Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,525
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Direct console point, and 30 quid? Not buying that.
Didn't Remedy charge 20/25 for Alan Wake?
Didn't Remedy charge 20/25 for Alan Wake?
Dark Souls:P2D GFWL edition pre-order page up on Steam now
- Thread starter AWPC
- Start date
IIRC it released on steam at £22 then RRP was £25
The two situations really aren't comparable, Alan Wake didn't see a PC release for 2 years after its console release.
Not only that but Dark Souls is coming with brand new content that consoles won't even see for some time yet and will still have to pay for.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,525
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Alan Wake came with the episodes DLC, while I'm unsure what the availability of the console DLC was at that time, we still got decent few hour long DLC free with the game.
Alan Wake wasn't a carbon copy, you could see it was very polished, ran brilliantly and was an overall excellent game, Steamworks, etc.
How isn't it comparable when we're talking about 2 games that are getting ported from consoles to PC?
Dark Souls looks to be a carbon copy of the console variant, along with stupid DLC at a price of 30 pound, yet it's production quality in terms of PC looks to be lacklustre.
Alan wake was originally being developed for PC by a developer who before that were primarily PC developers, there was a space of 2 years between it's console release and PC release, not to mention the fact it was in development for about 5 years originally. The DLC was also already out by this time, The Signal being release in late 2010 and The Writer late 2011. As a result when it hit PC's the game itself was 2 years old and the oldest DLC was over 6 months old. In comparsion Dark Souls is less than 1 year old and the DLC is brand new and console players will still have to pay for it on its release.
Not to mention the fact that Alan Wake is a purely single player game where as Dark Souls offers a long main campaign, multiple way to play that campaign and multiplayer/pvp.
So no, they are not comparable situations.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,525
- Location
- Dormanstown.
But that's kind of irrelevant to the lark they're pulling with the 30 FPS Cap etc...
Alan Wake was a good port, priced correctly, Dark Souls is looking like a poor port priced incorrectly.
It's a simple, one was a good port, one is a bad port.
*Expecting another pedantic response and why I'm completely wrong*.
Alan Wake was a good port, priced correctly, Dark Souls is looking like a poor port priced incorrectly.
It's a simple, one was a good port, one is a bad port.
*Expecting another pedantic response and why I'm completely wrong*.
Last edited:
How is it irrelevant? From are giving PC gamers the ability to play a game they might not have had access to, they are and always have been a console developer and as a result they are doing to most straight forward port they can whilst maintaining the original quality of the game which is far from bad.
When From released Dark Souls they said they had no intention of releasing DLC, however since the PC petition and the massive support for DS they have reneged on both of those. Yet what are people doing now? Whinging constantly.
What are you going to do next stick your fingers in your ear and shout LA LA LA, or maybe hold your breath until you get your way? Stop being so childish. I've put forward multiple facts to back up my argument, all you've managed to do is whinging about FPS.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,525
- Location
- Dormanstown.
I don't wish to "discuss" any longer.
Anything you don't agree with, you'll put down, it's pointless.
I mean, you're that pedantic, you tried to make a simple point/statement into something it's not.
Simply put, one was a good port, one is looking like a carbon copy of the console variant/bad port.
But no, that's not good enough.
EDIT : Bearing in mind, I've said nothing about the content, the content they're going to provide is a good incentive to buy it, but the production value/quality from a PC point of view is where my issue is.
Anything you don't agree with, you'll put down, it's pointless.
I mean, you're that pedantic, you tried to make a simple point/statement into something it's not.
Simply put, one was a good port, one is looking like a carbon copy of the console variant/bad port.
But no, that's not good enough.
EDIT : Bearing in mind, I've said nothing about the content, the content they're going to provide is a good incentive to buy it, but the production value/quality from a PC point of view is where my issue is.
Last edited:
Oh I see, we should be grateful for a half arsed direct port
I understand now. Waste of time trying to argue with you. If you expect improvements on things that were bugged or flawed, or you expect them to make an effort to support things a PC should, you are 'entitled' but if you buy the cash-in you are being 'grateful' and 'supporting future releases'.
Maybe you're right though, maybe the SP/MP thing isn't entirely irrelevant. They made an effort with the SP game because its easily pirated (like it is on the Xbox) so if people think you're making a half arsed port they won't be as inclined to spend money. As a MP game they know you either buy whatever **** they put out or you don't get it.
It's pointless because you've yet to refute one of the arguments I've put forward. I disagree with things and state why, that's how a discussion between adults works, obviously you aren't clear on that.
In the real world, you can't just say your right.
A pretty clear statement on the content don't you think?
Please explain "how" they are irrelevant, just saying they are does not automatically make it so.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,525
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Because your points are irrelevant to my statement on production quality from a PC point of view.
EDIT : Don't misquote me on the stupid DLC.
I dislike DLC in general, although I wouldn't say I said anything about it, other than it's stupid and acknowledged it's there.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 614
lol at Fenris....you're actually trying to defend a bad console port
herp derp hurr hurr
herp derp hurr hurr
OMG STOP BEING SO ENTITLED.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 614
DAMN YOU...
SORRY
SORRY
I'm not trying anything, I'm defending a good game and a good developer, all you lot are doing is acting like spoilt children who have been told they can't have everything they want.
It's quite pathetic really, also rather amusing seeing as the game isn't even out yet and you are already whinging yourselves inside out about its quality.
Last edited:
GFWL is ****e, the only downside to ssf4ae on the pc, though i still play it as no other choice lol.
I just wish all games companies would use steam. If it isnt on steam or battlenet i usually wont even bother, no interest in buying stuff from origin or other people with half arsed steam counterparts.
I just wish all games companies would use steam. If it isnt on steam or battlenet i usually wont even bother, no interest in buying stuff from origin or other people with half arsed steam counterparts.
No, you're defending a good game, a good CONSOLE developer and a bad port.
The most pathetic thing is people like you shell out money for games which are poor ports and directly taken from consoles with no improvements for the PC what-so-ever just for a quick cash grab. People like you are why PC gaming is turning to ****, because you accept low standards for games instead of improvements which we should be getting. You're not better than the idiots who buy CoD every year for the full price, then shell out another £15 for a map pack which they just ported from a previous game and didn't put any work in to.
Sorry if I'm "Entitled", I don't expect to play a game in 2012 with low res textures which are worse than a PC game from 2007, a frame rate which is locked at 30 which makes the game look even more horrid and is using ridiculous DRM which doesn't even need to be there.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 614
^ OMG STOP BEING SO ENTITLED.