S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2

This got tired days ago. Please stop Werndan.

specialkid8 posted...
This got tired days ago. Please stop Werndan.

You aren't contributing to the discussion. Please stop with your fanatic console fanboyism.

http://gamersushi.com/2010/11/30/crytek-consoles-hold-back-pc-gaming/

Even Crytek themselves agree there's no point arguing it-Consoles objectively hold PC gaming back because consoles are using 2003-era hardware in 2011.

specialkid8 | Posted 3/21/2011 10:37:13 AM | message detail | quote
Getting a leaked copy of a game before release is not piracy. Downloading it illegally from the internet is. You said there were NO open world games on the consoles. now that someone has mentioned some you can't just say, oh well those don't count.

He didn't "just say" they don't count. He explained why they don't count. I can do it again if you need me to.

Console oriented open world games sometimes reach okay sizes, but they can pull this off because they don't need to remember any details. Every time you return to an area it's exactly the same as it was the first time you went there. I can knock down a street light in GTA or Saints Row, leave, and come back and it'll be good as new. All the pedestrians and cars are random so they fade in and disappear because they're only props to maintain the illusion of detail. The world only changes when it's scripted. Assassin's Creed works the same way. Neither of them give the player the ability to interact with the world in a way that won't be forgotten the minute you leave the immediate area.

The only exceptions are Bethesda games that would still be capable of so much more if they weren't designed around the limitations of consoles, and as has already been explained they accomplish this by breaking everything into easily handled, bite sized zones.
---
Tenchu Wiki
http://tenchu.wikia.com

That's not what he said. He said there are ZERO open world games on consoles which is a blatant lie and trolling. When someone posted a list of open world games he just knocked them down like they don't exist.

"That's not what he said. He said there are ZERO open world games on consoles which is a blatant lie and trolling. When someone posted a list of open world games he just knocked them down like they don't exist."

While I agree with Werndan101 on most issues, he is blatantly wrong in some specific instances and I'm not sure whether he's ignorant, trolling, or a stealth console fanboy trying to make PC gamers look bad. Either way, it's true, there are a few console games that are technically open world.

But like the guy above pointed out, there are massive sacrifices that are made to achieve this. Mainly, those open world games don't really save anything you did previously, visuals are massively chopped down, there's lots of pop-in and/or framerate issues, and it's just obvious in general that the platform isn't made to handle it.

The real issue isn't just about hardware. It's about the mentality of your average console gamer and the audience that they represent. While there are a few good games out there designed around the consoles (Mass Effect and Fallout 3/NV for example), the vast majority feel like they're designed for teenagers and/or very casual gamers who don't want any real depth in their games. They want to sit down, lay back, twiddle some thumsticks around for an hour or two, and go to bed.

They don't want to invest some time to really learn the nuances of a deep shooter for example. They don't want complex map dynamics that require a lot of skill and strategy to take advantage of. And they most certainly don't want a game that's very challenging. They want simple shooting mechanics where the game does half of the aiming for them and where none of the mechanics are deep enough to require much thought (CoD for example).

Naturally, this doesn't apply to all console gamers. But that's the type of gamer that most console developers are making games for this generation unfortunately. And it's very likely that we'll see Stalker 2 go the same way. Shooting will likely be dumbed down to the point where recoil, ammo conservation, and hit locations no longer have any real significance (again, like CoD). Environments will be simplified to encourage the player to follow a set path so they can watch perdy set pieces explode (example: compare Crysis 1 with Crysis 2).

And to top if off, the graphics will no doubt have to be massively chopped down which will result in greatly reduced atmosphere because so much of that atmosphere depends on the phenomenal lighting seen in past games which the consoles simply cannot handle in an open world environment (example: lighting in every open'ish world console game is horrid).

It isn't that PC gamers want to keep these games exclusive because they're selfish. It's because they know that when these games go multi-platform they get heavily chopped down; both graphically and gameplay wise for reasons related to both the strict hardware limitations of the consoles and the average age and mentality of your typical console gamer.

Specialkid8, I'm not saying you're necessarily one of them just because you obviously play on consoles. But the vast majority if your peers certainly are and that's who developers are designing games for. You can't blame PC gamers for not wanted to see one of their favorite series stripped bare. Imagine if the next game in the Halo, CoD, or Killzone series were to be specifically designed for the Wii and then just ported to the PS3/x360. How would you feel?

That i can agree with for the most part. The new age of console players have pretty low standards, but i feel that stems from other aspects of pop culture a lot (rage filled conversation for another day). i feel like the main blame for this new crown lays squarely on the shoulders of COD. i despise it and everything it has done to the genre and the industry as a whole. Aside from that, i don't we should have much to worry about with STALKER becoming CODified. It is a separate enough entity that the "mainstream" will not have much affect in its development. i think they know who they are making the game for and will not try and dumb it down so everyone can play it. Not every game is COD you know. On the technical aspect, or course PC will always be superior, but consoles do have some pretty impressive stuff to offer with graphics and physics and it will only improve from here. The pc shouldn't suffer because of anything like that. it may get streamlined a bit to at least be able to fit on the controller but apart from that it won't be stripped bare. basically what i've been saying is that people shouldn't have anything to worry about. People seem to hang on to failures and forget when a game does go multiplatform and is better for having done so. But we know absolutely nothing about the game so far so no one should really be talking about what it will or will not be in the first place, but the game should really be innocent until proven guilty. until this game comes out and turns out to be a radiated COD people should not pass judgement so easily.

specialkid8 posted...
That's not what he said. He said there are ZERO open world games on consoles which is a blatant lie and trolling. When someone posted a list of open world games he just knocked them down like they don't exist.

They don't exist because of the reasons Ubersuntzu specified. I had said this before in the moderator deleted post.

but consoles do have some pretty impressive stuff to offer with graphics and physics and it will only improve from here.

No. Consoles use 2003-era hardware in 2011. Their specifications are static and will never change.

Not to mention that graphics CAN equal gameplay in some aspects. For example, an advanced physics system would work beautifully with a game that used some form of limb damage.

Just give it a rest.

specialkid8 posted...
Just give it a rest.

Don't barge into a fight you can't finish, son.

I didn't barge in. I have been here the whole time, and if you haven't noticed i already won the argument several pages back. You just keep dragging it back up with more ridiculous crap.