• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

360 version not a good idea?

console players require thier games to be dumbed down quite a bit, RO console would probably have crosshairs (BLASPHEMY).

See when a new player comes to RO and you hear "ZOMG HOW DO I TURN CROSSHAIR ON?" or "WHERE IS MY CROSSHAIR"

thats because the previous games they have played are also availble on consoles thus have been dumbed down.
That's some nice baseless generalization there.

RO could easily work on a console, it's not that complex, a console pad has enough buttons for your basic movement, aiming, shoot, bayonet, lean, use and map. Plus the rest like commands etc can be handled using a quick command gui ala GRAW easily.

I don't know where the hell you got the idea that people asking about a crosshair in RO are all console players, did you survey them all? I think you'll find a lot of those questions stem from players of whatever system who are used to every other FPS having a crosshair.

I'd like to see the game come to a console, whatever generates revenue for TWI and keeps them afloat and producing great video games is fine in my book.
 
Upvote 0
low res textures, bulky weapon models and iron sights and huge hitboxes.

So every console game equals low quality graphical piece of **** with hitboxes that equals scycrapers and everything's dumbed down so much that even 2 year old could play the game like some master? Sure PC can beat sometimes the **** out of consoles - especially gameplaywise, but somehow I don't get the idea that console visuals would be always greatly inferior to the PC. Unless you compare NES games to new PC games or PS1 to new PC games.

And I really don't recall any game that would look ugly or completely ****ed up in terms of visuals. Resident Evil 5 looks decent, Mass Effect looks far beter on x360 than it does on my laptop with low details, Assasin's Creed looks also decent and so on.
 
Upvote 0
So every console game equals low quality graphical piece of **** with hitboxes that equals scycrapers and everything's dumbed down so much that even 2 year old could play the game like some master? Sure PC can beat sometimes the **** out of consoles - especially gameplaywise, but somehow I don't get the idea that console visuals would be always greatly inferior to the PC. Unless you compare NES games to new PC games or PS1 to new PC games.

And I really don't recall any game that would look ugly or completely ****ed up in terms of visuals. Resident Evil 5 looks decent, Mass Effect looks far beter on x360 than it does on my laptop with low details, Assasin's Creed looks also decent and so on.

I believe he was mistaken with the visuals. The good thing about consoles is that you don't have to worry whether or not your system can run it, but it probably would look better on the PC version with a good system. However I have never seen a realism based game on a console before. I think it has to do with the fact that if someone develops for console, they want everybody to be good at it, and want it to be fun. Unfortunately not everybody's definition of fun is realism so that is why nearly every console is a more "arcade" like shooter. Haven't we already argued about this before in about 100 other threads though?
 
Upvote 0
As long as they make better use of it than nintendo did with their snes mouse 'support' :D awesome
mario-paint-super-nintendo.jpg


Doesnt MGS4 have a certain amount of keyboard support (beyond text input, both console support usb kb for that if you didnt know ) in that you can use the print screen key for screen capping or am i just pulling that out of my ass?
 
Upvote 0