PC Game quality

[GodlessAstronomer]

VB? Ewww

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
VB? Ewww

That's what people tell me. I have to use it every day.

 

[Rifter]

I agree that PC game quality has gone down hill like a landslide, i dont think this is really increasing piracy though IMO people will either pirate or they wont, game quality has nothing to do with it. Games can be short and still good through i dont think the time it takes has much relation to the quality.

Piracy numbers are skewed anyways because if anyone is keeping track they would think i pirated 2 games when in reality i owned them and they would have no way of knowing that it would just get added to the stats. I have only downloaded/bootlegged/pirated whatever you want to call it, a torrent of a game when the original CD/DVD would not install/play due to some gay DRM problem. So far this has happened to me personally with Bioshock and Mass Effect. Bioshock kept telling me to insert the original CD into my drive when when it was in there the whole time. I didnt feel like waiting for a response to my e-mail to get support, which BTW took 8 days and did not solve the problem, its really sad when i can download a version without DRM and install updates and play it to completion before getting the issue responded to let alone resolved with the Software company(2k), its worth noting that the issue has since been fixed for me with a later patch but that did not help me at all at the time and makes no differnce now as i beat the game already. And Mass Effect would not play nice with Daemon Tools Pro, I dont let my games tell me what programs i can have installed thats bullshit, i tell my computer what i can have installed not the other way around. Software companies need to get there shit together and stop punishing paying customers with DRM. If anything that is contributing more to piracy stats than diminishing game quality IMO as paying customers have got to be asking themselves why are they putting up with the DRM crap when the guy down the street that isnt even paying for the game gets to play it with no problems. Im not condoning piracy Personally i will never download a game i do not own but as i stated above i believe a person is either a pirate or is not, they are a thief or they arnt, and im not. There is nothing wrong with registration keys and they have been working for years, make then needed for online play and verify them when you sign into a server and then leave out the rest of the DRM.

AdamK47 LMAO at the VB post good one

 

[Kalmah]

I busted out my playstation 1 and snes emulators several months back and started playing all of my favorite old games again. (legit copies mind you, I havn't played a game that I don't own and I own both systems.. they are in a box in storage somewhere)

I played chrono trigger for at least 25 hours. Final Fantasy 2 for probably 15, final fantasy 3 for probably 20ish.. and now I'm on the 18th hour of final fantasy 7 and still on the first of the three discs.

The thing is, with these old games and their crappy graphics, you don't pay attention to the graphics.. it's all about the game.

With pc games and everything being 3d, it makes the controls a bit flunkier, you got your camera going through walls or behind trees.. Overall, it usually isn't any more enjoyable than a good 2d game.

There are exceptions of course.

I would just like to know, when it became a standard to released a bugged-to-hell game and have to go through a year and a half of patches before the game is playable. Have you ever gone to the store and bought one of these and was totally pissed because you knew you couldn't return it?

I don't know where I'm going with this. It's like 2am and I'm bored. heh

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Kalmah
I would just like to know, when it became a standard to released a bugged-to-hell game and have to go through a year and a half of patches before the game is playable. Have you ever gone to the store and bought one of these and was totally pissed because you knew you couldn't return it?

GTA 4. This game won't run properly until I upgrade to a quad core, and that probably won't happen for another 1-2 years. As it stands, a 3ghz E6600 gets about 30fps in this game at lowest settings.

I think the rule is that you're supposed to wait until it's in the bargain bin before you buy it. That way you know all the bugs are worked out and the game doesn't suck. Example: the SDK for Left 4 Dead was just released last week. That's a full 6 months after the game was released! Team Fortress 2 had a problem like this as well. TF2 had a severe CPU limitation where even my 3ghz E6600 couldn't get more than about 40fps. TF2 was released in October 2007 but the SMP patch to make the game playable didn't come out until 2009.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: 9mak9Putting gameplay aside (Mirrors Edge and Wolverine are fun; while I heard T4 sucks), why must these games have no value?

One word: Consolization.

The popularity of the consoles has decimated PC gaming, IMHO. Unreal Tournament III might be a great case study in this. With UT3, the gaming company had the opportunity to revitalize the greatest online multiplayer first person shooter of all time but because it was consolized the result was a pathetic, buggy beta that was released as a finished retail version of the game that wasn't worthy of its own name.

It's all about the consoles, pumping out disposable console games that can be bought and resold at Gamestop, and single player kiddies now-a-days. Let's hope that Star Craft 2 helps to revitalize online multiplayer PC gaming some.

 

[gorcorps]

Um... you're wondering why a licensed game sucks? They always have sucked. You don't buy a licensed game unless you've heard amazing things first, and that's a hard and fast rule. I'm not surprised the game sucks, and the fact that you're using a movie tie-in game for your argument makes me think you don't know a god damned thing.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I never buy games licensed from movies. Ever. Last one I got was... hmm, none of my currently-owned games are... I guess the last one was Star Wars Battlefront 2, which is actually a pretty good game, although it's basically just Battlefield with Star Wars skins.

 

[Sylvanas]

Games directly based on movies have always sucked- period. The only game that was good and was based on a movie was probably Golden Eye for the N64- ah good times.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Kalmah
I would just like to know, when it became a standard to released a bugged-to-hell game and have to go through a year and a half of patches before the game is playable. Have you ever gone to the store and bought one of these and was totally pissed because you knew you couldn't return it?

GTA 4. This game won't run properly until I upgrade to a quad core, and that probably won't happen for another 1-2 years. As it stands, a 3ghz E6600 gets about 30fps in this game at lowest settings.

I think the rule is that you're supposed to wait until it's in the bargain bin before you buy it. That way you know all the bugs are worked out and the game doesn't suck. Example: the SDK for Left 4 Dead was just released last week. That's a full 6 months after the game was released! Team Fortress 2 had a problem like this as well. TF2 had a severe CPU limitation where even my 3ghz E6600 couldn't get more than about 40fps. TF2 was released in October 2007 but the SMP patch to make the game playable didn't come out until 2009.

Are you sure about TF2? I remember it getting chewed up by just about any cpu in benchmarks.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Kalmah
I would just like to know, when it became a standard to released a bugged-to-hell game and have to go through a year and a half of patches before the game is playable. Have you ever gone to the store and bought one of these and was totally pissed because you knew you couldn't return it?

GTA 4. This game won't run properly until I upgrade to a quad core, and that probably won't happen for another 1-2 years. As it stands, a 3ghz E6600 gets about 30fps in this game at lowest settings.

I think the rule is that you're supposed to wait until it's in the bargain bin before you buy it. That way you know all the bugs are worked out and the game doesn't suck. Example: the SDK for Left 4 Dead was just released last week. That's a full 6 months after the game was released! Team Fortress 2 had a problem like this as well. TF2 had a severe CPU limitation where even my 3ghz E6600 couldn't get more than about 40fps. TF2 was released in October 2007 but the SMP patch to make the game playable didn't come out until 2009.

Are you sure about TF2? I remember it getting chewed up by just about any cpu in benchmarks.

I made a video to show what I mean. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C21RbRKfvVM

The game is laggy as hell when SMP is turned off.

 

[MustangSVT]

Don't generalize because you can't make good decisions.

There are plenty of great games out there.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
I made a video to show what I mean. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C21RbRKfvVM

The game is laggy as hell when SMP is turned off.

I also made a follow up to show what happens when SMP is turned off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6TR3dNVjx4

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: MustangSVT
Don't generalize because you can't make good decisions.

There are plenty of great games out there.

Don't make unfounded statements! List the 'plenty of great games' for us.

 

[Sureshot324]

Originally posted by: MustangSVT
Don't generalize because you can't make good decisions.

There are plenty of great games out there.

This.

Try reading reviews before you buy games. If you had at least looked at the scores on game rankings or metacritic you would have know T4 sucked.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Atleast games these days don't completely destroy the gaming industry for a few years like Pac man (atari port) and ET did back in the day : p

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Fox5
8 hours is actually a pretty good length for a game, especially if it's good all the way through. Especially for a $20 game.
Heck, even 4 hours is acceptable if it's really really good or priced low enough.

Most old games weren't very long either, but their difficulty made them take forever to beat. There wouldn't be 15 minute speed runs for games if they actually had so much content that you couldn't blaze through them.

I feel that 8 hours is much too short. I thought Uncharted (PS3 game) was fantastic, but after finishing it in one day of playing, I would have been pretty upset if I'd paid full retail price for it, no matter how good it was. I also thought Dragon Quest VIII (PS2) was a great game, and that one was a bargain at 100 hours of play for $20. Mass Effect would have put me off a bit if I'd paid full price as well, but I managed to pick it up for $15, so I wasn't too irked at finishing my first run at 22 hours... I think my completionist run was bout 35 hours (so at least the variety available got a total of 57 hours). I think 20-30 hours is probably a good length, actually, I finally played through BioShock, and Steam has me at 22.2 hours on it.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: 9mak9Putting gameplay aside (Mirrors Edge and Wolverine are fun; while I heard T4 sucks), why must these games have no value?

One word: Consolization.

The popularity of the consoles has decimated PC gaming, IMHO. Unreal Tournament III might be a great case study in this. With UT3, the gaming company had the opportunity to revitalize the greatest online multiplayer first person shooter of all time but because it was consolized the result was a pathetic, buggy beta that was released as a finished retail version of the game that wasn't worthy of its own name.

It's all about the consoles, pumping out disposable console games that can be bought and resold at Gamestop, and single player kiddies now-a-days. Let's hope that Star Craft 2 helps to revitalize online multiplayer PC gaming some.

It's true.

 

[ivan2]

one reason i trust steam's sales, high quality games for less.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Well, I don't know about high quality or for less, but at least steam puts the metacritic score right next to the buy me link, so if it's garbage, you've only got yourself to blame.

 

[Wheelock]

The upside to the decline in the PC gaming market is that at this point in my life I have other obligations (work, family, etc.) that limit my gaming time. The occasional good release from Blizzard or Sid Meier's studio or some other studio like Bethesda or Valve is typically enough to keep me going.

But I certainly agree that PC games aren't what they used to be. It boggles the mind that there aren't even modern incarnations of X-Com, of X-Wing, or some other classic game that doesn't start with "X-"

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: 9mak9Putting gameplay aside (Mirrors Edge and Wolverine are fun; while I heard T4 sucks), why must these games have no value?

One word: Consolization.

The popularity of the consoles has decimated PC gaming, IMHO. Unreal Tournament III might be a great case study in this. With UT3, the gaming company had the opportunity to revitalize the greatest online multiplayer first person shooter of all time but because it was consolized the result was a pathetic, buggy beta that was released as a finished retail version of the game that wasn't worthy of its own name.

It's all about the consoles, pumping out disposable console games that can be bought and resold at Gamestop, and single player kiddies now-a-days. Let's hope that Star Craft 2 helps to revitalize online multiplayer PC gaming some.

It's true.

Yeah, stringent DRM and poor qualiuty ports are just paving the way

 

[Modelworks]

From the game developers viewpoint it is getting harder and harder to make lengthy games. It takes so much work now to make all the content that making something that last 10 hours is just not reasonable for most games. In years past it was easy to make a game with 100 hours of game play because all it was is the same thing over and over. We used tiles for the graphics and everything was cut and paste. Now we have to design each level and it better not reuse elements from previous levels much or the gamer will complain .

Another way that a developer can extend game play time is by making the game difficulty higher, and that requires careful balance or again gamers will complain.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
From the game developers viewpoint it is getting harder and harder to make lengthy games. It takes so much work now to make all the content that making something that last 10 hours is just not reasonable for most games. In years past it was easy to make a game with 100 hours of game play because all it was is the same thing over and over. We used tiles for the graphics and everything was cut and paste. Now we have to design each level and it better not reuse elements from previous levels much or the gamer will complain .

Another way that a developer can extend game play time is by making the game difficulty higher, and that requires careful balance or again gamers will complain.

To be honest, I have no sympathy for the developers: we are charged money for these products.

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Modelworks
From the game developers viewpoint it is getting harder and harder to make lengthy games. It takes so much work now to make all the content that making something that last 10 hours is just not reasonable for most games. In years past it was easy to make a game with 100 hours of game play because all it was is the same thing over and over. We used tiles for the graphics and everything was cut and paste. Now we have to design each level and it better not reuse elements from previous levels much or the gamer will complain .

Another way that a developer can extend game play time is by making the game difficulty higher, and that requires careful balance or again gamers will complain.

To be honest, I have no sympathy for the developers: we are charged money for these products.

And that is why you vote with your wallet!