Producer Defends Dead Space 3 Being A 'Console Port'

rflcptr said:
What do they owe you?
Click to expand...

They don't owe me anything. However, I also don't owe them anything.

If their product doesn't meet my expectations for the price, I'll just have to wait until I deem the price acceptable for what they're giving me.

For a PC game, that means if it's an "account linked" game, it's immediately less valuable than a console game I can resell. If it's $60 new on launch day for a console, and I can resell it for ~$35, then the highest non-resellable PC launch price I'd be willing to pay is $25.

If it's a non-resellable license, it's value is greatly diminished over a product I own as the two items aren't even close in value, as such the price I'm willing to pay is adjusted accordingly.
 
Welp, I was reasonably interested in this. Not enough to support a developer with this kind of attitude though.

/closes wallet.
 
I got Dead Space 2 on a pre-release sale for $30, can't say I regretted the purchase as it was a good game. If they did even less this time around, I have no problem waiting for it to be in the <$10 bargain bin where the others in the series eventually went.
 
Medion said:
Console version is $60, PC version is $60.
Both games are fundamentally the same, with the PC version being superior in options?

Why the whining? What makes you think that you are entitled to a superior version at a lower price?
Click to expand...

If they want to give me the same version then they should lower the price. PC games shouldn't include the $10 console licensing cost.
 
rflcptr said:
What do they owe you?
Click to expand...

They don't owe us anything. If they want our money on release day, instead of bargain bin day, they will provide a PC experience. It's an opportunity for them to make more money.
 
KENNYB said:
They don't owe us anything. If they want our money on release day, instead of bargain bin day, they will provide a PC experience. It's an opportunity for them to make more money.
Click to expand...
PC is a much more competitive market. They may have ran the numbers and decided it wasn't worth the investment. Competitive markets aren't always the greatest thing for the consumer, as this case illustrates.
 
could have seen this coming a mile away....

Visceral has always been a console 1st developer, there was literally ZERO support for DS1/DS2 in the way of patches, bug fixes. I hate to sound like a vindictive prick, but I hope this game fails miserably and EA throws another developer into the trash heap...
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Consult PR before making statements.
Click to expand...

Honestly , why don't any of them exercise this small but important bit of advice?

Oh well fuck'em. Instead of actually buying Dead Space 3 I'll just rent it through Gamefly on the 360 since they obviously don't care enough to make an actual effort with the PC version.
 
My PC is not a tablet - response to W8

My PC is not a console - response to DS 3

I'll wait until this game is $5 then buy it. D1 and D2 are great games and I thoroughly enjoyed both. But if the developers are going to be lazy, I won't give them the full value of the game.
 
snowcrash said:
My PC is not a tablet - response to W8

My PC is not a console - response to DS 3

I'll wait until this game is $5 then buy it. D1 and D2 are great games and I thoroughly enjoyed both. But if the developers are going to be lazy, I won't give them the full value of the game.
Click to expand...

It felt the same way with the FEAR series.
The first and second were awesome, and the third just felt like a shitty console port of a COD/MW style game.
 
Z06 said:
Imagine. A Dead Space game developed for the PC from the ground up with DX11 full tessellation and all the bells and whistles...


It would look amazing. And I'd probably buy it.
Click to expand...

And you know what? It wouldn't sell, because PC gamers don't pay for games. It would have had a higher budget, with less time devoted to the console versions. The company would have gone out of business unless they were a big company to begin with, in which case, they won't take many risks like this again.

KENNYB said:
If they want to give me the same version then they should lower the price. PC games shouldn't include the $10 console licensing cost.
Click to expand...

On consoles, they deal with a licensing fee (10-12%) and retail (about the same). On the PC it's a mix of retail mark up, or a rumored 70/30 split with the likes of Steam.
 
Medion said:
And you know what? It wouldn't sell, because PC gamers don't pay for games.
Click to expand...

I can't believe people are still spewing out ignorant statement like this. What are you, a console fanboy? :rolleyes:

This is bullshit and you know it. Plenty of other dev gives proper support for the PC platform with better graphics and mod support.
 
Red Falcon said:
It felt the same way with the FEAR series.
The first and second were awesome, and the third just felt like a shitty console port of a COD/MW style game.
Click to expand...

What..

Fear 3 is far from a console port. The PC copy is quite good. The game however. Thats a unrelated topic.
 
Dion said:
What..

Fear 3 is far from a console port. The PC copy is quite good. The game however. Thats a unrelated topic.
Click to expand...

Could have fooled me.
FEAR 2 had far superior graphics in my opinion.

The character models were very good, but the scenery and everything else felt cheap.
Even the first FEAR had better looking textures up close.
 
Was this a surprise? The first two Dead Space games were consolized to the max and I don't see how this one is going to be any different.

Would have been great if they used the Frostbite 2 engine for this though I would have been interested.
 
rewted said:
Epitome of what is wrong with gaming today.

95% of gaming companies only want to cater to the lowest common denominator, screw the enthusiast. :mad:
Click to expand...

cuz they found a way to get money out of everyone, the minute that went down you right they said screw us. Cuz main streamers are way simpler to feed shit to.
 
I guess I'll wait until EA puts it on sale, instead of a pre-order. Maybe even wait until they make some "Ultimate" edition that includes all the DLC for like $40 or something.
 
John Vuong said:
Was this a surprise? The first two Dead Space games were consolized to the max and I don't see how this one is going to be any different.

Would have been great if they used the Frostbite 2 engine for this though I would have been interested.
Click to expand...
They put better effort in the PC port.

Extra work involves improved graphics but also improved controls consistent with a keyboard/mouse option. DS2 was much better on the PC.
 
Steve said:
This is probably the lamest excuse I've ever heard for a game being a straight console-to-PC port:
Click to expand...

Really, honesty is lame? Lets face it these types of games are developed for the console first and we all know it, why is it lame to be honest and say we want the experience to be the same across all platforms?

rewted said:
Epitome of what is wrong with gaming today.

95% of gaming companies only want to cater to the lowest common denominator, screw the enthusiast. :mad:
Click to expand...

The epitome of what is wrong with gaming is that enthusiast think they make up a big enough market segment to have any real clout. We account for like 1% of their target market, sorry that is reality.

ShamisOMally said:
An effort to begin with
Click to expand...

Why do they owe you an effort or anything else? You do not give them enough on your own to justify squat. If you do not like what they produce do not by it. ALL any developers owes people is a product that delivers what they promised. Anything beyond that is lazy greed by the consumer.

MIghty Hooligan said:
Very lazy attitude to have towards PC gamers and as others have touched on it would almost (almost) be easier to swallow if they didnt charge $59.99 and adjusted the price accordingly.
Click to expand...

Now this argument I can get behind. I am so sick of seeing game sales which are mostly digital being the same price as boxed sales. There is a savings with digital between cost of shipping, packaging, art, printing, production. All of this is gone with the digital and that savings should be reflected.

ShamisOMally said:
I can't wait for the next console gen, cause developers won't be able to be ultra lazy fucks anymore

DX11 on consoles can only make the gaming world as a whole better
Click to expand...

DX11 nor any DX makes gaming better, better games are not about technology but design and fun. This is another issue the so called enthusiast PC gamer has created in the market. A drive for technology in games. Games should not be about the technology they use but the game play. Look at all the great games out there that prove the latest tech is not needed for an amazing gaming experience. Look at Skyrim, would DX11 or better graphics tech have made a better game, hell no. First modders have shown even with DX9 the game can look amazing. however the appearance of the game was NOT what made the game great. It was the exploration, the open world style, the game mechanics that dissolve into the story. In other words not the tech but the game play made it great and that is just one of many.

Seriously guys if you do not like the game then do not buy it but this childish whining that the industry sucks because it is not the way you and a few of your buddies feel it should be is getting old and is what is TRULY LAME!
 
Computer Ed said:
Really, honesty is lame? Lets face it these types of games are developed for the console first and we all know it, why is it lame to be honest and say we want the experience to be the same across all platforms?
Click to expand...
Sigh, your responses are riddled with fail. Allow me to retort;

Honesty? The whole point is that they ARENT being honest. Simply stating "here's my honest answer" does not inherently make it honest. It's misdirection. The dev's did not cripple the pc version to preserve some sort of semblance of unity between systems. They did it because they did not feel like having to upgrade game assets like textures and models. Afterall, why wouldnt they want to take advantage of all the additional horsepower? How am I better off as the consumer by being limited to what a console can output? How is my half-assed experience on the PC better served because it is the same half-assed experience on the console? They might as well say they are limited the screen resolution to 720p to "preserve the experience" between users.

Why do they owe you an effort or anything else? You do not give them enough on your own to justify squat. If you do not like what they produce do not by it. ALL any developers owes people is a product that delivers what they promised. Anything beyond that is lazy greed by the consumer.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with being owed. If you are producing content for the consumer, then you have already forfeit your right to claim you dont owe anything. You dont get to sit there and advertise a product, then complain when nobody likes the product and say "we dont owe you anything". You want to know what they owe me? They owe me a quality product for me giving them $59.99. If you cant take criticism then GTFO. Next you'll be telling me to make a better game myself lol.

DX11 nor any DX makes gaming better, better games are not about technology but design and fun.
Really? So the enhancements in shader model and lighting/shadowing have not made DS a more eerie game? The advancements in 3d rendering technology over the last 20 years have not brought us to a point where we can play something like DS, instead of something like Mario Bros? The sit there and reap the rewards of technology and then act like none of it matters. Of course tech matters. We have entirely new games based squarely around the capabilities DX/OGL have brought us.


. Games should not be about the technology they use but the game play.
Click to expand...
Sometimes new technology introduces new game types which are fun. The push from 2d to 3d introduced us to a whole new level of fun. By your logic we'd all still be playing on our Atari 2600's because games shouldnt strive to advance technology. It's all about the "fun" as it exists right now.

Look at all the great games out there that prove the latest tech is not needed for an amazing gaming experience. Look at Skyrim, would DX11 or better graphics tech have made a better game, hell no.
Click to expand...
wtf rofl. Skyrim, a game that takes full advantage of DirectX, is your example of how DirectX is useless? Sigh....

however the appearance of the game was NOT what made the game great. It was the exploration, the open world style, the game mechanics that dissolve into the story. In other words not the tech but the game play made it great and that is just one of many.
Click to expand...
The tech is what made this open world exploration even possible. How would you have liked the developers of skyrim to give us a port from the original xbox and say "we want the experience to be the same across all platforms. So we have placed invisible walls around ever corner to keep you from venturing off the path. We have limited player count so as not to confuse you when you encounter more "things" in the world. We have limited the textures so that you arent too impressed with the visuals on your pc.

Seriously guys if you do not like the game then do not buy it but this childish whining that the industry sucks because it is not the way you and a few of your buddies feel it should be is getting old and is what is TRULY LAME!
Click to expand...
No, it's not. We have seen what PC gaming is capable of, and some of the best games of all time have been developed around PC. We can see where the industry is headed, and it has little to do with creation and art, and more to do with milking the industry for everything it's worth.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Computer Ed said:
DX11 nor any DX makes gaming better, better games are not about technology but design and fun. This is another issue the so called enthusiast PC gamer has created in the market. A drive for technology in games. Games should not be about the technology they use but the game play. Look at all the great games out there that prove the latest tech is not needed for an amazing gaming experience. Look at Skyrim, would DX11 or better graphics tech have made a better game, hell no. First modders have shown even with DX9 the game can look amazing. however the appearance of the game was NOT what made the game great. It was the exploration, the open world style, the game mechanics that dissolve into the story. In other words not the tech but the game play made it great and that is just one of many.

Seriously guys if you do not like the game then do not buy it but this childish whining that the industry sucks because it is not the way you and a few of your buddies feel it should be is getting old and is what is TRULY LAME!
Click to expand...

Actually Design and Fun is where PC shined and what consoles eclipsed. A keyboard/mouse gives you a heck of lot more control than a 10 button imprecise thumb control that needs autoaim built into games to compensate for the inherent clunky inaccuracy of a controller.

So not only did the console stifle the graphical experience for PCs they stifled the controls as well.
 
micron said:
http://www.droidgamers.com/index.ph...e-with-have-iaps-and-its-mobile-gamers-faults
Click to expand...

The game's producer said:
There are action game fans, and survival-horror game fans, who are 19 and 20, and they've only played games on their smartphones, and micro-transactions are to them a standard part of gaming. It's a different generation. So if we're going to bring those people into our world, let's speak their language.
Click to expand...

what? Where does he get this idea? while i don't have any facts on this, it seems ludicrous.
 
As long as the port is equal/greater than DS2, I'm fine with it. I'm not a fan of EA/Visceral's approach towards PC gamers, but I think they've done a great job with the franchise thus far in terms of story, gameplay and immersion into the main character.
 
Computer Ed said:
DX11 nor any DX makes gaming better, better games are not about technology but design and fun. This is another issue the so called enthusiast PC gamer has created in the market. A drive for technology in games. Games should not be about the technology they use but the game play. Look at all the great games out there that prove the latest tech is not needed for an amazing gaming experience. Look at Skyrim, would DX11 or better graphics tech have made a better game, hell no. First modders have shown even with DX9 the game can look amazing. however the appearance of the game was NOT what made the game great. It was the exploration, the open world style, the game mechanics that dissolve into the story. In other words not the tech but the game play made it great and that is just one of many.
Click to expand...

Are you serious with this? The tech level and modders being able to take full advantage of the DirectX technology is the BEST thing about Skyrim. The gameplay and especially the story are its shortcomings lol
 
Luckily there are plently of other games that are available on the PC platform to enjoy which do take advantage of the hardware. Oh well. Dead Space 3 may turn out to be an awesome game, but not at $59.99 for a straight console port on the PC. I might take a look when it's on sale at a later date.
 
This is another reason why I wait for most stuff to hit the bargain bin. I don't feel like I've been ripped off if I only spent $10.00 on it.
 
I've never played this game, nor do I have much excitement for playing it. It being a console port is alright, what isn't alright is if they totally hose the controls and have no Field of View (FOV) settings. If controls are done right then having the option of changing them is of great importance.
 
So a user base for a platform, saying it plays like a POS is perfectly acceptable then?
 
chockomonkey said:
The tech level and modders being able to take full advantage of the DirectX technology is the BEST thing about Skyrim. The gameplay and especially the story are its shortcomings lol
Click to expand...
So do you play the game, or do you just spend time modding it?
 
In other news, Chevrolet's new C7 has limited the acceleration and top speed to be that of a standard Cobalt, in order to ensure everybody's experience is the same regardless of platform.
 
I paid something like 4.99 for Metro 2033 when it was on sale. no way this will take more than that from me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top