Bethesda: Consoles to be the lead platform for Skyrim, aim to make it ?really accessible?

[russkiimperial]

Here's the thing everyone: clearly Bethesda are trying to reach out to the console crowd. Why? Because that is where the money is and that is where gaming is going more and more towards.

The 'pc elitism' that so many like to disparage are simply the reactions that the pc users have because the western RPG genre has pretty much been their own for as long as games existed up to now.

Imagine now if this happened in the other direction. Let's say that the future was in PC gaming and the developers of the best console dominated genres like fighting, platforming and sports games were suddenly seen as trying to please the PC crowd? We would be hearing bloody murder from the other side of the aisle.

I'm a pc gamer myself and probably will be until the bitter end, but I can't really blame Bethesda from a business standpoint.



edited to add: eh, I've never been that impressed with Bethesda anyway. Just this RPG elitist's opinion.

 

[Mxrz]

People who never played an ES before Morrowind got zero right to ***** about the series being dumbed down. Get that weak shit out of here.

Skyrim will be the first TES that I play on a console. So anything they do to make the controls & UI better is perfectly okay with me. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on the rest since they've been giving me quality games for 17 years.

Just PLEASE get mod support for the PS3 at least. Playing an Elder Scrolls without mods (read: tities!) just isn't right.

 

[Nihilm]

Discuss? PC gamers are a bunch of elitist pricks who will be upset by this. I really see no other reason why anyone would care what its developed for. On top of that the base-less accusation of "dumbed down" is getting on my nerves. What the hell does that even mean? Other then that... meh I don't really carer what they develop on PC and consoles are mostly the same.

Well....... first of all developing for consoles and porting over to PC, makes no sense.
Much more sense is made when it is developed for PC with consoles in mind, because then you avoid all the hardware isssues that come with different PC setups, dumbing down means that the game starts treating you like your an idiot, for example in morrowind you did not have a huge red arrow point where to go, sure it was much more comfortable in oblivion with a huge red arrow, but most of the time I did feel screaming stop showing me where to go, i can figure this out for myself, then i modded out the arrow and fast travel system and lived happily ever after until i realised that oblivion ultimately sucked compared to morrowind.

yes I am a PC elitist btw, proud of it infact, the witcher series FTW!!!!! I'm out.

Except it does. All games are developed on PCs. Consoles have limited specs and thus encourage optimizations. PC games need optimizations too. Therefor developing it to run on a console means developing it to run well on PCs too. Yes, that means you don't address different PC set-ups but honestly nobody can account for the infinite combination of PC set-ups. If you get your working build to run on the PC before testing on the consoles, grats it runs on PCs. (nobody is going to go test dozens of graphics cards, different OSs, and different combinations of settings). Consoles and PCs are the same under the hood its just a matter of the software running them and how you use it. Consoles have the more limited hardware and thus are better to benchmark optimization. Working builds are developed on PCs and thus if the build works then it runs on PCs and if it runs on the test hardware, i.e. a consoles then it runs on a console. People are making a distinction that is arbitrary and asinine with PC vs. Console.

As for "dumbing down" everything that anyone has ever cited as an example has been an example of design decisions not something based on some limiting factor due to consoles or PC. "dumbing down" is a separate issue all together from console or PC and I hate to see people conflating the two. Complex games run on consoles simple games run on PC and vice versa.

I know people are entitled to their own opinions and what-not but all the fanboys are giving me a head-ache. Where is my anti-fanboy badge, I need some sparkles to crush.

First of all, I agree that dumbing down is a completely separate matter, but i have to say that all consoles might equal PC's, but all PCs do not equal consoles, time has shown that a game that is well optimized for consoles = a game that is not well optimized on any PC build, while a game that is well optimized on a PC works very well on consoles as well, it just costs more and takes more time, so basically they do a shittier job because it saves money this way with minimal revenue cost, can't argue that fact.

 

[Joccaren]

Why are devs so stupid sometimes? Make the UI accessible, yes, but make it for PCs first so that we can get the best experience possible, then port it into consoles (using port term loosely here, I would have them develop them game for consoles adding in as much as they could from the PC version). That way, we both get the best we can get, Consoles get as similar to the PC version as is possible, whilst PC users get the best experience possible and not some console game with Anti-Aliasing added in.

 

[Matterer]

Hmm, where did I put my torch and pitchfork? Yeah... Not too happy about this. It seems silly to start from the bottom and adjust the final product up. >:C

 

[Mxrz]

You develop for your customers. Bethesda believes 90% of their customers are on consoles. The logic ain't hard.

 

[H20 Pirate]

Speaking as a Gamer who has had difficulties getting his PC to run without it trying to dismember me in some way, this is a good thing, as I play more games on my Xbox anyway.

Also, why would be upset about something like this, it's a change being made so that everyone can enjoy the game no matter what platform they own, and I don't think this is going to make the PC version any better or worse than the Console version, to be optimistic, they could both be the same level of awesome.

But sadly I think it's that attempt at equality that ticks PC Gamers off, from all the complaints that seem to pour in about anything once dominated by the Personal Computer being shared with Consoles.

But maybe I'm wrong, if so then I apologize for this post.

 

[Double A]

I'm trying to be positive and think that translates to 'The ui won't be overly complex and horrible' but I think it's a little bit of a kick in the teeth to the original fans of the series perhaps.

Is it really? I mean does it really matter which platform is the MAIN one, so long as it's still coming out on the platform you wanted to play it on? Seriously why is stuff like this always taken as a personal betrayal? All it means is that Bethesda wants as many people to be able to enjoy the game as possible, which can only be a good thing, so make it with consoles in mind first because it's just so much easier to then adapt it to PC's than it is to adapt a PC game for consoles.

The environments still look great. The gameplay still looks great. If the majority of fans are dissatisfied with the game when they play it then I will concede that this was a bad idea, but until then, see it not as a 'kick in the teeth', just a sensible business decision which will probably produce a better game overall; as developing for consoles forces them to make things like interfaces less needlessly complicated, which is the one thing that always gets complained about when it comes to hardcore RPG's.

Say you have 2 good friends, but want to impress 4 different guys you barely know. You take said 4 guys out drinking instead of your 2 good friends.

That's what it feels like.

Also, because when games get ported from a console, they almost always have suckier controls, especially in the RPG genre. Now, given that it's Bethesda, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but if they do dumb it down, I'm going to be really pissed off. Scraping a little extra money out of the console bucket shouldn't be worth alienating fans. There has to be a way to make both sides happy, but unfortunately most devs just end up punching their PC/hardcore fans in the nuts.

 

[Stormz]

Well that sucks, I'll probably still get it for PC unless they use freakin steam. Which I know they will.

 

[Buccura]

Console is the lead platform for a major release. And, this is news, apparently.

 

[lacktheknack]

So why can't there be LESS accessible RPGs that actually give me control over my experience? Do I just have to play "The Witcher" for the rest of my life?

 

[archvile93]

I'm trying to be positive and think that translates to 'The ui won't be overly complex and horrible' but I think it's a little bit of a kick in the teeth to the original fans of the series perhaps.

Is it really? I mean does it really matter which platform is the MAIN one, so long as it's still coming out on the platform you wanted to play it on? Seriously why is stuff like this always taken as a personal betrayal? All it means is that Bethesda wants as many people to be able to enjoy the game as possible, which can only be a good thing, so make it with consoles in mind first because it's just so much easier to then adapt it to PC's than it is to adapt a PC game for consoles.

The environments still look great. The gameplay still looks great. If the majority of fans are dissatisfied with the game when they play it then I will concede that this was a bad idea, but until then, see it not as a 'kick in the teeth', just a sensible business decision which will probably produce a better game overall; as developing for consoles forces them to make things like interfaces less needlessly complicated, which is the one thing that always gets complained about when it comes to hardcore RPG's.

Yes because porting the game from console to PC and focusing on consoles never bites PC gamers in the ass. Just look at Halo, or SR2, or GoW. All those games were great on PC. *puts on serious face* I am way too cynical to believe this won't mean that the console versions are far superior to the PC version, which will be very poorly made. I suppose this isn't too bad though. Gamers are used to having to rely on fan made mods to make Bethesda games playable, this probably just means they'll need them a little more now.

Just because there have been bad PC ports in the past doesn't mean this one will be.

Like someone said earlier, it's not like Bethesda will suddenly just forget how to make games on the PC good, so you can have just a little faith in them don't you think? If anything IO can see this approach helping games like Skyrim be better on PC though being forced to simplify the controls slightly. Because (despite what many PC gamers seem to think) needlessly convoluted and badly designed menus and interfaces is not the same thing as depth.

So, in summary, I see no reason that this will mean instant doom for Skyrim on PC. But y'know what, even if it does end up as a shitty port, so what? PC modders can fix that shit, something that cannot be done with shitty console ports. And it most certainly doesn't mean Bethesda is spitting in your face, it just means they're doing what is best for them from the perspective of a business that has to make money. Three words, deal with it! If PC gamers are losing out because the real money is in consoles these days, then I place the blame firmly on some (not all I stress, but some) members of the PC community for being just too damn hard to please.

To clarify, I don't have anything against other games coming out on other platforms, and I definately don't think that it's only a real game if it uses every key on the keyboard for something. The issue I have is how they announced this. To me it sounds like they're going to put all their effort into the consoles versions and cobble together a quick PC version as an afterthought. This would inevitable result in a bad game, and I really hate to rely on modders, because the developers were too lazy to do their jobs right. And yes I agree business need to make money, but I also believe that there should be something called being ethical (unethical business practices were what caused the great depression afterall, back when there was no such thing as white collar crime, this is why governments control them to an extent), and not screwing someone over because you don't feel they represent a large enough money base to make a decent game, but large enough to shaft them with a crappy one. The reason there are less games for PC is not because of a hard to please base, but because companies feel there aren't enough of them to make enough money off of (at least good ones, they're often all too willing to make bad ones). What I'm trying to say that if they're going to make a game for all platforms, time and care should be put into all them so they're the best they can be. They should never be hastily put together and thrown out to make a quick buck.

 

[archvile93]

Why does this site keep eating my posts?

 

[Kraj]

... i'm not happy now. thanks op. i could've done without seeing that...

 

[MajWound]

I didn't think Oblivion was complex at all on the 360. I can't imagine what they did differently to "streamline" the gameplay. Except fix the fucking menu system.

 

[Xrysthos]

This doesn't really compute with what the lead developer/game director said in a podcast I heard on YouTube. He (Todd Howard) said that the aim was to optimalize the HUD and UI for each different console, meaning PC, xbox and PS3 respectively, and that there would be noteable differences between them. In other words, not a cheap and quick PC port, but a game tailored to each console.

Inventory management in e.g. Oblivion was a nightmare, both on the PC and PS3 (which are the only versions I have experience with), and while some may enjoy spending time looking for the right item, spell, quest or whatever in a slightly disorganised system, the majority do not. It makes sense that there would have to be simplifications for the PS3 and xbox versions, but that doesn't mean that the PC version couldn't do with a bit of streamlining. The "dumbing down" of new RPG's might be a concern, but it might be hard for new players who haven't had a chance to enjoy the classics, and are currently too attached to near photorealistic graphics to ever do so to jump into a game that is about as advanced as D&D. Those of us that have played RPG's for a long time know the system, what to do, which skills and classes to pick and so forth, but it isn't really financially viable to create a AAA title catering only to the experienced-and-well-schooled-in-the-classics gamer. It's not a trend I'm happy with, but I still enjoy the new games that are made, and that is the most important thing. For me, at least.

As far as the PS3 and xbox being the primary concern for the developer - well, it does make sense considering the estimated market shares. And to be honest, I'm fairly happy about it. Can't really afford to buy a new gaming computer every couple of years just to be able to run a game smoothly.

EDIT: YouTube Link. Not the one I was looking for, but he mentions the PC UI towards the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sw_1P2dvWU&feature=related

 

[Cheesepower5]

oh fuck
first Duke Nukem and now The Elder scrolls getting dumbed down!

I find the phrase "Duke Nukem getting dumbed down" to be slightly paradoxical.

 

[warrcry13]

I want Skyrim for PC, but pretty sure I can't run it so I'll be getting it for the xbox until I can upgrade. This news affects me not.

 

[BodomBeachChild]

Thank the gods for the modding community.

 

[DalekJaas]

Oh no, I hope this doesn't follow the the pattern which ruined Crysis 2 and other games because the devs focused on consoles. Wish I hadn't read this, removed all of my excitement for the game. Now instead of buying it on release day I am going to wait to hear some opinions, if it is a consoletarded fail like every other game I have bought over the last year then I will have to give it a miss.

Reading comments on other forums, I think it is safe to say a lot of people are putting their cash away and there will be a lot of black flagged ships around on launch day...