Console to PC Ports Can Be Great

The whole concept of "console port" is outdated anyway. At least in the strictest definition. Modern multiplatform development usually involves simultaneous work on all platforms. Very few companies have a "lead platform" anymore.

But that's mostly academic. You can still have a game where one platform ends up weaker than others.
 
phide said:
Not quite. '640p' at 16:9 is about 1080x640. 1024x768 is more comparable.
Click to expand...

True. Some games like Call of Duty: Black Ops are rendered at under 640p though. Black Ops for example is 960x544 which I think is a bit closer to 800x600.

I mostly decided upon that resolution as he's complaining his monitor doesn't natively support 800x600 fullscreen. Hence, he has to use windowed mode which due to things being rendered in the background such as say maybe msn messenger, the system tray, task bar notifications, etc, rending at 800x600 would be more similar solely for the sake of Performance vs Perfomance for equal aesethic quality wise.
 
Looking around the web, it looks like Crysis 2 is multiplat, not a port.
 
If it is done right WoW players around the world will get this game.
 
krotch said:
Looking around the web, it looks like Crysis 2 is multiplat, not a port.
Click to expand...

Like hell it is...

DX9 only, Press start to begin, no modding tools like before, lack of advanced graphics options.

Yep its a port. Not sure where on the web you read its not. You cant even claim its a multiplatform with press start to begin being the first thing you see right off the bat.
 
Am I the only one that was reeling backwards in disgust at all the jagged edges, pixelation, and blocky animations in this video at the same time that they were praising the fidelity of it? I'm pretty sure I saw better looking console games in 2005, let alone PC titles in 2011. Ha!
 
Seriously, like, I'm still in complete disbelief here. And I quote: "I'd say the PC version is my favorite... Mainly because it just looks stunning!"

ThisLooksAwful.jpg


Stunning. Right. Yes... Look at those... Fire-ball... effects? Bwahahah,*smirk* I can't even keep a straight face! :-S
 
Update: I'm still laughing uncontrollably. I may need professional help.
 
Well I like Legendary, and Wolfenstein (2009) is pretty good, and I believe both of those were console ports and I enjoy playing both immensely. I don't mind a game being ported as long as it's enjoyable and not terribly buggy. I do prefer native PC development but a game being a console port is not going to stop me from playing if I think I'll like it.
 
L0s7 4 Lyf3 said:
In 2003 my computer (with a P4) had trouble playing Quake 3 (1999) at decent settings. The only games that ran well were pre-2000.
Click to expand...

In around 2003 my PIII/Ati rage used to play that game with everything as high as it would go at rediculous resolutions. I didn't know the p4s sucked so badly :eek: Did you have a graphics chip of any kind?

Kuraudo said:
People are forgetting that the code for a console game is optimized for consoles. When you take a console port and put it on pc, it's not going to run as well.
Click to expand...

Limited scope of game design is nothing to do with the "limitations of consoles". Otherwise there would never have been an open world game before 2003ish. High end PCs used to be worse than the consoles are now. The reason that games are manafactuered and linear the way they are because people buy them, repeatedly. It makes buisness sense, so it is perpetuated. There have been open world, 128 player multiplayer titles on consoles so anything is possible if done corrently.

Mass effect does suck terribly though...
 
Disposed said:
Like hell it is...

DX9 only, Press start to begin, no modding tools like before, lack of advanced graphics options.

Yep its a port. Not sure where on the web you read its not. You cant even claim its a multiplatform with press start to begin being the first thing you see right off the bat.
Click to expand...

That doesn't necessarily mean it's a port. I just means they're lazy. Build an engine to work on the diff systems. Build the game. Change portions of the game to match their respective systems. Add in more options for their respective systems. Crytek simply kind of skipped the last 2 steps.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Ports can be done badly both ways. Last time I played the console version of a PC game on the start menu it said "press enter to continue" and on the save menu it told me not to turn off my PC or exit to windows. I was SO pissed off as it ruined the experience for me completely. :p
Click to expand...


I like that. ^
 
HohnyF said:
Dead Space never got a sigle patch.

Eventually ppl got used to controls (or they gave up) , and it was ok. Save the the save game difficulty bug.
Dead Space 2, EA said it has no plans to fix dithering...

Capcom makes good multiplatforms
Click to expand...

This is why I did not play Dead Space. Way to damn buggy.
 
Playing Dead Space 2 now and haven't had any issues with it. Pretty good game too.
 
For me the worst thing that could be done when porting a game to the PC is to skip a whole game.
Sorry Lionhead, but I don't care how much effort you put into Fable 3, I lost interest in Fable years ago.
 
Fixing the controls on the PC version won't change the fact that Fable 3 just wasn't a good game. I bought it for the Xbox and still regret that decision. Maybe if they scrap and rework the entire last half, but that's not going to happen.
 
The biggest issue I have ever had with console ports is that many times the game will be released, and make it's name in the PC Market. Take Ghost Recon for example. Once it was successful, Red Storm whored it out to the consoles, and when it came time to make Ghost Recon 2, the PC community was an afterthought. 2 completely dumbed down the game and took out most of what made the original what it was in an effort to sell more copies on console. The game was so widely panned by the PC community they didn't even bother to release it. And yes, I'm still ticked off about it. Honor those who helped make you or die in a fire.
 
krotch said:
That doesn't necessarily mean it's a port. I just means they're lazy. Build an engine to work on the diff systems. Build the game. Change portions of the game to match their respective systems. Add in more options for their respective systems. Crytek simply kind of skipped the last 2 steps.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right? It couldnt be any more obvious of a port unless it said Xbox 360 on the fucking title screen.
 
Disposed said:
You're kidding right? It couldnt be any more obvious of a port unless it said Xbox 360 on the fucking title screen.
Click to expand...

Any proof that it's a port and not lazy developers? I'm more inclined to believe Crytek, seeing as if they lie. They can get sued for false advertising.
 
krotch said:
Any proof that it's a port and not lazy developers? I'm more inclined to believe Crytek, seeing as if they lie. They can get sued for false advertising.
Click to expand...

I have shown all the proof i need to show if thats not enough to convince you then good luck in life believing everything a company says.
 
krotch said:
Any proof that it's a port and not lazy developers? I'm more inclined to believe Crytek, seeing as if they lie. They can get sued for false advertising.
Click to expand...

Consolization is quite simple. When a game takes several steps back from the previous game and it happens to coincide with the console audience, it's been consolized.

This is not just lazy developers. The technology took a step backwards from CryEngine 2. Not just graphically, but what was accomplished by physics. The controls were simplified. The developers console was locked down in several different areas. The difficulty, even on the hardest mode, was laughable at best. The game became Crysis on Rails.

I'm starting to hate the term streamlining. If there are problems, you streamline. If people are content with how things work, that's dumbing down.

I admit, consolization is the wrong term, because games dumb down when they're released to a mass audience. It just so happens that the mass audience happens to be on consoles, so they're tied together.
 
Nytegard said:
Consolization is quite simple. When a game takes several steps back from the previous game and it happens to coincide with the console audience, it's been consolized.

This is not just lazy developers. The technology took a step backwards from CryEngine 2. Not just graphically, but what was accomplished by physics. The controls were simplified. The developers console was locked down in several different areas. The difficulty, even on the hardest mode, was laughable at best. The game became Crysis on Rails.

I'm starting to hate the term streamlining. If there are problems, you streamline. If people are content with how things work, that's dumbing down.

I admit, consolization is the wrong term, because games dumb down when they're released to a mass audience. It just so happens that the mass audience happens to be on consoles, so they're tied together.
Click to expand...

Consolization and port is not the same thing. At least, I don't think they are. Not even sure what consolization even is. A port is software being specifically built for one system, then changed enough just to play on a different system. Multiplatform is software being designed from the ground up to work on different systems or the software is individually created for each system.

Now Crysis 2 is multiplaform, but it has been dumbed down, as the lowest hardware specs happens to be the consoles. You can call it consolization, but that doesn't mean it's a port.
 
krotch said:
Consolization and port is not the same thing. At least, I don't think they are. Not even sure what consolization even is. A port is software being specifically built for one system, then changed enough just to play on a different system. Multiplatform is software being designed from the ground up to work on different systems or the software is individually created for each system.

Now Crysis 2 is multiplaform, but it has been dumbed down, as the lowest hardware specs happens to be the consoles. You can call it consolization, but that doesn't mean it's a port.
Click to expand...

Port is just one word though that's been used over the years to mean something it technically doesn't mean, like the word theory. Most people horribly misuse the term, but you need to read into what they're saying, and not take what they're saying literally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top