• 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/

HoS biggest competitor

I don't see the point you are trying to make, I really don't.

Are you saying that crappy console port should succeed so this whole abstract entity of "PC gaming" is saved?

I think you are making a terrible logical mistake with that line of thought.

The games made by businessmen should fail, so the games made by gamers succeeds, thats all.

And the industry is not 1 single entity, because within it, there are still individual companies that tries new things. (And no, the industry is not going to casual land, because it's been there for years already)

You seem to have gotten my whole argument backwards or you're just twisting it on purpose? I was obviously and clearly arguing in favor of real PC titles which is exactly what I want yet you seem to think I want casual ports to succeed?(How on earth did you manage that?) Obviously it would be great if BF3 was a true BF3 even if its never gonna happen, the same goes for Cod.

Read again or leave it, I am sick of writing the same thing over and over.

The industry is going somewhere and that is casual land, more and more companies are moving over and we see fewer and fewer good titles on the PC. All you need to do is look backwards, more specifically before 2005 when the current console-gen came out. I don't know your history but to me you don't sound like a PC gamer with any significant history besides RO.

Maybe you're not worried at all or frankly don't give a banana, it doesn't change the truth of whats going on, and as I said earlier Tripwire is a miracle amongst the PC crowd, something we won't see much of -> sadly.
 
Upvote 0
You seem to have gotten my whole argument backwards or you're just twisting it on purpose? I was obviously and clearly arguing in favor of real PC titles which is exactly what I want yet you seem to think I want casual ports to succeed?(How on earth did you manage that?) Obviously it would be great if BF3 was a true BF3 even if its never gonna happen, the same goes for Cod.

Read again or leave it, I am sick of writing the same thing over and over.

The industry is going somewhere and that is casual land, more and more companies are moving over and we see fewer and fewer good titles on the PC. All you need to do is look backwards, more specifically before 2005 when the current console-gen came out. I don't know your history but to me you don't sound like a PC gamer with any significant history besides RO.

Maybe you're not worried at all or frankly don't give a banana, it doesn't change the truth of whats going on, and as I said earlier Tripwire is a miracle amongst the PC crowd, something we won't see much of -> sadly.

Well I'm tired of replying the same things too, but if you insist I will insist too: the industry is not going to "casual land", because its already there. And its never coming out of it, unless someone makes them bite the dust first.

Seriously, how much more casual can they go? and why do you care, they are bad enough already so not even the demos are worth trying, so why would you care if they go even more casual? Just let them rot. And then, maybe something will rise from the ashes.

BF3 won't be an exception, but it may be decent at best, and thats what I'm afraid of. Because "decent", is not good enough, it will only be harmful to RO2, because it starts with an advantage of resources, marketing, and a bigger name and it will take all the credit for its common virtues.

So no, we don't need as many "decent" FPS as we can get. We just need one, good enough to start a revolution.

You said we shouldn't want BF3 to fail. But I say that you can't build a new empire if the old one does not fall.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I can't see how anyone can call the BF series totally overrated or simple reskins. Every entry in the series has the right to exist. BF2142 had a completely new scenario and added the much loved titan mode, BC1 was the first console BF(and for a console game it was simply awesome), BC2 is a continuation of that that is also available for PC since pc players begged for it. BF3 will hopefully continue the way of BF2/BF2142. If it's more of a BC3 people will be pissed off anyways and DICE will get to feel that. But I don't see how people can call the BF titles simple reskin of the predecessors.
 
Upvote 0
BC1 was the first console BF(and for a console game it was simply awesome)

Not quite, there was Battlefield 2: Modern Combat that came out for the PS2, Xbox, and Xbox 360 three years before Battlefield: Bad Company.

I haven't had a problem with people who play the new Battlefield games as much as the CoD fanboys. My biggest annoyance is that they always think I mean Bad Company 2 whenever I'm talking about Battlefield 2...
 
Upvote 0
Well I'm tired of replying the same things too, but if you insist I will insist too: the industry is not going to "casual land", because its already there. And its never coming out of it, unless someone makes them bite the dust first.

Seriously, how much more casual can they go? and why do you care, they are bad enough already so not even the demos are worth trying, so why would you care if they go even more casual? Just let them rot. And then, maybe something will rise from the ashes.

BF3 won't be an exception, but it may be decent at best, and thats what I'm afraid of. Because "decent", is not good enough, it will only be harmful to RO2, because it starts with an advantage of resources, marketing, and a bigger name and it will take all the credit for its common virtues.

So no, we don't need as many "decent" FPS as we can get. We just need one, good enough to start a revolution.

You said we shouldn't want BF3 to fail. But I say that you can't build a new empire if the old one does not fall.

If BF3 was a success beyond a decent game then whats the harm(aka a true PC version)? I would rather hope for that , than a complete failure and then a rebuilt BF4 in 4 years @ PC only, pff yeh like that's gonna happen.

We need more than one game to succeed in terms of being more than decent, you can't just rely on one single game, and NO we do not only need one game, we need a lot of good games if we're gonna get a bright future.

If the industry continues were its going , the PC platform will be dead beyond Indie within the next 10 years for sure, that is exactly were it is going when everyone is moving casual -> everyone.

We're mostly already left with simulators and realistic games on the PC. Titles like Cod , Bf which had no intentions on being realistic but were great PC games nevertheless with huge PC support will never return to its original platform in the same shape due to consoles.

Hilarious I give up you win whatever.
I am done with the brick-wall talk.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
If BF3 was a success beyond a decent game then whats the harm(aka a true PC version)? I would rather hope for that , than a complete failure and then a rebuilt BF4 in 4 years @ PC only, pff yeh like that's gonna happen.

We need more than one game to succeed in terms of being more than decent, you can't just rely on one single game, and NO we do not only need one game, we need a lot of good games if we're gonna get a bright future.

If the industry continues were its going , the PC platform will be dead beyond Indie within the next 10 years for sure, that is exactly were it is going when everyone is moving casual -> everyone.

We're mostly already left with simulators and realistic games on the PC. Titles like Cod , Bf which had no intentions on being realistic but were great PC games nevertheless with huge PC support will never return to its original platform in the same shape due to consoles.

Hilarious I give up you win whatever.
I am done with the brick-wall talk.

A "true PC version" is not enough, bringing back the lost support just don't cut it. RO2 is changing many things beyond "dedicated servers" and "modding" support. If BF3 is "good" like the old ones, you'll still have the same **** that has been done over and over, and that **** was replaced by something even worse which seems more profitable, so no, the industry wont go back that way.

LoL @ the apocalyptic "PC is dying" cries. AFAIK, if you only count FPS, PC is effectively dead outside TWI. You keep saying that I'm selfish don't give a damn beyond my personal needs, and I don't deny it. But look at you, only considering FPS (which is your interest) when talking about PC gaming, discarding all other genres. Thats quite a self centered view on the industry.

You also contradict yourself a lot in this topic: you said that the industry is moving towards casualization, and its gonna die, and you also said that "dying" doesn't mean "cease to exist". So you mean that "dying" means "casualization". I said that the industry is already casualized, so its not gonna go anywhere anymore, and you say no. What does the death of PC gaming means to you then, if its not dead already? I think you just want to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.

If a "brick wall" means not accepting your ideas, I suppose you too could be considered one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
LoL @ the apocalyptic "PC is dying" cries. AFAIK, if you only count FPS, PC is effectively dead outside TWI.

Going off topic... but I'll disagree. PC game is pretty dead. Tactical shooters, flight sims, any kind of sim or realistic game, PC games are getting dumbed down in general - see ME2's story.

Sure, there are some decent ones, but not very many.
 
Upvote 0
Going off topic... but I'll disagree. PC game is pretty dead. Tactical shooters, flight sims, any kind of sim or realistic game, PC games are getting dumbed down in general - see ME2's story.

Sure, there are some decent ones, but not very many.

ME 2 was pretty damn awesome.
Who here has read and/or listened to all of the codex entries?
I have o/
 
Upvote 0
And what on earth is this "pure PC game" term? A game is a game, the goddamn platform it runs on doesn't decide how good the story is.

It certainly does not decide the story, but you can say that a PC game gives you more direct, precise and advanced control, because is designed for a mouse and keyboard. It also uses to give you more choice when it comes to configurations and preferences.

Thats for me, the major difference.
 
Upvote 0
It certainly does not decide the story, but you can say that a PC game gives you more direct, precise and advanced control, because is designed for a mouse and keyboard. It also uses to give you more choice when it comes to configurations and preferences.

Thats for me, the major difference.

Of course, playing with a pad is like playing with a brick :D
 
Upvote 0
Lol at "PC FPS genre is dead outside RO2". No matter how much you dislike the current CoD/BF titles, as long as thousands of people play it on PC you can't call it dead. And I don't see how any of those titles have problems with mouse/keyboard control. CoD still controls the same way it always did and BC2s movement is actually an improvement over BF2, even if I still don't like it(which is mainly due to how easily it's affected by lag). Totally agree with Xendance's prior post.

If ArmA2 is what you define as a pure PC Game, then I definitely don't want all PC Games to be like that. Look at STALKER. It's only been released on PC, but it could easily be ported to consoles as well without the game loosing any of it's depth. Of course the more titles that are concentrated mainly for PC the better, but saying multiplatform = sucks on PC simply doesn't cut it. But haters gonna hate.
 
Upvote 0
Lol at "PC FPS genre is dead outside RO2". No matter how much you dislike the current CoD/BF titles, as long as thousands of people play it on PC you can't call it dead.

In the context, we were talking "dead", as "dumbed down", not actually "dead". I still stand saying that outside TWI games, there are no other FPS worth playing today.

If ArmA2 is what you define as a pure PC Game, then I definitely don't want all PC Games to be like that. Look at STALKER. It's only been released on PC, but it could easily be ported to consoles as well without the game loosing any of it's depth.

I do consider ArmA a pure PC game, but that doesn't mean I have to like it just for that. I don't want PC games to be like ArmA either, but I do want them to be like RO, which is also a pure PC game that doesn't have any resemblance with ArmA.

Anyway, with all this depressing and uninteresting modern crapfare setting, I wouldn't play them even if they were "true PC games". Can't stand the whole American/NATO vs Terrorists/Communists/Asians clich
 
Upvote 0
If ArmA2 is what you define as a pure PC Game, then I definitely don't want all PC Games to be like that. Look at STALKER. It's only been released on PC, but it could easily be ported to consoles as well without the game loosing any of it's depth...

STALKER was a nice series. But the mods are what made it great.

Multiplatform games tend not to be moddable. Even if they are, console sales will cut into the PC sales, which means while more people will own the game, less will have the PC version... so less people will be able to make PC mods. In addition, with less PC players modders will be less inclined to make mods for it.

So a multiplatform game does affect PC games.


That being said, I do not really have an issue with them. I've enjoyed plenty of multiplatform games. But I still prefer games made for the PC.


That being said, someone port over Ace Combat X and 6 to the PC please. :p
 
Upvote 0
Of course the more titles that are concentrated mainly for PC the better, but saying multiplatform = sucks on PC simply doesn't cut it. But haters gonna hate.

As much as it's fun to jump into conclusions, since the thread's main intension was to talk about PC games which could provide competition for RO2 it's pretty random to use multiplatform examples (which have been primarily made for consoles) to say how games are dumbed down, something I questioned from Flogger's post by using pretty odd term. Sorry to burst the bubble (again) but I just ****ing love Mass Effects even though I still personally consider the second game inferior to the first one for several fundamental design reasons. YMMV, sadly.

People are way too fed up with the use of dumbed down in general, as those cases where it genuinely applies are what you can consider franchise\series rape than simply simplifying things for some other reason, even when they are pretty close eachother around the thin red line.
 
Upvote 0