PC Gamers get another slap in the chops , no mention of PC demo for Bulletstorm

Recommended Videos

Oktanas

New member
Apr 16, 2009
368
0
0
There are 2 things way they don't make demos for PC version of the game:
1. They want to piss of PC gamers so they would have more reason to download game from torrent sites.
2. They know that PC gamers will download the game for free from torrents and they don't bother to create demo for PC version of the game.

Personaly I don't get any demos because they contain a lot of spoilers.
 
Jun 11, 2008
5,331
0
0
Krylock said:
Glademaster said:
Kasurami said:
And once again, the PC gaming crowds sense of entitlement is kicking right in. Seriously, you didn't hear all the console gamers up in arms when the PC got that MoH beta.

FPS does not suit controller.
Triggers and thumb sticks vs (can i get a drum roll for this) *ques drum roll* CLICKING A BLOODY BUTTON ON THE MOUSE

Hmm... You tell me what is better.
I'm sorry a mouse is better for aiming. Whether you thing so or not on technical terms a mouse is better. You're free to prefer to use a controller but a mouse is better. Can a controller change sensitivity on the fly? No it can't. My gaming mouse can change between 800/1600/2400/3200 DPI(this is dots per inch which is how many pixels the mouse would scroll by moving it an inch if you didn't already know what it meant) within less than a second you can't do that on a controller. My mouse kicks the shit out of my 360 controller and Gameware PC controller for FPS games.

A bit of a long winded answer for mouse but a mouse is better.
 

DaHero

New member
Jan 10, 2011
789
0
0
Just another FPS game designed for douchebags who feel the need to mic spam and noob tube, move along.

Not like I was gonna buy it anyways, I've got better things to do with my money.
 

omicron1

New member
Mar 26, 2008
1,729
0
0
Honestly? I think either Microsoft is responsible, or Epic decided not to take the time out of its polish phase to get a demo working on the various PC platforms out there (cost-effectiveness).

However, I really could care less, since Epic's being arrogant and charging $60 on PC, so I'm not about to run out and buy it new anyway.
 

internetzealot1

New member
Aug 11, 2009
1,693
0
0
ciortas1 said:
Rack said:
Are you kidding? Those PCs are a myth thought up by PC elitists to make their platform sound better than the consoles.

internetzealot1 said:
What's relative is which one you prefer. Which one works better, there's no contest.
PC works better for hotkeying items and shooting people directly in front of you. Console controllers are better in every other way.
 

internetzealot1

New member
Aug 11, 2009
1,693
0
0
ciortas1 said:
internetzealot1 said:
snip
1 What I mean by "directly in front of you" is that when you are looking at or near an enemy, you need to move the mouse very little to place the cursor on him. But when an enemy is, say, behind you, then you will have to move the mouse a lot to turn around and target him. Now imagine that you are being attacked by multiple enemies from multiple directions. As you fight them, you will have to keep turning to face different directions. Because a mouse is operated by sliding it across a real-world surface, you will, unless the enemies present themselves in the the perfect order, eventually run out of real-world space ( or arm-length) in which to slide this mouse. This means that you will have to do one of two things. A) Pick up the mouse and reposition it, or B) take the longer turn in the opposite direction in order to move the mouse closer to its original real-world postion. Both of these break the flow of the game and leave the player vulnerable for a moment.

On the other hand, a player using a controller will be able to turn to face all of the enemies without interruption, though his targeting will be less precise.
So, essentially, the Mouse is good for targeting, bad for turning. The joystick is bad for targeting, good for turning.

2 You say that "Movement is heavily tied with aiming and thus works worse with the shittier aiming system." It probably seems that way because WASD provides such limited movement (8 directions are not just enough to make the difference negligible). Since movement is so restricted on PC's, the importance of the aiming in relation to movement is multiplied. On a console every degree turned can be matched with a change in movement direction, so camera position does not have such an influence on movement.

To illustrate the flaw in PC movement, let's get hypothetical again. Say that you are in a firefight with an enemy, and for one reason or another you want to cross a catwalk that happens to have no rails. While crossing, you are exposed, and will want to keep shooting at your enemy. Now, WASD permits movement in 8 directions, right? Well assuming that you want to stay on the catwalk and assuming that you want to cross the entire catwalk on the same WASD combination, then there are 8 positions relative to you in which your enemy must be standing for you to be able to shoot him. Only two of those positions (directly in front of and directly behind) don't require that your enemy move in the same direction at the same rate as you.

But lets say that the enemy is in none of those three positions(he probably won't be). You will not be able to shoot at him while crossing the catwalk if you go all the way on one of the 8 directions. So you have three options.

1. Do not cross the catwalk(the controls are preventing you from doing what you want to do, which is bad.)
2. Cross the catwalk moving forward, looking straight ahead, not shooting your enemy while he shoots you(you are taking damage while he takes none, which is bad)
3. Cross the catwalk while shooting at him, having to do this batshit rediculous dance with WASD, juggling directions, while trying to shoot your enemy, and the whole thing will cause you to fall right the hell off. Even if you somehow manage to stay on, the zig-zag motion will cause you to move slower than if you had just gone in a straight line.

This is an extremely specific example, but it illustrates the issues with WASD. Also, its cost me a metric ass-ton of deaths. (BTW, WASD requires three fingers while a joystick only requires one. This won't matter unless you're extremely uncoordinated, but I think it should be mentioned.)

3 Button availability, hmm? You say that there are five buttons on the mouse alone. Counting wheel up and wheel down as seperate buttons is pushing it because they're usually just the reverses of each other, but its possible, and I'm sure someone's done it, so we'll let it slide. Now, you've counted four buttons on the controller that are usable in conjunction with both sticks: The two triggers and the two bumpers. What you're forgetting is that modern console joysticks (excluding the Wii, and we're not even going there) can be clicked in addition to being rotated. That brings the number of readily available buttons for console controllers up to six.

Now, if you want to press a button on the Keyboard, you're going to use the hand with which you operate WASD. That means that to press a button, you're going to have to take at least one finger off of WASD. That's at least 3 direction that will be unavailable for a moment. Unless the desired key is far away from WASD, in which case all of your movement will be unavailable. Then, you have to move your hand back over the sea of identical keys and put them on the exact four that you need.

I should also mention that on a PC, to have more than one movement speed, you need to reserve a whole button per each different speed. On a console, the degree to which the control sticks are tilted determines the speed.

As far as mouse buttons taking less effort to click...I really don't have that much trouble pulling my triggers. From a utilitarian standpoint, a bland mouse click might work slightly better. But triggers enhance the experience of shooting a gun much, much more. A mouse button feels like a poor substitute in comparison.

I should also mention rumble. I'm pretty sure that most mouses don't come with rumble, and I'm almost certain that no keyboard has been rumble equipped. It doesn't seem lik a big deal and it can't be evaluated objectively, but it lends itself to modern games (especially FPS's)extremely well.

4 Navigating menus...nope, got me there.
 

Brandon237

New member
Mar 10, 2010
2,959
0
0
Jkudo said:
While all of that is true, i think console gamers might make less posts advising pc gamers to basically "suck it up" if a large amount of pc gamers weren't going on about their superiority- and occasionally about how bad consoles, console games, and console gamers are- while still complaining about all the things you mentioned(which they have a right to complain about). Never got how you can complain about consoles and insult console gamers...but still own one or more.

I mean all fps should be on pc because they are better on pc? Since when? I know mouses are more accurate but i can't lay in bed with a mouse and keyboard...controllers are just more comfortable. If i'm trying to unwind controllers just seem more suitable, its more about preference. I have no idea where the sense of entitlement came from, but thats all irrelevant. Pc should get a demo to see if it runs on their systems, end of story.
Also true, although unfortunately an individual is judged by the actions of their group. So my only complaints are the ones I mentioned earlier, I have nothing against consoles or their users apart from the fact that the industry pays more attention to them. So I'm good with you guys... And now I need to kill the pc gamers who make me look bad, be back in a second :D
And as for the console complaints, did not get them either. I still sometimes use my PS2.

Like the demo idea, but some people would rather just hijack 40 incomplete games free than a few good ones at a price...
 

IronicBeet

New member
Jun 27, 2009
392
0
0
ciortas1 said:
Kasurami said:
And once again, the PC gaming crowds sense of entitlement is kicking right in. Seriously, you didn't hear all the console gamers up in arms when the PC got that MoH beta.
FPS games are better played on PCs. It is to be expected that any and all FPS games should be released on PCs.
So if PC gamers get FPS-related exclusives it's okay, but if console gamers get them it's not? That doesn't seem fair at all.
 

Kenko

New member
Jul 25, 2010
1,098
0
0
MiracleOfSound said:
Epic knows angry PC gamers will flood the internet with anti-console, vitriol filled 'Screw Bulletstorm!' threads, giving the game lots of free publicity. :D
Yeah, it's quite a brilliant plan really.
 

The Cheezy One

Christian. Take that from me.
Dec 13, 2008
1,912
0
0
As an ex-console gamer, I can see two sides of everything. Consoles are the new gaming thing. Stop. I can see you about to shout "Troll" and "Console gaming sucks". I am now a PC gamer, mainly due to the massive upgrade I had at Christmas. And PC gaming is prone to so much piracy, as it is an add-on to something that, by nature, gives the user a lot of control, that developers have to put on anti-piracy software that ruins it for us. The one game I have bought the most copies of? Warcraft 3. And you can install that on multiple PCs.
But consoles, as they are built to be a gaming medium, don't have to worry about limiting a users experience, no matter how much Sony trumpet the PS3 as a family media centre. In terms of controls, the mouse gives control unseen in a console, but analogue sticks do beat WASD about the head, with (theoretically) 360 degrees of movement, rather than 8. I will also never get used to having to hold a button down to walk.

OT: Probably just PCs being overlooked. Don't take it personally. As I said, console games are the new thing.
 

moretimethansense

New member
Apr 10, 2008
1,617
0
0
ciortas1 said:
Kasurami said:
And once again, the PC gaming crowds sense of entitlement is kicking right in. Seriously, you didn't hear all the console gamers up in arms when the PC got that MoH beta.
FPS games are better played on PCs. It is to be expected that any and all FPS games should be released on PCs.
That's opinion not fact! raaargh!
Shooters work just fine on consoles, if they didn't they wouldn't be anywhere near as popular.
 

Nova5

Interceptor
Sep 5, 2009
589
0
0
Does anyone really give a shit? It's a demo. A demo. Christ, I can't remember the last time I downloaded one of those on my PC.

The fact of the matter is, it's expensive to put those demos out there. Given the recent trends of the PC market, it's not worth it to a company to release a demo on a platform that won't generate that much in terms of return. Combine that with the already considerable good will that People Can Fly has generated around itself since the release (and popularizing) of Painkiller, and there's no reason at all to release a demo.

This game is just a shooter, perhaps distilled to its purest form, and it doesn't pretend to be anything else. Something People Can Fly has proven they can do quite competently. If anyone honestly needs a demo for this, I'm fucking astounded.
 

moretimethansense

New member
Apr 10, 2008
1,617
0
0
ciortas1 said:
moretimethansense said:
Being popular does not prove its quality in any way. Runescape is immensely popular even still, doesn't say anything about its god-awful gameplay.

They work just good enough for someone who hasn't played FPS games with a mouse. In other words, it's good enough for as long as you have nothing to compare it to. If not, like the other guy, have fun explaining to me why all console shooters have to go for aim-assists and some of them even the lengths of auto-aim.

Console RTS games work, too. Is that what you're going to say next? Listen, just admit each platform has its own strengths and weaknesses and stop brushing everything off as an opinion. Me saying fighting games work just fine on PCs would sound just as ridiculous as you saying this now.
Well aren't we being an elitist prig today?

I play FPSs on the PC, and I'm pretty damn good at it, I play FPSs on the console and I'm pretty damn good at it.
There is (to me) no noticable difference in prefomance between the two.

have fun explaining to me why all console shooters have to go for aim-assists and some of them even the lengths of auto-aim
Pretty straight forward, people are idiots, they believe this rhetoric levied against consoles and feel the need to compensate.
For the record, I turn off auto aim whenever there is an option to do so.

Console RTS games work, too. Is that what you're going to say next?
They do actually, in a straigh match between a console RTS and a PC RTS there would be a noticable differance however.
The reason console RTSs tend to have issues is because they tend to try to emulate a mouse, they really need a control scheme desinged to work on consoles.

Listen, just admit each platform has its own strengths and weaknesses and stop brushing everything off as an opinion
At which point did I claim that that wasn't true?
And yes it is opinion, if you prefer a pad over a mouse and keyboard you're going to play beter with a pad than with a mouse and keyboard, that is fact.

Me saying fighting games work just fine on PCs would sound just as ridiculous as you saying this now
How would it?
They do, especially if you have a pad :p