The Mead Family - TTLG Forums

Hell Kitty on 6/9/2005 at 15:46

Quote Posted by Ziemanskye

Hell Kitty, did you try the PS2 incarnation of DX?

I rented it out once to compare, but it was a while ago so I don't recall much. I think I only played till Hong Kong.

Quote:

I'm just curious, because as I said, I don't like grid inventories, in PC or console games, but I also don't much like having inventories that are endless, or which have a maximum number of variations of pick-up.

I've only known one other person who liked grid inventory tetris like I do. Heh. It's an odd thing to like, but there you go.

Quote:

By that I mean that I think IW had too few things you could store and make some use of, there weren't enough 'tools' to be collected.

I agree with that, would've preferred lockpicks and multitools kept seperate, though the small amount of biomods bothered me more. After playing Second sight, I really, really want a telekinesis biomod...

Something that always annoyed me about DX was that JC seemed to carry around all his ammo in some kind of magical bag of holding. I'd much prefer it if you had to store ammo in your inventory, and the only limit to the amount of ammo you could carry was how much you could fit. My favourite inventory system is that from (http://users.tpg.com.au/dan1979/Inventory1.jpg) Resident (http://users.tpg.com.au/dan1979/Inventory2.jpg) Evil 4, especially since it allows me to rotate items to better fit. If it had quick slots like DX it's be perfect.

Actually, I also prefer the system of upgrading weapons in RE4 to that of DX. Each weapon having different levels of upgrades in different areas (Firepower, firing speed, capacity & reload speed), though replace paying for upgrades with using a tool, possibly with the chance of failure, based on a skill. And having extras like scopes and silencer taking up inventory space, as you can see in the first screenshot with the rifle scope taking up 3 spaces.

Quote:

And automatic codes... Oh hell yes. Being able to guess a code is one thing, but being able to play a game a second time and remember (or just google) codes is cheating in a meta-game sort of way, but it annoys me for some reason when it's possible.

:thumb:

I dislike going back through notes looking for passwords and usernames. It's wasting valuable time that could be better spent rearranging my inventory. :laff:

Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 6/9/2005 at 15:54

Quote Posted by Hell Kitty

I didn't misinterpret anything. You said "it's entirely possible they removed them due to consoles" which is wrong. It is entirely possible they removed them due to mistaken beliefs about consoles or console players, but no matter what the reason was it was due to a decision by Ion Storm, not due to consoles which is what you posted, even if it wasn't what you meant.

But you must admit, "it's entirely possible they removed them due to a decision by Ion Storm" is both stupid-sounding and blindingly obvious.

And we're arguing the finer points of semantics here, anyway: If I make a decision not to jump in water because it's boiling, I could say "I'm not jumping in there due to it being boiling"..when in fact, it seems I should say "I'm not jumping in there due to having made a judgement based on the fact that the water is boiling and I don't think that's good for me". But it's reasonably easy to see what I'm getting at from the first sentence, no?

It IS entirely possible they removed them due to consoles. A mistaken 'reason' to remove them, but a legitimate 'reason' to remove them, even if wrong.

Or, if you like, entirely possible they removed them due to a decision made by Ion Storm due to consoles. It's the same thing. And it's still, apparently, wrong.

You seem to want to take offence at what I'm saying: believe me, I'm not saying ANYTHING negative about consoles -I'm just trying to point out some logical flaws in peoples' arguing standpoints. Hopefully in a fairly non-aggressive fashion. I may be failing. Ah well.

Hell Kitty on 6/9/2005 at 16:49

Quote Posted by Dr. Dumb_lunatic

But you must admit, "it's entirely possible they removed them due to a decision by Ion Storm" is both stupid-sounding and blindingly obvious.

Stupid sounding? No, no more stupid sounding that "due to consoles". Blindingly obvious? Of course, and that's what makes it so frustrating.

Basically, "removed to decision by Ion Storm" is a fact. 100%. It can't be argued that Ion Storm is to blame for removing them, but people always seem to blame consoles, and that always seems to more to absolve IS of doing a crap job.

What exactly does "removed due to consoles" mean anyway? The difference between it and you boiling water example is that everyone knows what would happen if you jumped into boiling water, but "removed due to consoles" is completely vague.

"Okay guys, since we made the decision to make this game for Xbox and PC, we need to scrap the skills."
"Why?"
"Because it's against my religion to develop console games that feature skills."

"The Xbox can't handle skills" isn't a likely reason at all, unless IS forgot about the PS2 version, and are completely ignorant of every console game ever made. As stupid as it is, "Xbox gamers don't understand skills" is a possiblity, though it's just as possible that someone said "PC gamers nowadays don't understand skills". More likely than either of those is the belief that "Gamers nowadays don't understand skills", which would mean neither PC nor console can be blamed, rather "the skills were removed due to the belief that the current generation of gamers are stupid". It's also likely that due to the decision to develop for two platforms, regardless of what those platforms are, because they didn't think they'd have the time to implement and test them, and that if they developed exclusively for one platform they would have included them, which means that "removed due to PC" is as valid a complaint as "removed due to consoles".

And we're arguing the finer points of semantics here, anyway: If I make a decision not to jump in water because it's boiling, I could say "I'm not jumping in there due to it being boiling"..when in fact, it seems I should say "I'm not jumping in there due to having made a judgement based on the fact that the water is boiling and I don't think that's good for me". But it's reasonably easy to see what I'm getting at from the first sentence, no?

It IS entirely possible they removed them due to consoles. A mistaken 'reason' to remove them, but a legitimate 'reason' to remove them, even if wrong.

Or, if you like, entirely possible they removed them due to a decision made by Ion Storm due to consoles. It's the same thing. And it's still, apparently, wrong.

Of course it's wrong, the only right is that it was a decision made by Ion Storm, everything else is just a guess, formed by peoples biases. All over the internet you'll find people claiming that the reason there are no skills in DX:IW "because of consoles" or "because of Xbox". Why does no one say "because of PC" or "because of the games industry" or any other reason they could invent? Because the Xbox and console systems are an easy scapegoats, and console exclusive gamers aren't around to defend themselves and tell the PC exclusive gamers how wrong their stereotypes are.

In you first post in this thread you said "I was under the impression that adding skills, elaborate inventory, multiple ammotypes etc was all considered a bit too complicated to be handled via control-pad." I told you in my first post that you were wrong and even provided examples, and then you went from a specific but incorrect belief (to difficult for a controller) to an anooyingly vague reason (removed due to consoles). Why exactly do you continue to latch on to this reason and what exactly do you mean by it.

TheGreatGodPan on 6/9/2005 at 17:17

I have a PC. I played Deus Ex on it. I played Grim Fandango on it. I played Thief on it. I played System Shock 2 on it. I played Fallout on it. I am playing Planescape: Torment on it. After I finish that, I'll still have Ultima Underworld, Martian Dreams, U7, U4, Wasteland, Darklands, and Wizardry 4 all on the same machine. Can you say the same thing about any console? Not only are they physically incapable of playing older games, but their demographics are younger and probably unaware of older games. And saying that Thief is just not popular sounds silly when three of them were made and it is basically the main thing that kept Looking Glass alive so long (it was Terra Nova and that flying game that killed them). When a PC game goes onto a console, it tends to get worse. When a game is designed for a console and a PC, it tends to be worse than its predecessor. Sure there isn't another Grim Fandango or Planescape: Torment. But Grim Fandango and PS:T exist for PC. I recognize that I am not the biggest market for games, but at least people with my tastes were a recognizable market for PC games before developers decided to concentrate more on consoles. When you market games for consoles, your market is people who think KOTOR has unprecedented freedom and that FFVII is one of the best RPGs ever. And that's not even bringing up the inherent differences in controls. With the console market having so much more influence than PCs the result is no adventure games and more mediocre RPGs (I'll admit that KOTOR and Morrowind are improvements by console standards, but steps down from PCs). A few genres that can exploit their niche on PCs, like strategy games and FPSs will survive, but the smaller genres that used to have room are shit out of luck.
EDIT: Point and click games are not possible on consoles, but Grim Fandango ISN'T POINT AND CLICK!

Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 6/9/2005 at 17:18

Again: I'm not actually promoting this viewpoint as a fact, or, even, as my personal viewpoint: I was merely pointing out that while "removing X due to Y" is potentially a bad decision, and also may be an incorrect assumption, it is NOT an insanely ridiculous concept. Which you sort of said:

"The idea that skills were removed due to consoles in so insanely ridiculous, considering the amount of RPGs available for console."

It's not an insanely ridiculous idea. It's possibly a stupid idea, but not insanely ridiculous. Removing skills due to dislike of a particular piece of cheese in norfolk IS insanely ridiculous, but this isn't.

That's all I was saying. No comment on consoles, or lack thereof, merely a comment on whether or not a particular idea was a plausible theory or not.

Then I got sucked in to the rest of all this.. :confused:

Anyway: as far as making bad decisions go, remember, Eidos released Daikatana..

Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 6/9/2005 at 17:27

Quote Posted by Hell Kitty

In you first post in this thread you said "I was under the impression that adding skills, elaborate inventory, multiple ammotypes etc was all considered a bit too complicated to be handled via control-pad." I told you in my first post that you were wrong and even provided examples, and then you went from a specific but incorrect belief (to difficult for a controller) to an anooyingly vague reason (removed due to consoles). Why exactly do you continue to latch on to this reason and what exactly do you mean by it.

Lets clarify, here:
I've highlighted the keyword: Considered. Not MY opinion. I was under the impression that some people, somewhere, thought that a few things might have to go, to make this game work for consoles.

I state nothing about my own feelings on the matter, merely that, as far as I know, this has been touted as a potential reason. Ok?

So, incorrect belief, maybe. But not my belief, so no probs there.

Then 'Annoyingly vague reason (removed due to consoles)': as I've said above, I was questioning your complete disregarding of this possibility, not stating my own opinion.

To be honest, I'm fairly wary about posting my own opinions on ANYTHING online. It always seems to piss off SOMEBODY.

So: I am not console bashing. I am not Hell Kitty bashing. I have nothing against consoles, you, DX:IW, any of this, I was merely pointing out potentially flawed reasoning, or highlighting theories posited by others.

I am sorry to have apparently caused offence.

Hell Kitty on 6/9/2005 at 17:53

Quote Posted by TheGreatGodPan

Eh, of course you can. If you have a SNES, you can play all the old SNES games. If you have a Genesis, you can play all the old Genesis games. If you have a PS1 you can play all the old PS1 games. Just like if you have a PC, you can play all the old PC games. Actually, it's much easier to play the old console games than old PC games, as console hardware doesn't change, so as long as you have the hardware and games you can play at any time. Not so with PC, as hardware changes and can be incompatible with older games. To play many old PC games I need to use programs like DosBox and VDMSound, and even then there are still some that just won't run on newer hardware. Console games, however, wil ALWAYS run, you just plug em in and play.

Quote:

Not only are they physically incapable of playing older games

That doesn't even make any sense. As I just explained consoles with always be able to run the games for them.

Quote:

When a PC game goes onto a console, it tends to get worse. When a game is designed for a console and a PC, it tends to be worse than its predecessor.

Same old anti-console bullshit. The system a console appears on doesn't determine how good the game is. Crappy developers produce crappy games. Sloppy ports are the fault of crappy developers. Good developers can be hindered by time and money constraits.

Quote:

I recognize that I am not the biggest market for games, but at least people with my tastes were a recognizable market for PC games before developers decided to concentrate more on consoles.

The games you mention are niche games and always have been, they've always been the minority, yet you speak of them as though there were once many games like them, but there never were. They are the exception on PC just as games like ICO are the exception on console.

Quote:

When you market games for consoles, your market is people who think KOTOR has unprecedented freedom and that FFVII is one of the best RPGs ever.

You have no idea what you are talking about with this bullshit. Who the hell are you to tell console gamers what they think? In truth you know very little about console games and console gamers, but that won't stop you from spouting your bullshit stereotypes. Saying that is as ridiculous as saying something like "When you market games for PC, your market is people who think DOOM offers the best action experience and that Diablo is one of the best RPGs ever." Stupid comments made out of complete ignorance.

Quote:

With the console market having so much more influence than PCs the result is no adventure games and more mediocre RPGs.

No, the state of adventure games and RPG isn't down to consoles, it's the industry as a whole. If a PC developer releases a crap PC only RPG, it's got nothing to do with consoles.

Quote:

Point and click games are not possible on consoles, but Grim Fandango ISN'T POINT AND CLICK!

Ridiculous, point and click games ARE possible on console, it's just that they are annoying to play with a controller, thus different types of games get different controls schemes.

Hell Kitty on 6/9/2005 at 18:00

Quote Posted by Dr. Dumb_lunatic

So: I am not console bashing. I am not Hell Kitty bashing. I have nothing against consoles, you, DX:IW, any of this, I was merely pointing out potentially flawed reasoning, or highlighting theories posited by others.

I am sorry to have apparently caused offence.

I'm not offended in any way. I can assure you that when I argue with people on the net, I do so with a smile on my face. I would log off if I didn't get some level of enjoyment out of it. Nevertheless any argument I get into it seems people picture me as being really angry. I need to start putting a smiley face at the end of everything I post.

I maintain that "due to consoles" is an insanely ridiculous reason, as insanely ridiculous as "due to PC" would be. If you're going to offer and opinion, you need to be prepared to back it up with more than just "oh, it's my opinion." You appear unwilling or unable to expand on it, so I guess that's The End.

TheGreatGodPan on 7/9/2005 at 02:11

Hell Kitty, I think you are just trying to act stupid on purpose here. Playing old genesis games is not analogous to playing old PC games because a genesis is inherently more limited. It was a stage between the master system and saturn. A PC is not a stage between anything. There is no machine other than a computer which can play all of the games I listed. I won't deny that most of them were niche games, but they were niches that used to exist! Adventure games at one time were one of the most popular genres, but good luck finding many for consoles (unless you consider survival horror to be adventure).

You aren't going to find someone making a game for consoles in their spare time and selling it in ziplock baggies or over the internet, and that's basically how some of the most important developers started out. Sometimes they made games that just flopped, because no one was stopping them from doing so. Sometimes they ended up being succesful enough to continue as a series. Fallout wasn't super succesful, but it was enough to get a sequel. Interplay was going to make Fallout 3, but they canceled it and had the team work on FOPOS instead, because it seemed like a better idea to aim for consoles instead. Nowadays unless you get most of the PC gamer market, it's not worth it to make a PC exclusive game when you could make a console game. A minority will not cut it like it used to.

And saying "It's not the consoles fault, it's just developers that couldn't deal with the challenge" is a laugh. You don't have to be a fan of Battlecruiser 3000, but it I dare anyone to honestly say it wouldn't have been worse if it had been on a console. There's no use denying that the technical limitations of a console aren't going to adversely affect a lot of game optimized for PCs. When designers are targeting a segment of the PC market, my opinion counts for more. When they are targeting a different group of people, I don't matter. I get screwed over, and that's why I'm pissed.

Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 7/9/2005 at 10:25

Dear jesus fuck. Don't you just hate it when your long, elegantly-worded response gets mysteriously eaten by the ether as soon as you hit 'submit'. Ghaaa..

So apologies, this won't be as long, or as elegant.

"I maintain that "due to consoles" is an insanely ridiculous reason, as insanely ridiculous as "due to PC" would be. If you're going to offer and opinion, you need to be prepared to back it up with more than just "oh, it's my opinion." You appear unwilling or unable to expand on it, so I guess that's The End."

This whole statement is just stupid: for a start, no, no one ever needs to back up their opinions: the internet is fucking RAMMED with idiots spouting opinions with no grounding whatsoever. It's NOT a pre-requisite.

BUT THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT:

You seem to have conveniently completely failed to read/comprehend the fact that THIS IS NOT MY OPINION. I'm fairly sure I mentioned that, in fairly unambiguous terms.

Stop desperately trying to shoehorn me into a nicely categorised 'slot' so you can continue shouting "console prejudice!" at the top of your voice.

Look, and I'll try to make this as clear as possible: all I'm saying is that it's NOT an insanely ridiculous idea that someone decided to remove skills because the game was being released on consoles.

Ok? Not "it's the reason", not even "in my opinion, it's the reason", just "it's conceivable that this could be a reason"..that's ALL I'm trying to get you to understand: that the idea, as a concept, is conceivable. Yes, it may be wrong, but that's immaterial.

Let's try this:

DX had features IW didn't, yes?

IW is 'streamlined' in comparison to DX, yes?

DX for the console lacks things that DX for the PC had, yes?

Many of these things DX for the console lacks are mirrored in IW, yes? (smaller maps, modified menus, no manual keypads)

So, it is not completely outside the realm of possibility that someone decided the skill system was something that could be removed in IW to make it more playable on a console.

It's ALSO entirely within the realm of possibility that someone decided to remove the skill system because they just didn't think it was worth it, for PC or Console.

Both are possible, and NOT insanely ridiculous. They are theories based on a chain of reasoning.

Remember, people can make decisions based on various factors, AND ALSO BE WRONG. :D

Ok? THAT'S what I'm getting at.

For the record, removing/tweaking a game "due to PC" is ALSO not a fucking "insanely ridiculous" idea.

Jesus. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp? :D

Hrrmm...also, apologies: irritation at losing the previous post has also made this a lot angrier-sounding.

Arse. I shall add some smilies to lighten things up a bit.