jim-jam bongs
Member
Polk said:
Best case scenario. Worst case scenario is removing features because they don't want to have to develop two versions of the same game. See Dragon Age 2 for more info.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 under development - multiplatform
- Thread starter Foliorum Viridum
- Start date
Best case scenario. Worst case scenario is removing features because they don't want to have to develop two versions of the same game. See Dragon Age 2 for more info.
Neuromancer said:
For one thing, a 108-key keyboard plus mouse versus a 16-button gamepad with joysticks and auto-aim.
For another thing, a computer monitor you sit 3 feet away and interact with via a pointing device is different than a TV you sit 10 feet away from and interact with via a D-pad.
THEN no matter how good the engine is there has to be some amount of compromise to make the game work with 512 MB of RAM
On top of that, no console gamers don't have the chops how about THEM apples??
Neuromancer said:
The former engine developer explained that the X-Ray engine is just not capable of adapting itself to consoles; it was very much PC-only.
jim-jam bongs said:
That's why it's critical GSC remains PC centric. BioWare has become console centric and thus a lost cause for those who crave games with deeper and more complex gameplay. It's unfortunate that most publishers think they have to chase an as wide as possible console audience and reduce the complexity accordingly.
The PC suffers far less from this problem. As mentioned, the STALKER 1 games sold 4 million copies so far, so there is already a solid fanbase. Its current complexity is not a barrier to commercial success, so though obviously GSC will try to find a bigger audience for the sequel, they do not necessarily have to "dumb it down" for the PC audience.
In a way we can already see where they're going. Whereas Clear Sky added more complexity to the game (mechanics that had been intended for SoC, but cut for release), Call of Pripyat focused more on "streamlining" (to use that abhorred word) the game. The faction system was toned down. Upgrades and repairs improved and simplified. Stashes contained persistent items. Artifacts respawn. Shelters are plentiful and indicated whenever an emission occurs. It even had achievements, though thankfully they actually meant something in-game, making it more of an RPG-like perk. Yet I don't think most people thought CoP betrayed the core values of STALKER; it was more a case of making the complexity work without losing the mechanics. CoP shows us glimpses of the direction GSC is heading to and so far I don't think there too much reason to worry, as long as their focus remains primarily on the PC version.
I could be wrong though. I'm still undecided as to whether the incessant talk of "bros" and other American slang was a case of really bad voice acting and dialogue scripting or a subtle commentary on male bonding and why STALKERs are mostly loners. I'm inclined to the former though.
Anyway, the game is not out until 2012 at the earliest; given GSC's track record and their seemingly ambitious new engine, I wouldn't be surprised if it's really 2013. Either way, by that time the gap between PC and current-gen consoles will be so large, they will have to go for two distinct versions.
By the way, the RPS forum yielded an interesting link:
http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2009/09/24/the-real-stalker-2/
Guts Of Thor
Thorax of Odin
Awesome!
Never played the first one.
Never played the first one.
SonOfABeep
Banned
Excited to play a version that will have some QC applied to it. Call of Pripyat was better but the original and Clear Sky were a nightmare to get running right.
DodgyGeezerFella
Member
Hope they take the CoP route with this one (huge areas filled with all sorts of random interesting shit and hidden underground areas that are all seamless).
Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER! Get out of here STALKER!
I love me some Stalker, but Jesus please don't gimp it for consoles. Honestly though how can they not ruin it? There is next to no way you could navigate the inventory whilst in the middle of a gun fight on a controller. Maybe they could use PS Move, it would help a ton to select things without having to change up the game much from the PC version.
I love me some Stalker, but Jesus please don't gimp it for consoles. Honestly though how can they not ruin it? There is next to no way you could navigate the inventory whilst in the middle of a gun fight on a controller. Maybe they could use PS Move, it would help a ton to select things without having to change up the game much from the PC version.
blindrocket
Member
I always wanted to play STALKER, but didn't have a PC during the time of its release.
I remember drooling over screenshots in PC gaming magazines YEARS ago. I think I even posted a few times on the STALKER message boards before the game released.
What specs would be needed to play it? I kind of doubt it would run on my laptop, but I dunno.
I remember drooling over screenshots in PC gaming magazines YEARS ago. I think I even posted a few times on the STALKER message boards before the game released.
What specs would be needed to play it? I kind of doubt it would run on my laptop, but I dunno.
blindrocket said:
Pretty low. I was playing on medium when it came out an an AMD 64 2800+, 1 gig of ram, and a 6600GT
NIGHT- said:
There is quite a lot of evidence to show that developing with consoles in mind necessitates dumbing down a game. It's akin to your favorite author writing a sequel to your favorite book but cutting out sub-stories that might be difficult to follow in hopes of broadening appeal , as opposed to mere e-thuggary that would be present if Uncharted 3 were on the 360 as well, or Gears of War on the PS3.
My only concern, with going multiplat, is that the consoles are so lacking in video/system memory. I'm not sure how this will effect the kind of world they like to create within the STALKER series.
Besides, GSC's work is always a bit rough around the edges; I'd expect the console version to be something resembling the Risen port job, at best.
Besides, GSC's work is always a bit rough around the edges; I'd expect the console version to be something resembling the Risen port job, at best.
The problem here isn't that PC gamers want teh exclusives (We've been living without them for a while now, they're not all that important), it's that we don't want our non-standard oddly complex and very specifically designed PC games getting a very literal dumb-down when making the transition to the world of analogue sticks and not-too-many-buttons.
It's equivalent to say, Killing Zone or Halos being released on their respective platforms, but with the addition of now releasing on the Wii. You then have the game suffer from needing to be, first and foremost, based around the lowest common denominator's restrictions. And in a world what with video games being not for smart people already, it's a shame that there's now a possibility of STALKER becoming yet another Shoot The Man In The Face game.
But, it's only a possibility. And I'm pretty sure STALKER 2 won't work when it comes out, so after about 5 weeks the PC version will still be the only version in either case.
It's equivalent to say, Killing Zone or Halos being released on their respective platforms, but with the addition of now releasing on the Wii. You then have the game suffer from needing to be, first and foremost, based around the lowest common denominator's restrictions. And in a world what with video games being not for smart people already, it's a shame that there's now a possibility of STALKER becoming yet another Shoot The Man In The Face game.
But, it's only a possibility. And I'm pretty sure STALKER 2 won't work when it comes out, so after about 5 weeks the PC version will still be the only version in either case.
saelz8 said:
No, I get it completely. You think that by going to consoles, the game is going to be worse off in some way or another. That they're going to "dumb it down" for the console crowd and have it negatively impact the game. But this argument is similar in spirit to the whiners that complaining when a PS3 exclusive goes to 360, because of the limitations of DVD vs Blu-Ray, or the theoretical higher ceiling with Cell... etc.
Now I'm not saying that it's not an impossibility that STALKER will go down the same path. But you guys are assuming guilty until proven innocent. All we have is an announcement and you guys have an immediate knee jerk reaction that the game is going to be worse off.
And there's certainly plenty of PC Master Gaming Race elitism permeating this thread.
EviLore said:
I mean, come on. I can't believe a comment like this is coming of EviLore of all people. I know EviLore is a huge proponent of PC gaming with DD and Steam, but to make the kind of comment that all PC game makers automatically assume that all of their players are intelligent (and that console game makers presumably don't) is ridiculous.
Shadow of Chernobyl is my favorite FPS bar none and is a game I believe everyone should play through at least once - though that's largely due in part to the community fully realizing the vision that GSC set out with, and it took several years post-release for that to happen.
Call of Pripyat fixed a lot of issues they had with Shoc/CS releases and made a good vanilla debut, but it was still missing a little of that something special that ShoC Complete had.
It's a wait and see for me.
Call of Pripyat fixed a lot of issues they had with Shoc/CS releases and made a good vanilla debut, but it was still missing a little of that something special that ShoC Complete had.
It's a wait and see for me.
You've played Stalker right? Isn't awesome how it just sort of drops you into the world and expects you to figure it all out? There are a million systems in the Stalker games and it doesn't take the time to explain any of them to you. There absolutely is an assumption of intelligence in that particular game that doesn't really have an analogue on consoles. People complained about Mass Effect 1 being a hard game to play because there was no tutorial. Mass Effect 1!ZealousD said:
Not to use them as an example, but it was a common complaint. Can you imagine how those same people who react to a properly done Stalker?
You could argue about DVD vs. Blu-Ray restrictions with 360 vs PS3 ports, but that doesn't address the actual parallel situation -- how many times has someone suggested that porting a PS3 and/or 360 game to the PC would result in the PS3/360 game having features removed, or the game simplified? Which games?ZealousD said:
I will even grant you that one MIGHT argue that such a porting effort could cause features to be cut due to lack of time for a small studio. But even so -- please point some cases out where console people have argued the PC port will affect the console version.
To basically repeat what other people are saying...if there's a console version of a game, great! More people can play it. If the existence of a console version has a negative effect on the PC version, then that's too bad. Some studios may feel that they HAVE to make a console version to get enough sales. I don't know if that's true or not, but I can understand the studio viewpoint if so.
DodgyGeezerFella
Member
dionysus said:
Do it, Call of Pripyat destroys CS, and imo, is better than SoC
dionysus said:
Clear Sky abandoned a lot of what made Stalker, Stalker. Especially the whole faction war thing (which is entirely ignorable with zero consequences to the player as well as the whole thing completely disappearing about half way through). Unless you want some good backstory on the zone (of which all the pertinent information is given in the swamps alone - the very first zone), there's really no reason to buy the game.
And as far as lack of hard explanation of the game mechanics in the Shadow of Chernobyl, exploration of the game in all it's aspects is part of the experience, truly.
Blizzard said:
Obviously this is impossible. PC is an open platform, so any sort of deficiencies can be removed. The only real time that the PC suffers a technical inferiority is in control scheme (for certain genres, like fighting games or platformers), and this can be rectified through adding hardware. But you're injecting a Red Herring here. I never made that argument and never implied it.
I'm simply saying that making the knee jerk reaction that the game is going to be simplified is similar to the kind of fanboy behavior that's typical when talking about lost exclusives for console platforms. If STALKER 2 ends up being a simplified game meant to appeal to a more mass market audience, then you may lob hatred upon the developers. But making the assumption early before anything is known is a clear symptom of fanboy elitism in my opinion.
Blizzard said:
And I don't disagree with this. But there's at least several people in this thread that don't follow this line of thinking.
wormstrangler
Banned
subversus said:
CoP is boring for you, but the majority of STALKER players name it as their favourite.
I'm not sure why GSC doesn't just grab, say, the Crysis engine and build from that. Though the X-Ray engine is unique and has a certain charm about it.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
ZealousD said:
Okay, but I already gave you three examples of PC->Console conversions that suffered specifically from the allegations being made and you just didn't reply to my post.
Because historically it has been.
He's directly referring to the interface streamlining in BioShock and Deus Ex 2.
It seems like you have softened your language, but eh. "Similar" except in one case, people are mad because their console does not have a monopoly on a game..."similar" except in the other case people are annoyed because such changes have a -history-, presumably, of negative effects on the PC version. In one case there is hardly a rational justification except for bringing more popularity to your console and thus maaaaaybe better games and more developer support for it, while in the other there are more concrete reasons. Or maybe I'm off-base.ZealousD said:
Yes people are expressing fear in advance. It's not totally unjustified, but what else are you going to say on a message board? "It might turn out okay, let's wait and see?" :lol
I can't understand why people love Call of Pripyat.
-No dynamic anomalies + vast open spaces = walking in Zone without care for minutes. You had to watch every step in CS and SOC and that was part of the fun - you're running into hideout to hide from blowout (or escaping mutants, or shooting some dudes) and BAM you stepped into some shit that almost screws you but then you barely made it alive. Thanks to the community for getting anomalies back though.
-stupid boring plot of which you couldn't carry less, so instead you're doing sidemissions which also aren't fantastic (first two games at least pushed you forward).
-placeholder characters.
-general lack of polish and I don't know how to say it better but may be love. It felt like devs were bored with the engine, with the game and were just checking out the list: the final build stability -check, sleep - check, more open world - check, less pure fetch quests - check.
Why people love COP is beyond me.
-No dynamic anomalies + vast open spaces = walking in Zone without care for minutes. You had to watch every step in CS and SOC and that was part of the fun - you're running into hideout to hide from blowout (or escaping mutants, or shooting some dudes) and BAM you stepped into some shit that almost screws you but then you barely made it alive. Thanks to the community for getting anomalies back though.
-stupid boring plot of which you couldn't carry less, so instead you're doing sidemissions which also aren't fantastic (first two games at least pushed you forward).
-placeholder characters.
-general lack of polish and I don't know how to say it better but may be love. It felt like devs were bored with the engine, with the game and were just checking out the list: the final build stability -check, sleep - check, more open world - check, less pure fetch quests - check.
Why people love COP is beyond me.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
I'm not holding my breath. I am intrigued by the new engine though.
Stumpokapow said:
And you also gave me a couple examples of games that didn't suffer. I can think of some other examples right off the top of my head. Crysis 2. Unreal Tournament 3. Half-Life 2 (specifically The Orange Box).
Blizzard said:
My language hasn't softened. I used a word like "remind", remember? I never made a full equivalence.
Uhhhh.. why not? Is cautious optimism really that odd of a concept to you?
jim-jam bongs
Member
ZealousD said:
- Crysis 2 isn't out yet so you really can't say that with any certainty.
- UT3 was just a bad game, and I would say absolutely suffered as a result of leading on consoles.
- Half-Life 2 was PC first and console second.
I agree with cautious optimism here, but I also think that past history favours the pessimists.
Discotheque
Banned
jim-jam bongs said:
Didn't they cut out the sandbox element of Crysis in favor of a more linear game for the sequel?
jim-jam bongs said:
We've seen enough of it to make that determination.
Discotheque said:
If they did, that'd be a conscious design choice that would have had little to do with the fact that the game is on consoles. These consoles can easily pull off the same type of gameplay as the original Crysis. It's not like the sandbox element of the original game was that expansive to begin with or that these kind of elements aren't accepted by the mainstream.
How so? The modding tools were just as expansive as ever, weren't they? If not more so? Admittedly, I haven't played UT3 yet, but I was under the impression that any "dumbing down" of the game was entirely on the consoles versions themselves.
Crysis 2 isn't out yet as someone else pointed out, and even with the limited info we have so far, people have already pointed out -exactly the sort of thing- we're talking about for multiplatform influence, i.e. simplified controls, more linearity, etc. Maybe it will not be simplified or "dumbed down" or scope-restricted or whatever. We don't know yet for sure.ZealousD said:
*edit* The game is releasing 7 months from now and you claim we have already seen enough to know the PC design was unaffected by consoles?
I don't know if consoles could handle the sort of scope the PC games had, on CRYTEK's engine. But arguing this point, that it is both a conscious design point AND has nothing to do with consoles...seems kind of iffy to me.
If you admit that multiplatform concern is rational, and based on what has happened with other games, then can you at least admit that one can express concern about this without being a "PC fanboy"? Fanboy is a harsh term, man. It makes me cry. :'(
I was kind of being sarcastic, thus the laughing smiley. If anything, I think I tend to be way more mild, trying to reserve judgment than some people. Note for instance how I keep trying to concede points to you and offer possible rational arguments for views I do not even hold.
Blizzard said:
Yes. But not everybody "expressing concern" in this thread was doing the pissing and moaning I spoke of.
This is fine: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22808391&postcount=35
This is not: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22821233&postcount=64
jim-jam bongs
Member
ZealousD said:
Not to be rude, but did you play Crysis? Saying that the sandbox element wasn't all that expansive makes me think that you didn't. At any rate, it's not about the console market accepting sandbox elements, it's about the hardware being unable to cope with the extensive freedom and complexity of the original game.
Also, the suit powers are being streamlined to be more friendly to controllers, which is exactly the type of thing that people in this thread are worried about.
ZealousD said:
Not really. Epic partnered with Gamespy for the online on PC which lead to a glorious clusterfuck of stupid account management implementations. This happens with most console to PC ports because the hooks for online play are console-centric, and it's easier to plug them into a similar (or same in the case of GFWL) system for the PC version.
Like I said, optimism is all well and good but at some point you have to acknowledge that people are reacting to having been burned repeatedly and accept that pessimism is just as valid a choice.
Edit: Aw I kind of like Zealous. Hope that wasn't a perm.
WHOAguitarninja
Member
Crysis 2 looks to be far more linear of an affair the Crysis 1. So no on that one. UT3 shipped with an abysmal UI and server browser on the PC, so no again. I'll give you Orange Box, that one was fine on the PC.ZealousD said:
There isn't really anything inherent to Stalker's mechanics that couldn't work on a console, I don't think. The issue is that I think the general expectation is that console players will be somewhat baffled by what to do in the game. The STALKER is series is probably closest to Fallout 3 in play, but it's even less directed and guided than that was. That's one of its charms. Hopefully that as well as the punishingly cruel nature of the game aren't lost.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
ZealousD said:
But Crysis, Unreal Tournament, and Half-Life didn't have any kind of interface complexity to dumb down, which is why they are worse analogs to Stalker than the three games I mentioned. And UT3 did get dumbed down in that the 360 version didn't have proper mod support; something that'll also be true of Crysis 2, unfortunately for anyone who wants to check out MSTER 2 or whatever the equivalent will be. And Crysis, which used open-world tech, doesn't seem to use open-world tech in the sequel, so from a level design point of view, it does seem to be "dumbed down".
The problem isn't that some people are cautiously optimistic, the problem is that the cautiously optimistic people insist on calling those who are understandably pessimistic fanboys or otherwise insulting them.
SonOfABeep
Banned
It's way too early to throw these assumptions around.
No matter what you say about "dumbing down" or other cases of that happening in the past, you're simply assuming that you know what GSC is doing with the game based on literally ONE WORD of one of the first bits of info about the game.
I'd call that unreasonable. If it was a different team doing it or if they had directly said that changes would be made to the game, not the engine,then we have a discussion.
That said I think there's a very odd hatred towards any kind of change or refinement in games. Does more complexity make something better all the time?
I love the original stalker but what I loved about it was the atmosphere, the world, and the survival aspect. I don't think any of these things would be impossible to pull off on a console. There's no technical reasons, certainly.
What I did not like were the obtuse, never explained sytems of using the anomolies to buff your skills and the utterly fucked up quest system.
Thinking of all of the stalker games how many buttons were really nessecary?
Fire, Aim, crouch, sneak, inventory, flashlight, swap weapon, and quick item use. Pausing the game to access inventory should have been in the stalker games and a quick radial menu in the console version to access healing items would be fine, and wouldn't affect the PC version's quick access item keys.
Maybe I'll be wrong and it'll turn into call of duty, but this isn't bioware or bethesda we're talking about. I think GSC is slightly more hardcore than those guys.
No matter what you say about "dumbing down" or other cases of that happening in the past, you're simply assuming that you know what GSC is doing with the game based on literally ONE WORD of one of the first bits of info about the game.
I'd call that unreasonable. If it was a different team doing it or if they had directly said that changes would be made to the game, not the engine,then we have a discussion.
That said I think there's a very odd hatred towards any kind of change or refinement in games. Does more complexity make something better all the time?
I love the original stalker but what I loved about it was the atmosphere, the world, and the survival aspect. I don't think any of these things would be impossible to pull off on a console. There's no technical reasons, certainly.
What I did not like were the obtuse, never explained sytems of using the anomolies to buff your skills and the utterly fucked up quest system.
Thinking of all of the stalker games how many buttons were really nessecary?
Fire, Aim, crouch, sneak, inventory, flashlight, swap weapon, and quick item use. Pausing the game to access inventory should have been in the stalker games and a quick radial menu in the console version to access healing items would be fine, and wouldn't affect the PC version's quick access item keys.
Maybe I'll be wrong and it'll turn into call of duty, but this isn't bioware or bethesda we're talking about. I think GSC is slightly more hardcore than those guys.