DX 2 To Be Another Victim of the "Console Dub-Down" plauge?

[Immunity]

Well, Im starting to eagerly anticipate the release of DX 2, (I've played the original through around 15 times), but some of the information I am starting to come across is scaring me.

Now, when a game is made for PC, and then adapted for release onto consoles, there is no problem. Common sense and hard fact evidences that the PC can support more data in general then a console currently can (sheerly talking the size of MBs.) Textures are reduced, sounds quality is reduced, and the finished product is ported onto consoles.

What really irks the he** out of me though, however, is when a SIMULTANEOUS release is planned. This is of course the result of 90% corporate greed and 10% laziness and in no way whatsoever makes sense, as the CONSOLE version should be ADAPTED from the PC version (the latter having more power). Basically, its saying, lets just make one version, screw the people that caused the success of our previous title, so we can make the people with Xbox happy. Forget those who gave this title its lifeblood, we want money. Way to go Ion on the fan support.

This is now all too common a practice and is marring every PC game this applies to in terms of what it COULD have been had the devs focused on the PC release first, then later ported to consoles.

*side note* Morrowind did this, and in turn, both the XBox and PC gamers got their money's worth. *end side note*

Now, switching topics for a sec, what the he** is this I hear about the SKILL system being REMOVED? What the he** are you guys thinking? Please, for the love of great gaming, do not turn this sequel into a POS title trimmed to fit the "ease of use" category so demanded into todays console games.
I think this poster on the neocron forums made a good point about this topic, stating

In Deus Ex, the replay value was in finding different ways of completing your mission, based on what skill choices you have made. Skills altered the way you came at a problem, and most of them opened up a different avenue for completing the objective. Kill the skills, and kill the replay value.

I guess my point after all of this rambling is that I am scared that DX 1, a title that DESERVES a worthy sequel, will end up not having one. Instead, it will be a dumbed down FPS with little to no replay value, all as a result of corporate greed and conformity.

Come on ION, open your eyes, give DX a sequel that it will be proud of.
Don't forget who made DX the success that it became, it was the PC Gamers who did so. I'm not saying ignore the consoles, simply put the PC release as your first priority.

Originally posted by Immunity
Now, when a game is made for PC, and then adapted for release onto consoles, there is no problem. Common sense and hard fact evidences that the PC can support more data in general then a console currently can (sheerly talking the size of MBs.) Textures are reduced, sounds quality is reduced, and the finished product is ported onto consoles.

Abd the other way around is also possible if the company in charge of said translation does a good conversion job (ie, improving textures, sound and whatnots from console to PC).

What really irks the he** out of me though, however, is when a SIMULTANEOUS release is planned.

Which isn't a problem, because it obviously means both versions were worked on and are ready to work.

This is of course the result of 90% corporate greed and 10% laziness and in no way whatsoever makes sense,

Must make mental note... "making money to support my company is a greedy act and does not make sense"... must remember that "branching the franchise to other platforms is ridiculous"

as the CONSOLE version should be ADAPTED from the PC version (the latter having more power).

It goes both ways, and no version is being "adapted". Their development cycles are separate. Its not like the console version will be a port of the PC one, and neither is the reverse. The same happened with Splinter Cell - both versions were made at the same time, though the XBox version launch was prioritized over the PC.

Basically, its saying, lets just make one version, screw the people that caused the success of our previous title, so we can make the people with Xbox happy. Forget those who gave this title its lifeblood, we want money. Way to go Ion on the fan support.

Yes screw them, its not like they're making the sequel to one of their best-selling games for BOTH the PC and Xbox... Please, if anything, they're one of the companies out there that still give a damn to their fans.

This is now all too common a practice and is marring every PC game this applies to in terms of what it COULD have been had the devs focused on the PC release first, then later ported to consoles.

And when the versions are nicely done, its the gamers who win.

Now, switching topics for a sec, what the he** is this I hear about the SKILL system being REMOVED? What the he** are you guys thinking? Please, for the love of great gaming, do not turn this sequel into a POS title trimmed to fit the "ease of use" category so demanded into todays console games.

For the love of god... the skills being removed is not a byproduct of it going for consoles, its a design decision regardless of platform. The Biomod system will work much like the skill system.

I think this poster on the neocron forums made a good point about this topic, stating


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Deus Ex, the replay value was in finding different ways of completing your mission, based on what skill choices you have made. Skills altered the way you came at a problem, and most of them opened up a different avenue for completing the objective. Kill the skills, and kill the replay value.

And i'm sure that person made a great post to himself. However, given he hasn't played DX2, i think i'll wait to see and not trust every biased and uninformed person who claims DX2 will be a "dumbed down console port", among other crappy statements. Not forgetting that the skills were not the main factor of replayability in DX1.

I guess my point after all of this rambling is that I am scared that DX 1, a title that DESERVES a worthy sequel, will end up not having one.

But it will, more than likely.

Instead, it will be a dumbed down FPS with little to no replay value, all as a result of corporate greed and conformity.

I'm sorry i have to intervene again... do you even know who Ion Storm are? By implying "Corporate greed" and "conformity" are things by which IoSt works by shows you have no knowledge of the company whatsoever. They're one of the few that don't follow trends and the easy money.

Come on ION, open your eyes, give DX a sequel that it will be proud of.

They're working on it. And fan support will help that, not useless criticism.

Don't forget who made DX the success that it became, it was the PC Gamers who did so. I'm not saying ignore the consoles, simply put the PC release as your first priority.

Thats why you're getting a PC sequel, remember?

[Note:Edited for typo correction and to add another line]

[cball05]

Whoa, people really need to chill about this. We know next to nothing concrete about the game, and attacking each other on assumptions is not the point of this forum.
However, personally I think that DX2 will not be a "port" from console to PC - on the contrary, from the screenshots it looks like PC has a totally different interface and probably its own textures as well. (but since the site hasn't been changed for months, again we face the problem of inadequate info)
An example of modified game versions is the Bond game Nightfire - it was released onto PC and console BUT the games had been changed to emphasize the advantages of the system. For example, the console version had more drive-shoot levels while the PC version was 1st person. While not an amazing game, it proves a point.

... who's attacking who?

[Big Ragu]

Originally posted by Trollslayer
... who's attacking who?

I don't know, but I agreed with everything you said.

[cball05]

Originally posted by Trollslayer
... who's attacking who?

Not just this thread in particular....
But it does seem like everyone has to always go to extremes:

Originally posted by Immunity
...it will be a dumbed down FPS with little to no replay value, all as a result of corporate greed and conformity.

Originally posted by Trollslayer
i think i'll wait to see and not trust every biased and uninformed person who claims DX2 will be a "dumbed down console port", among other crappy statements....And fan support will help that, not useless criticism.

I totally hope that everything you mentioned is true, Trollslayer, as I said in my earlier post. But again, we really know too little to have valid arguments about the game. Also, just because Immunity makes comments that are out of line doesn't mean that you need to argue with him.

But hey, I'm not Catman, don't act like I'm giving orders - it's just my opinion that fighting never gets anywhere, especially when we're all working on assumptions...

[goatmilk]

trollslayer i just wanna put out there that you made an excellent point about the game still being great despite the fact that it is also being made for the xbox. and as an xbox and pc gamer, i gotta say, id like to see how it is done on both systems. just because of past experiences, and the fact that the xbox is a console, doesnt mean that the textures, sound, and overall graphics will suffer, just give the game a chance right?

@ cball05:

I wasn't arguing with the original poster. That comment you quoted was aimed at whoever the original poster was quoting. Furthermore, i'm not being agressive by stating that that criticism was useless to IoSt. Do you think they'd listen to those comments? They were majorly unfounded and biased. Not the kind of constructive criticism they need, and certainly not the kind the fans should be giving.

I'm conflictant by nature so my posts might seem aggressive, but i rarely lose my temper or am aggressive without a reason.

@goatmilk:

I think i should thank you for the comment, though i'd like to say that my point wasn't that the game is great despite being made by Xbox. I'm not sure i even said that... regardless i also didn't implied i wasn't going to give the game a chance :confused again: Its a bit obvious the game will take a slight hit on consoles, but given the Xbox is unquestionably the best next-gen console, i don't see that many problems.

[cball05]

Originally posted by Trollslayer
@ cball05:
Do you think they'd listen to those comments? They were majorly unfounded and biased.

I completely agree. Sorry to misinterpret aggressiveness with "attacking" - and Immunity was asking for it, I guess. Hope no offence was taken - expressing opinions IS the point of this forum.

Anyway, hopefully DX2 will not be "dumbed-down" and our worries will be (finally) put to rest...

[Immunity]

Well damn, I seem to have started quite a skirmish on this topic heh. Gee, the fanboys don't give up without a fight it seems. Thats totally understandable though as I've been there myself.

All I'm saying is...no good can come from an originally designed for PC game sequel being ported onto consoles, thats all. It may not HARM it, but its definatley going to hinder the potential it may have had.

True, I may not be as informed as some of you on the development status/features list/company history, but shouldn't I still be able to express my opinion without getting shot to bits in mere seconds? Heh.

The PC market should stay seperate from that of the console market, at least until the consoles are able to come even moderatley close to what the PCs of today can handle. As it stands however, that may take a while. Until that time, the PC gamers are being screwed over.

[Big Ragu]

Tell me if I'm wrong (I'll regret that), but wasn't Morrowind also made for consoles while also for the PC?

Morrowind is one of the best games I've ever played, and yes I played it also on the Xbox. The Xbox version didn't look bad at all, actually it looked better than on my computer. I didn't really find any problems with it being streamlined, but that is also because the two systems had two different interfaces, each made to work best for the system. Both reached their own potential.

I know for a fact that Ion Strom is a smart company, smart enough to do what is right. You just have to put your faith in them, and when you do that, you will be much better off.

[Catman]

There's an old saying which is apropos here:

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

In other words, when you see a message which seems calculated to irritate or annoy while staying just this side of the line, simply ignore it. Trolls like attention, and if you ignore them, they'll generally either self-destruct, go away, or find themselves banned.

That said, there's nothing wrong with expressing legitmate concern over what has been reported regarding the design of DX:IW, and there's nothing wrong with argument over opinions so long as everyone treats each other with respect. Even then, it's not unusually for some folks to get a bit heated in their exchanges, and unless things get too nasty, I'll hold back on taking action.

But I do keep watch. Believe that.

[Immunity]

Well, thats the first time I've been classified in the troll category in my 10 or so years online (although I don't frequent message boards too much). I don't know whether to be honored or insulted at this

Anyhow, I figured I would make a list of all the PC game titles that were not made in conjuction with console ports, and those which were. Classifying each in the Good or Bad category based on the MAJORITY of ratings from respected online reviwers such as PCG, IGN, Gamespot etc etc.

PC Games made seperatley from console ports or no console ports at all:
Half Life (good)
Deus Ex (good)
Warcraft Series (good)
Command and Conquer Series (good)
Thief Series (good)
Max Payne (good)
Medal of Honor (good)

PC Games developed side by side with console port:
Enter the Matrix (bad)
Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2 (bad)
Pirates of the Carribean (bad)
Morrowind (good)

Console Games Reworked and ported to PC:
Splinter Cell (good)
GTA 3 and GTA VC (good)

The morale of the story?
9 times out of 10, it is in the best interest of both parties, PC and Console gamers, for the devs to concentrate on the release of either one or the other, and not both!

[Big Ragu]

Can't help but wonder, does he have a tatoo of an eye on the back of his neck?

This is what i fail to understand. If both the PC and console markets are different, why would a game with versions for both platform hinder the game? Because i honestly fail to see it.

Since PCs are for people who use them for a various number of things (gaming included), releasing a game for PC, specially releasing a sequel of one of the best-loved games of recent years to the PC (the platform where it started), is always a smart move.

And since consoles are for people who usually just buy a console to have fun with it, and its games, and since the console is in fact, the most powerful one to run games like DX2 without stutering in the slightest, i don't see the problem there as well.

The console version is just that, a fun game for people who own the console. And for PC users its a fun game for people who own PCs. So yet again i fail to see how the game would suffer from having itself placed on two of the most played gaming platforms of the moment, the PC and the Xbox.

Originally posted by Immunity
The morale of the story?
9 times out of 10, it is in the best interest of both parties, PC and Console gamers, for the devs to concentrate on the release of either one or the other, and not both!

Well if the developers are inept at their jobs it would be. The examples you gave weren't the best.

PC Games developed side by side with console port:
Enter the Matrix (bad)

Enter the Matrix in itself is a bad game. Even if more time had been spent on either version, the game would still not be any good. More design time would've helped the game. 4 Gigs of installation size? I've seen games more graphicaly impressive, or with more content, occupy a 5th of the size of EtM.

Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2 (bad)

NFS has already been failing on a commercial level for years. The game was bad regardless. Many PS2 gamers didn't liked. In fact, considering the PS2 is the console with the more problems in the graphical department i'm amazed at how the game ran. It only sold because it was a racing game (and we know how much they sell).

Pirates of the Carribean (bad)

Pirates of the Caring Bean didn't falter because of dual development time, but because it fell prey to the "Its got a good license, so they'll buy it" line of thought. It lacks in many areas, but it also has some fairly good ones. What failed there was idea implementation or a better execution of such.

Morrowind (good)

Morrowind was in development for years, and came out first for PC - and yet, the PC version was still very unstable. The problem (again) was not the fact that the game got later versions for platforms; Bethesda's programmers are not very good programmers. And this one is fact, unfortunately.

It just boils down to who works on it. In fact, most of the time, companies now employ smaller/third-party companies to make ports of their games, so that the main company does not have to waste time and resources on it. So worrying about a company losing time working on both versions is many times unfounded. For short, here's how a game is made for other plaforms:

1) Game X is good, so company Y decided to make the game for PC, then later to Console Z.

2) Game X is good, so company Y decided to make the game for both the PC and the Console Z.


>if 1), then: Company Y can do the conversion themselves; else; they hire a smaller company whose job is to do conversions.

>if 2), then: Company spends dev time working on the game itself first, then has a team divided in two (or removes elements from other teams working on other projects as is also common), and handles it itself.

Also, if a company decided to do both versions themselves, that only shows the company is confident in its own expertise to do the job. It might come out bad, or it might just come out nicely.

But then again, this is Ion Storm. The game will come out nicely for both platforms.

Have a nice day.

[Random]

Originally posted by Immunity
Now, switching topics for a sec, what the he** is this I hear about the SKILL system being REMOVED? What the he** are you guys thinking? Please, for the love of great gaming, do not turn this sequel into a POS title trimmed to fit the "ease of use" category so demanded into todays console games.
I think this poster on the neocron forums made a good point about this topic, stating ...

And I think Chris Carollo responded to this fear quite well when he said, not for the first time, that the skill point functionality has been incorporated into the biomods, not removed. The biomods are doing the exact same thing that augmentations and skills did in DX1, and they're doing it in the single system, not two overlapping ones.

[cball05]

Originally posted by Catman
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

Thank you - that's all I wanted to say

[NoNicknameForMe]

This man has convinced me not to buy DX:IW... his unrelenting logical assault on the falicys of IonStorm have shown me the light, thank you Prohpet of the New Age of Aquarias.

[El Padrino]

Originally posted by Immunity
[B] blah, blah, blah...

Quite a bit of the design decisions made regarding DX2 aren't a result of corporate greed and/or conformity, or to cater to the console audience, but because of lessons learned while working on the PS2 port of Deus Ex. Basically, they realized that the interface was a cluttered mess. Hard to accept until you really think about it.

There's an interview floating around, either at IGN or Gamespy, confirming what I've just said, but at the moment I can't find it. I'd spend a bit more time looking, but since you didn't extend the same courtesy with your (baseless) assumptions, I'm not going to bother putting in the extra effort. It was a good interview.


So anyway, even if they didn't work on both versions on the same time, the basics would still be pretty much the same, meaning a streamlined interface and no skill system (it's being taken care of by the biomod system, so I don't know what all the fuss is about).

Harvey Smith

We only want to do things for a reason. We don't do it dogmatically. I guess that sounds like I just said Warren was dogmatic but that's not what I meant. Warren wanted to make sure that we were making a roleplaying game so he pointed to several features and said "These are sacrosanct." We're not in to that.

We looked at them and said we're cutting the skill system. We're gonna merge it with the bio-mods because the bio-mods work better in a videogame. And we're gonna give you the same powers; you're gonna be able to do the same things strategically in the game. In some ways it's better. We're just not going to be presenting you with a big screen of numbers and stats just because every other RPG in the history of man has done that. Of course, the fans flame the hell out of you for that. "You're not an RPG! You took away my stats!"

Whatever.

We don't give you a little sheet that says "strength, dexterity, charisma, wisdom." That's ridiculous.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/386/386515p1.html?fromint=1

And there's absolutely no reason to automatically equate reaching a larger audience and knowing it will make your company money (the lifeblood of all these evil corporations) with "greed," especially since this simultaneous release doesn't really hurt the PC version, screwing us all over in the process. Getting richer was, I'm sure, on their minds when they decided on a version for the X-Box, but so what. How does that hurt the game, or do anything but help the company to make more games and spread happiness to more people?


Of course, if you don't think reaching out to a wider audience so more people can see and enjoy your work is a good thing, Spector recommends you put on a beret and move back to Greenwich.

Warren Spector

Y'know, I never... God, I will never dumb down a game, I will use the word "never." No, I mean, the word we use around here, and I hope no one in our audience hears this in a bad way -- accessibility is the word here, and a lot of people hear "accessibility" and get scared. "Ooh, they're simplifying. Ooh, they're dumbing down." No. What we want is, as many people as humanly possible to experience the kind of gameplay we provide. I mean, anyone who says "Yeah, I want a smaller audience. I don't want a lot of people to see my work." Go back to Greenwich Village and put on a beret and whatever.
http://www.gamespy.com/interviews/fe...2/index4.shtml

Oh, and about Pirates of the Carribian. If I'm not mistaken, some Disney executive made a deal where they'd rename Sea Dogs 2 to "Pirates of the Carribian," add in some elements to tie in with the movie, and have it ready to ship along with the movie. That hurt the game quite a bit.

[El Padrino]

Originally posted by cball05

However, personally I think that DX2 will not be a "port" from console to PC - on the contrary, from the screenshots it looks like PC has a totally different interface and probably its own textures as well. (but since the site hasn't been changed for months, again we face the problem of inadequate info)

If I'm not mistaken, the only difference between the textures will be the resolution -- the PC's will be higher (resolution) and the X-Box's will be lower (because there's only so much a TV will do). The interface (if I'm not mistaken) is going to be about the same as well; but it's not to cater to the console audience or anything like that.

Originally posted by Immunity

The morale of the story?
9 times out of 10, it is in the best interest of both parties, PC and Console gamers, for the devs to concentrate on the release of either one or the other, and not both!

Your logic is flawed becasue it lacks any reasoning or facts deducing the simultaneous release on a console and PC as the reason the product turned out bad.

[Le`Sauveur`De`Ces`Dames]

wow, I'm not here for 2/3 days and you manage to begin another PC/Console/dumbing-down flamewar without me!! (baaad people)

well, I can't see why this post attracted 20 answers, since we all had this discussion at least 4 times in the last 2 months.

so I send you back for example to the thread "my fear" (if it's still there).

[Catman]

With the release date still uncertain, I'm sure this won't be the last time this comes up. Sigh.

Even so, thanks to El Padrino for those well-researched and well-written remarks.

[Le`Sauveur`De`Ces`Dames]

(I think that even AFTER the release, there will still be people to complain DX:IW is not exactly like DX1)

[cball05]

Originally posted by El Padrino
The interface (if I'm not mistaken) is going to be about the same as well; but it's not to cater to the console audience or anything like that.

Looking at the screenshots on the website, it looks like the XBOX shots have no HUD at all, versus the circular HUD of the PC shots. Of course, this may just be because the PC shots are more recent and the same HUD has been implemented in the console version as well. *sigh* if only the website would be updated...