Force unleashed on PC

Piracy possibly plays a part, but at the same time I know lots of people with chipped 360s. I believe it is simply competition, PC gamers demand more, you are competing against some of the best FPS games, they know that they can sell a poor game by calling it Starwars and advertising if it is on a console.

PC gamers are much more demanding. Games that are good on consoles are average on PC, especially in the FPS Genre.

I don't want to open a can of worms but tis true. :)
 
They could sell a boatload simply putting it out on the PC though, especially since a direct port of the 360 version would do for most SW fans. I don't know the intracacies of Xbox 360 development but with it using DirectX I suspect the path from it to PC and vice versa isn't as onerous as development for several disparate platforms (as they have already done).

I don't really buy that the reason they didn't release it on PC was because they felt it couldn't compete with previous SW titles, my gut feeling is that the decision was driven by piracy first and foremost - whilst I know 360s can be chipped I would think that with Xbox Live being a factor in this equation that they would be a relative minority. There's no piracy at all on the PS3 and from what I can gather Wii and DS piracy involves jumping through hoops.

Or it could be that the control mechanism, targeting system and QTEs wouldn't translate very well to mouse & keyboard?...
 
this should be very cool, one for the nvidia physx i hope!


good excuse to upgrade when they go 55nm and then use my 8800gt for secondary

Dan
 
DanielSon said:
this should be very cool, one for the nvidia physx i hope!

good excuse to upgrade when they go 55nm and then use my 8800gt for secondary
Click to expand...

Did you read anything after the thread title? :p

Strife212 said:
Come on, MOST peoples PC's would get thrashed by a PS3.
Click to expand...

According to the Steam hardware survey over 35% of systems analysed have a GPU better than a 7900, and over 35% have a dual-core or better CPU. IMO that shows pretty strong support for "hard core gaming" machines.
 
Last edited:
Streeteh said:
Right, for starters the Wii and PS2 versions aren't the same as those released on the PS3 + 360. The physics aspects have been largely removed and the graphics heavily toned down and the gameplay adjusted accordingly.
Click to expand...

I know what you're saying but to me it just seems they're saying one thing but doing another. If the physics are such an integral part of the game why remove it all together in order to run it on an inferior system that isn't going to show the game in it's best light. It just really makes no sense to me. Other than the money aspect of course.

Strife212 said:
Come on, MOST peoples PC's would get thrashed by a PS3.
Click to expand...

I completely agree but if you look again you'll notice I said PS2, not PS3 :)
 
I thought it was "good", just not £40 good. I think I'm going to rent it or get it 2nd hand in a few weeks when it's half that, not paying that much for (what the demo leads me to believe is) a mediocre button masher.
 
Completed it today. Probably holds the record for the smallest major title ever. Around 7 levels (2 of those repeated twice) and buggy as hell. Could be completed in around 3.5-4 hours if you speed run it all.

Last boss battle is really buggy and unbelievable how poor the Q&A was (or not) seen as the game was finished over 2 months ago they did not bother fixing all the bugs (loads of them). Needs patching badly as some are hard lockups requiring console reboot.

Game has some tremendous animation & cut scenes, music & FX but gameplay is very poor.

PC version would be not well received at all as the game design is so basic.

Watered down version of Jedi Outcast with better graphics and physics (which are not worth the hype at all nothing Havok could not do anyway).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom