Operation Flashpoint 2 preview and screenies
- Thread starter NoxNoctum
- Start date
You where expecting anything else? its simple really, they allways design the game for the weakest platform, because this way, they can be sure the game works on all platforms whilst keeping their deadlines (making the game too demanding to run on an Xbox could mean having to delay its release for many months as things need to be remodelled, retextured, re-coded and maps have to be altered, hell, it could take a year easilly if the problems are fundamental enough).
So yes, us PC users will get a port as allways, how good a port it'll be remains to be seen, but the industry's track record thease last 5+ years leaves us with little reason to be optimistic..
QFT!
Upvote
0
I personally think it's a little naive to expect more than a port...and I'll be extremely surpised if it isn't.
I can think of only handful of titles in the last few years that have been (what I consider to be) successful ports onto the PC. All of which were released on the PC at least 6 months after they hit their original system.
And if you were Codemasters, and you understood Operation Flashpoints player base - surely you'd make a point of saying that the PC version of Dragon Rising was independant of the console releases...?
I can think of only handful of titles in the last few years that have been (what I consider to be) successful ports onto the PC. All of which were released on the PC at least 6 months after they hit their original system.
And if you were Codemasters, and you understood Operation Flashpoints player base - surely you'd make a point of saying that the PC version of Dragon Rising was independant of the console releases...?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
When the game is being developed simultaneously for all platforms, then it's a multiplatform game and not a bad port. In fact the word pc ports is only valid on games like Mass Effect, Gears of War, Halo 2, etc. which were developed only on console and later on ported to PC.
Upvote
0
Yeah thanks for that unnecessary lesson - I really wasn't sure what those terms meant.
90% of the time "multiplatform development" means - "making it for the easiest platform to develop for - and porting it to the others"
I'm not saying it is a port, or that it's going to be a bad port.
All I'm saying is to expect actual dedicated multiplatform development is naive, as it's extremely expensive and happens so infrequently.
90% of the time "multiplatform development" means - "making it for the easiest platform to develop for - and porting it to the others"
I'm not saying it is a port, or that it's going to be a bad port.
All I'm saying is to expect actual dedicated multiplatform development is naive, as it's extremely expensive and happens so infrequently.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Well I agree with the point that multi-platform development CAN be problematic, if it's all 1:1 instead of actually using the individual strenghts of the platforms. I found GRAW2, while some people may not like the game, a good example of how it can work out positively.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The Royal Technical Institute of common bloody sense, you are more than naive if you think the Console and PC versions are going to be compleately different games, with different assets and map/texture sizes and whatnot, pay attention in class once in a while and you should notice that the industry doesen't work like that, they make one game, allways keeping in mind that whatever content they make must work on the weakest platform they wish to make money on, and then they make it play on several platforms, that's what multiplatform titles are, have been, and probably will continue to be for the forseeable future, thats how they make their money.
Rubbish, "multi platform" is just a fancy PR word for "we'll be porting this to other platforms too", and allways has been, go through your stack of games, i'm sure you'll have plenty "multi platfom" titles in the bunch, and find one where the assets are different between versions, one where the PC version has bigger maps because it can handle that for instance.
There is no disernable difference between a port that was made after the fact, and a "multi platform" title, they play exactly the same and we see exactly the same things, even CoD4, which was arguably one of the best multi platform attempts in recent years, you can clearly see it, there is no way in hell thease tiny maps where designed around the 32 player support of the PC version, they where designed for the 16 player support of the Xbox, or go look at FEAR-2, a recent offering, why was leaning taken out of the game, despite beeing such a big part of the gameplay in the first one? was it because leaning was a mistake and made for bad gameplay? no, its simply because the Xbox ran out of buttons, so they removed it, and they didn't bother to put it back in when they made the PC version (ported).
Thease games are not tailour made for the patform you play it on, they are full of compromises to make it all work the same on several platforms, just like a port job, if we're lucky they will add on a few extras on the PC version (but it happens rarely since the PC is not the money maker), but that still doesen't mean the game is tailour made for the streangths and weaknesses of the PC platform, and it shows, and even if the game still manages to be fun, you can be damned sure it would have been even better had it been tailour made for the platform to begin with, and they are left wanting in areas where PC games of years past delivered more (stuff like why don't i have in inventory screen? why can't i lean? why are all the maps so small? why are all the textures so blurry and low rez? why can't i adjust thease options? why is the UI so bad? etc etc).
Upvote
0
I very much think so, and i am correct, for i am a golden god amongst men!
But seriously, you need only look at what happened to franchises like Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon when they made the jump from PC, to "multi platform", and my point makes itself, or pretty much any other franchise that used to be PC only and then went multi platform (but it certainly is most noticable in more realism based games, or FPSRPG's for that matter).
You are welcome to feel that thease games are still "fun", since what is "fun" is 100% subjective, but you cannot deny that thease franchises underwent obvious changes when they went multi platform, and that is not subjective, we can compare them side by side and count features and options, number of controls needed and anything else we'd care to, and there are clearly differences.
And they didn't undergo thease changes because that was what the fans wanted, that should be readilly apparent just reading a few threads on this forum, or because they where changes that needed to be made to improve the gameplay, if that where true the old PC fans woulden't be complaining, look at it subjectively, and only 1 obious reason keeps popping up, thease changes where made so the games would be playable on the different hardware and input devices avalible on the Consoles as opposed to the PC.
Explain why FEAR-2 has no leaning, if not to make it playable on a gamepad?
Explain why Bioshock has no inventory system like its forfarthers the system shock series, if not to make it playable on a gamepad?
Explain why R6 Vegas has such low-rez textures, if not because the Xbox doesen't have enough RAM to render more than this?
Explain why CoD4 has such small MP maps, if not because the Xbox only allows for 16 connections instead of 32?
Etc etc, we can go on for houers listing games and obvious compromises like thease, all of which can only be rationally explained away as limitations put on the games by the Consoles hardware, that explination fits perfectly where none other seems to apply, and then it should be readilly apparent, multi-platform development has obvious consequences for PC games, something has to give way to make the games work on lesser hardware (and "lesser" is not a "PC elitist" put-down or any such nonsense, it is a fact, look at the specs, the keybord versus gamepad alone blows the console out of the water), and the developers are clearly not making fully sepperate versions for each platform, if that where the case, we woulden't see thease compromises in the games, but we do.
And now we've got OFP going through this process, a game infamous for needing allmost as many keys to opperate as a flightsim, and huge outdoor terrains, and here it is butting heads with the small amount of RAM present in the Xbox360 and a gamepad with a very limited selection of buttons (and even less that can be opperated simultaniously in real-time by just a thumb that must also opperate a thumbstick).. if you can't see the obvious compromises that must happen there, then you need to get your vision checked.
This leaves us with some common sense questions: How far are Codemasters willing to go with the PC version? how different will they make it to the Console one? how many of thease compromises can they remove from this version and still make a profit despite more development time? and how leniant are their investors and publisher? how much more time do they even have to develop this thing?
Well regardless, it is safe to assume that not all compromises will be overcome, and that this will surely anger fans of the origional game like we have seen so often before, and sadly, i belive that to be the best case scenario, we may also get a game that is just like the Console version but with a slightly different UI, it woulden't be the first time we see that now would it?
Upvote
0
Only read the first paragraph.
How can you name Ghost Recon as victim of multi-platform development? The PC version of GRAW/2 was completely different, adapted to PC(1st person with all the bonuses that come with it for example) and even had different developers hired(GRIN) extra for the PC version. Don't mix up dislike and reality.
Agree about Vegas though(1st one is a decent action-game, but no R6).
How can you name Ghost Recon as victim of multi-platform development? The PC version of GRAW/2 was completely different, adapted to PC(1st person with all the bonuses that come with it for example) and even had different developers hired(GRIN) extra for the PC version. Don't mix up dislike and reality.
Agree about Vegas though(1st one is a decent action-game, but no R6).
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Well then I'm afraid this debate is over, as I'm not going to participate in another endless pc-console discussion.
As for the game, I just read that there'll be destructible buildings, but not like in BF:BC where it's at least kind half-realistic, but instead there are going to be various states of destruction, in order to make it easier for the AI to navigate, according to CM.
Upvote
0
For emphasis. Having played both versions of the first GRAW, they are completely different games. Even the content is substantially different.
Upvote
0