Comments on: Video Game Warzone #135

By: Dios

Dios — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 02:39:00 +0000

My point that multiplatform games are being built for consoles first and then ported to PC still stands. This isn’t a hunch, developers have stated this, go listen to John Carmack at QuakeCon he talks about this. As for the Witcher 2 and Crysis 2, seriously do you remember how those games launched on PC? They were shitty ports, Crysis 2 didn’t get a patch for the game until 3 months later in which you could finally run DX11! Before then PC gamers had a shitty port of Crysis 2, by the way have you played Crysis 2 when it came out and compared it to the console version? Ugh. Compare it now and you’ll see a huge difference. Better tessellation and particle blurring, it’s not even close. The Witcher 2 was worse, it took longer for it to get a patch to be playable. As for Hard Reset, I haven’t played that game yet so i cannot comment on it. You are inserting a point i was not making into your response. Im not going to generalize PC gamers as those who believe games would be more advanced and so forth on PCs. The point is that developing for consoles first and porting to PC has given us enough examples of this resulting in bad PC experiences.

By: David Bruce

David Bruce — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:14:00 +0000

Was THE WITCHER 2 held back by consoles? No. Not only is the game coming to XBOX 360, but I bet the game runs better on XBOX 360 than on an equivalent PC with said Minimum specs. ( Intel 2.2 GHz Dual-Core, 1.5 GB, GeForce 8800 (512 MB) For years, people talked about Crysis 2 as being untouchable by consoles…..that was obviously a lie. I heard alot of HARD RESET….I can’t begin to tell you how underwhelmed I am about that game. The point is, is all of those games are or were PC only, and while those games are good, I see nothing groundbreaking. The way some people go on, they make it sound like with full and dedicated resources, PC games would be so advanced, so inovative and groundbreaking, so technically advanced that surely those games would be well beyond what the current HD consoles could do. I have yet to see this for any game launched so far. Let me know when you see it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:12:00 +0000

Don’t get me wrong I still liked the show but it wasn’t as focuses as the past few shows have been and I missed that. Also I think Jagon got on my nerves after a while lol

By: Dios

Dios — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:33:00 +0000

Actually Torrence is right and for reasons you both didn’t acknowledge. Multiplatform games are being built on the CONSOLE first and then either built or ported to PC. Before, this wasn’t the case, it was build for PC and port to consoles but things have changed. Developers looking to tailor the game for the console experience because that is where most of their sales will come from. This inherently effects the PC port. With developers trying to streamline their experience on every platform the real advantages a PC gamer used to explore aren’t readily available at launch sometimes or ever in some cases. People honestly don’t understand just how much optimization must be done for console games and all the tricks they have to pull out just to get a similar performance on a PC. I’m one to think that in this stage of our consoles life cycle the squeeze and tinker method is actually hindering development (though i have no proof, purely opinionated). Look at games like Rage, there’s no settings.ini file of any kind in which PC gamers used to optimize their experience. You literally can’t change anything besides the resolution and AA. The game (supposedly) automatically scales to keep the game running at 60FPS (which i can’t remember auto scaling ever being done correctly) but essentially PC gamers are playing a console port on what could be vastly superior hardware. Minimum settings btw are just the lowest common denominator nothing major to concern about there.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:46:00 +0000

When hhg isn’t around I’ll let more people speak. Thankfully, ICE kept the show going. I thought it was a GREAT show.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:45:00 +0000

Thank you! I knew I wasn’t crazy!

By: David Bruce

David Bruce — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:52:00 +0000

wizrl said, “All that matters is the gameplay and it is the same on ALL platforms. But when people talk about graphics and how consoles will rival avatar’s visuals, all i can do is smirk.” ____________________________________________________________ I have no idea when these “Avatar-like game graphics” will appear or what it would take, technically…But I will say this, Until we get to that level of visual sophistication, I don’t think we will be ready nor will we have a particularly pressing need for new consoles. Outside of Nintendo, I’m not looking forward to nor am I willing to spend 4, 5 and 600 dollars for a new/next generation console for incremental gains. And currently, in my opinion, even the best current PC graphics are not advanced enough to warrant a console next gen upgrade.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:44:00 +0000

Tor to answer your question about Mass Effect. SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER Saren Arterius’s ship “Sovereign” is a REAPER! Saren is mentally connected to Sovereign hence why there were 2 fights with Saren at the end. The first fight was without the aid of Sovereign, the second fignt is with Saren after he is destroyed and his mechanical skeleton is displayed. Because Sovereign was aiding Saren, it made Sovereign weak allowing the council’s ships and defenses (along with Joker who is piloting the first Normandy) to destroy Saren’s ship named Sovereign (which is a Reaper). You don’t directly fight a Reaper, but a Reaper is in Mass Effect 1 where a battle ensues which results in being destroyed by Joker at the helm of the Original Normady at the end of the game while you (commander Shepard) fight and destroy Saren. Hope that helps. You are right that Soverign is a REAPER (you just didn’t know that a Reaper could have a name) and that there is a connection where you indirectly fight one at the end. 8)

By: Oldfart

Oldfart — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:27:00 +0000

Great Warzone. I have not missed an episode for three years. You all seem to have more fun and get more information out when HipHop is not around.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:22:00 +0000

I hear what you’re saying, but the developers have also gone on record many times saying that they want to push the limits of the hardware. I find it hard to believe developers nowadays, especially devs like John Carmack and the people at Crytek. The PC version of Rage was a real curve ball to gamers and Crytek saying that the console version of Crysis looks better than the PC version was PR bs. Crysis 2 didn’t have mods nor DX11 support until later and it was clearly a console port and wasn’t as impressive as its predecessor. I agree with Tor that consoles are holding it back. All that matters is the gameplay and it is the same on ALL platforms. But when people talk about graphics and how consoles will rival avatar’s visuals, all i can do is smirk.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:40:00 +0000

Well at least the recent update just released today, fixes that.

By: David Bruce

David Bruce — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:07:00 +0000

Torrence Davis, At 1 hr and 49 mins, you said Consoles are holding back PC gaming. I don’t think I fully agree with that. Why? Because, while it is true High end PCs are more powerful and/or more capable gaming machines than consoles, many LOW END PC’s and laptops are not. You must remember, developers have gone on record many times saying that they want their games to run on a wide variety of machines and have programed and designed their games to do just that….and that includes those low end PCs. If you have any dispute on this, all you need to do is look at the back of the box of any released game this generation. So when people say or imply that consoles are the lowest common denominator for video game development of this generation, that isn’t’ true…….. PCs themselves are…..Lower end PC’s. Just sayin. –Persistantthug

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:02:00 +0000

Hey Tor why didn’t you have everyone muted this week? This ep was fun and all but I really liked how the show moved along when it was just you and HHG talking news and giving your impressions of said news. I know that HHG wasn’t around but that shouldn’t have been a reason to go back to the old format of everyone tossing in their two cents whenever they wanted.

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 20:30:00 +0000

Much improved audio from DirtyBird in this weeks warzone. On a BF3 note; I am very impressed with the scale and detail put into the Caspian border map, however I cannot help but think that its is designed more as a vehicle sand box as opposed to the maps in bad company 2 which had a good balance between infantry and vehicle combat which I enjoyed immensely. On the other end of the spectrum is operation metro which is solely infantry based, which half way through becomes a corridor shooter and has minimal destruction. So I am left wandering will there be any medium sized maps reminiscent of BC2? Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoyed the maps present in the beta however I am eager to see what the new features from FB 2.0 would like like in a medium sized map. I cannot believe Rage does not let you adjust graphical settings manually on the PC. I told my dad this, who has been an Id fan since the release of Doom, and he was shocked. Surely John Carmack is smart enough to realise that PC gamers like a taylor made experience and are willing to drop to 30-40 fps to boost visuals.