one we know of, but the original concept was a totally different game. Now, that alone made him pretty PO'ed. He had originally made RE4 with the tech for gamecube, but the heads of capcom, as greedy as they were, demanded that a port be made for the ps2 which would result in a less sophisticated, lower quality version of the game. He said if they did had it made he would leave capcom. They made it and he left. This is what PC gamers don't want to experience. PC gaming is a different market with different ideas and varied independent management. We like it that way... and there's nothing wrong it being that way. Maybe now this all makes a bit more sense to you.
but I still stand on the opposite side 
