Star Citizen Too Much Game for Consoles to "Handle"

[Rozalia1]

Apologies for the double post, Strazdas posted while I was posting. I opened up a new page to handle his post, but forget when I was finished that I wasn't in the edit screen so by the time I clicked post it was too late (I tried to cancel but it still went through).

Clearly you are looking for ways to shit on the opponent rather than continue discussion here.
Also 3 JRPG sequels does not gaming market make.

I assumed you were intelligent enough to realize a figure of speech, yet it appears from this discussion that you are deliberately trying to argue by misinterpreting what people say.
Also ultrawinkie never said 90% was shrubbery, so theres also that.

I have pointed out a fact. the text after it was not relevant, as i did not challenge that part of the text.

I know you're trying to draw out an insult in the direction of twink and I'll not do it. I'll say irony and be done with it. Oh and Yakuza isn't a JRPG series so try again please this time without the hidden barb.

Wrong, he just said it makes up 90% of a game (again, and notice he never backs you up on that hehehe). Shrubbery as I know you've caught on is a word I'm using to encapsulate all the little graphic bells and whistles that have been mentioned.
Did he say it was 90%? Yes. Did he say he was posting a list of every game that uses graphical effects in their gameplay? Yes. If his wordings are faulty than you should correct him, not wait for me to call it out and than attack me for it. There are no such thing as sides, no need to be so afraid.

... ... ... You're trying to draw heat, no other thing is possible as the alternative that you want me to state would fetch me a warning. So you quoted me, cutting out where I mentioned gameplay, and than presenting me as saying the only function of a game was to get across a story so you could throw that oh so grand "get a book" line at me...yeah, definitely drawing heat.

 

[Rozalia1]

Nope, a game defined 90% by shrubbery isn't much of a game, you yourself said as such so why you argue...is beyond me.

Evil? Really now? Me the guy you've labeled a shill for companies in the past now thinks companies are "evil". Astounding.

@Rozalia1
"Africans can apparently see for miles and have X-ray vision so much for that, and Far Cry 3 isn't much better."

The enemies are blind in Far Cry 3 mate ...

"As long as its possible to not be seen or not shooting, then its a shooter without shooting... no that doesn't really work. Pacifist runs are more of a...niche playing style, such games aren't really billed as a walking around simulator where you can shoot things if you want."

I take Pacifist runs at face value though, as a way of playing, niche or not (is that an arguement against?). And nope, that aint walking around, those are usually quite a bit more skillful runs then the normal.

"You've misunderstood than. You're showing me a game that has no graphics (well not quite as they interface is still there)...that isn't in anyway related to anything in the discussion. I'm not saying you can take out all the graphics and it'd still be a game, though I have said you could downgrade the graphics and you'd still have the same game as long as the story, and the functional gameplay is still there. "

That is exactly how I understood you though .

You can probably keep the story (not always). BUT you ARE touching the gameplay. Some times its not even touching it a "little". There is a limit to how much you can cut and still keep the gameplay the same.
I just tell you, its IMPOSSIBLE to make the SAME STALKER game as the ones on PC on a PS2. No matter how much you cut (destroy) the game's look

There is a limit. When you start touching AI, or graphical effects that affect gameplay or its depth, then you started changing the game.

"What defines a game to me (to rattle off a few) is the story, the characters, the music (a series like Wild Arms has got a defining soundtrack that uses certain elements not often seen), the setting, and of course lets not forget the gameplay. Graphics can add to that, but they aren't number 1 in the line of what defines a game and they certainly aren't 90% of what defines a game."

Same as me. Here, have some STALKER:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDCNlqMgnvo

However sometimes those graphics/effects, physics and AI ( wll, AI always does affect gameplay) can and do add depth, new tactics, possibilities and so on to games. That is what I am saying, those ARE important. They are part of what makes every game unique.


"If you don't get invested in the first place than what is graphical immersion? They could make the next Elder Scrolls the best looking game of all time tomorrow and it'd still be as dull as ditchwater to me."

Because it helps. Every little bit helps. There is a difference between this (from my old 2001 PC):
http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n438/Charcharo/ss_alexanderevgeni_10-02-09_06-05-0.jpg
And these:
http://www.tweakguides.com/images/ClearSky_17.jpg
http://www.tweakguides.com/images/ClearSky_2.jpg

I am not saying it is the 90% most important thing... but it is STILL important. And Id rather with it then without it.
Though I agree, if the game cant get to you even a little, the graphics/effects wont help.

Varies outside their stupidity.

I've done pacifist runs, I like them make no mistake. However it isn't front and centre the playstyle that you could say defines the game. There is a reason that "choice" is what is promoted.

Turn based game, be it strategy or rpg. Go. And by go I mean tell me what removing dynamic lighting has on the gameplay, or story. I don't question the usage of such elements, I question their importance which has in this thread been pegged at 90% of the defining of a game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWgPX9yTtQg

Yes it helps, never said it doesn't...however you need more than graphics to define a game.

This is where you misunderstand, as I've said before I argue against their importance (10 times more important), than their actual implementation. If I had to remove an element from a game I'd pick all the graphical fluff over removing the story or gameplay. I do not see such things as being 90%, 50%, or any such figure. Its a lot less important to me than such large figures.

 

[MercurySteam]

Even as old as their poor choice of graphics engine is, it'll still run horribly.

Hey, the CryEngine is an amazing piece of software with arguably the best graphics on the market.

Sounds like he's cutting out a lot of regular PC gamers too, by his words its going to be a game for the truly rich PC elite only. Not all of us can afford GTX 780 cards and Liquid cooling systems...

Oh boy. Well if you do end up needing a GTX780 and liquid cooling then you may want to see what's consuming so much of your system resources, cause there's no way that's the minimum requirement for Star Citizen

Oh great, yet another game falling victim to high PC requirements. Sometimes, I really hate PC gaming...

And what about the bad controls, locked framerates, poor optimisation and shitty textures we get with console ports? It's a two-way street buddy.

750W! Mate, you could quad sli with that with a Core i7 extreme (But only just!). Glad you're up and running again and have power to spare.

He could quad-SLI, but only with lower TDP cards like a 750Ti maybe.

On that note, it's not surprising that consoles can't run Star citizen, seeing as it needs 12 gigs of RAM. 12 gigs converts to 1.2 trillion bytes, right?

Close, but 1 gigabyte is 1024 megabytes so actually it ends up being 12884901888 bytes.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

And what about the bad controls, locked framerates, poor optimisation and shitty textures we get with console ports? It's a two-way street buddy.

Irrelevant. That's another discussion for another time. We're talking about PC games having very unnecessarily high requirements because developers feel they're oh so essential to a true PC game. The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

All this does in the end is greatly hurt sales and perhaps even impedes possible extra gameplay functionality that could have been added on if given the extra time and money.

 

[Flammablezeus]

This is what I fear most about kickstarters, not that the game won't be made or won't be good, but that the specs will be too high to run.

Seriously, console specs might not be elite but they're still higher than the Steam survey average. He's either BSing or backers are going to be left out in the cold.

It doesn't take a PC that powerful to be able to run it. At full setting? Definitely. Most PC gamers probably have a system that outperforms the Xbone or PS4 already anyway. Even with equivalent hardware (5yo+ PCs) the PC will take more advantage of that hardware because it's not spreading its resources as thinly as current consoles.

In the end though, you should only be buying games that your system can run. It's been like that since PCs were first commercially available. You wouldn't buy a PS4 game for your PS3 in much the same way you wouldn't buy Star Citizen for a 10 year old PC.

And what about the bad controls, locked framerates, poor optimisation and shitty textures we get with console ports? It's a two-way street buddy.

Irrelevant. That's another discussion for another time. We're talking about PC games having very unnecessarily high requirements because developers feel they're oh so essential to a true PC game. The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

All this does in the end is greatly hurt sales and perhaps even impedes possible extra gameplay functionality that could have been added on if given the extra time and money.

I think you mean that hardly anybody could play it at high or maximum settings. Luckily the game was just as playable (and still gorgeous) at lower settings. Even then, it still blows most shooters out of the water from the gameplay alone.

 

[Vault101]

Irrelevant. That's another discussion for another time. We're talking about PC games having very unnecessarily high requirements because developers feel they're oh so essential to a true PC game. The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

All this does in the end is greatly hurt sales and perhaps even impedes possible extra gameplay functionality that could have been added on if given the extra time and money.

theres more to a PC game than "gwafics"

controlls complexity ect...

 

[MercurySteam]

And what about the bad controls, locked framerates, poor optimisation and shitty textures we get with console ports? It's a two-way street buddy.

Irrelevant. That's another discussion for another time. We're talking about PC games having very unnecessarily high requirements because developers feel they're oh so essential to a true PC game. The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

All this does in the end is greatly hurt sales and perhaps even impedes possible extra gameplay functionality that could have been added on if given the extra time and money.

I get the feeling you've got some tunnel vision issues here. Look at it like this; PCs are constantly evolving and pushing the limits of their tech (which actually refreshes once a year) and this is what makes PC gaming so interesting, while consoles only evolve one every six years or so. People are now saying that if the software (such as DirectX) were to make some advancements then we'd get even more out of our current hardware. It's folly to suggest you shouldn't push the limits because the majority of people can't handle it and there is a difference between high-demanding and badly optimised games.

And I recall back in the day being able to play Crysis on my PC with its crappy 7300LE. Sure the game looked like crap but I was still able to run it, which is likely what will happen with Star Citizen; some people wil run it on low, some will run it on ultra and the rest will run it on medium-high.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

Where are you getting this from? The game was perfectly playable on midrange PC's at the time, PLENTY of people played it. It's just that they had to settle for lower settings/resolution etc. The game looked gorgeous even at medium settings + 720p.

Crysis 1 wasn't particularly well optimized, but the settings were heavily customizable and catered to a wide range of PC's. It set the benchmark of graphics settings games should have

The whole "but can it run Crysis" joke only came around because max settings + 1080p was impossible to run smoothly for several years after Crysis came out.

All this does in the end is greatly hurt sales and perhaps even impedes possible extra gameplay functionality that could have been added on if given the extra time and money.

Well graphics was pretty much the main source of sales for the Crysis series, so investing in graphics can occasionally work out quite well. Really depends on the game and what devs are going for.

 

[Strazdas]

Nope, a game defined 90% by shrubbery isn't much of a game, you yourself said as such so why you argue...is beyond me.

Once again, he never said that. what he said was:
"Breakthroughs in rendering and technology were 90% of Crysis."
Shrubbery is but a small part of those breakthroughs.

[
Irrelevant. That's another discussion for another time. We're talking about PC games having very unnecessarily high requirements because developers feel they're oh so essential to a true PC game. The first Crysis when it came out is a good example. Oh sure, great game but barely anyone could play the blasted thing.

Unnecessarely high requirements? the minimum requirements to play it is a 5 years old GPU. You only have to have upgraded in the last 5 years to be able to play it! In a market thats moving this fast and so far has only one console generation that laster longer than that this is not too much to expect.

The first crysis is scalable. I played it fine on medium on a laptop with 8600m GS. i still cant max it on 760 GTX. its extremely well designed to scale based on hardware its run at. No wonder it managed to bring CryEngine into the world.

 

[Rozalia1]

@Rozalia1

From what I remember AI in Far Cry 3 used basically the same audio/visual stealth detection all the way through. It was fairly easy if I recall correct .

Fair enough. I do respect the runs though, games that support such uniqie playstyles get higher praise from me by default. There are a few games that do promote it (Metro).

Unfrotunately I am not knowledgable on Turn Based games. RTS or RTT I can tell you, but not Turn Based. I am at most a Chess player .
I did give you examples on why toning down things in an FPS matters though, why not take that?

Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XZfD1HCI7s

"Yes it helps, never said it doesn't...however you need more than graphics to define a game."

True, unless its a Tech Demo. Then again those are rare nowadays.

"This is where you misunderstand, as I've said before I argue against their importance (10 times more important), than their actual implementation. If I had to remove an element from a game I'd pick all the graphical fluff over removing the story or gameplay. I do not see such things as being 90%, 50%, or any such figure. Its a lot less important to me than such large figures."

I never said 10 times as important.

I am saying there is just a limit to what you can remove.
Say you want to port STALKER to the PS2. You want to tone down texture quality and model quality? Fine. You want to tone down Dynamic Shadowing, shader quality, water quality, foliage quality. Again, fine.
When you touch AI, that is the barrier. You are now damaging gameplay (a game that LAUDS its AI). When you touch Penetration mechanics, that too is unacceptable. When you take away blood trails, Dynamic Shadows as a whole and Weather effects (dont go in the Dark Valley on foggy days... you wont survive) COMPLETELY (not just tone em down) you also damage the gameplay. Noticably. It is not the same game but uglier, its a different game now.

There is just a limit, that is what I am saying.

Last pacifist run I did was either Human Revolution which actually was ridiculously easy to do, heck I'd actually say doing a pacifist run is actually easier than just straight up shooting everyone up.
Or it was Metal Gear Solid 4 which was a lot harder as I also had to not get spotted (outside those story events where you're automatically spotted of course). Both very fun and rewarding.

This discussion has I feel been very FPS centric like a lot of such discussions are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JfCYgxrQ_M

Well there is the misunderstanding, I'm not arguing with you directly. I'm arguing with the percieved massive importance that twink has brought up and Strazdas supports.

How about you're right some of the time? I'll admit to you that the reason I've been rubbishing FPS gameplay being effected to the point of it being a different game is due to...I suppose you could say snobbery. If a fighter, or action fighter game were to have its gameplay crippled by lack of hardware than okay its a shadow of itself (hopefully this isn't a prompt for someone to say 30 frames DMC isn't DMC)...however a shooter? Its all the same to me, the bullets come out of the gun, the enemies die...its not just shooters of course. Take third person shooters, another like that...however if you take a game like Vanquish and you took the rocket boots out than yeah it'd not really be the same game...but I just don't care for the shrubbery, it doesn't evolve a shooter beyond what I perceive them to be.
Killzone (SF) has a little robot you can you to deploy a shield, shoot things, stun things, and transport you...you took out that and I'd not say that wasn't Killzone...that sort of deal, the fundamentals are there.

Once again, he never said that. what he said was:
"Breakthroughs in rendering and technology were 90% of Crysis."
Shrubbery is but a small part of those breakthroughs.

Congratulations, wait is that rude? Odd how apparently it is... *thumbs up* You can cherry pick his last post ignoring all other instances to state something? (Why is there a question mark at the end of that? I was checking this at the end and was like lol, I ask so many questions I've started to put them up almost instinctively).
Remember that if he wanted to "correct" me he could have done it several pages ago, he didn't so what does that say? I've prompted him to "say it isn't so" shall we say and nothing. Now I know this is a prompt in itself so I'll wait and see, but either way it'll change nothing.

Anyway there is no purpose in you stretching this out with defenses mate, its done, we disagree, shake hands, move on, happy times, cheers.

 

[Rozalia1]

@Rozalia1

Last Pacifist run I did was Metro Last Light. As in killing exactly 1 person , not quite that easy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLc9q_tlMDs

Well then, that really is a snobish way of percieving FPS games. They are just as filled with gameplay variances as any other genre. All I can say is, please play some of them. And not the CoD's (except 1,2 and 4... those are damn fine games ) but deeper things like STALKER for example. That thing puts most FPSes, RPGs to shame .

Take it as it is though, at least in FPS games, grpahics and effects and the like can affect gameplay a lot (DooM3, STALKER or even Crysis 1 to a slightly lesser extent).

Never played KillZone though. Ony console games I played the last 5-6 years were TLOU and GTA V. Probably wont play any anymore.

BTW, am currently playing The Witcher 2. Once I have finished it (and its books) I am thinking of playing a good PC JRPG. If you can give me something old? I remember that when I was younger I had a small JRPG with 2D graphics, had an english translation and really enjoyed it . If you can tell me such games? Ohh and it was probably free.

So did you fail or is one of those cases where that one kill has to be done and thus doesn't count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvoueEiVyWE Its funny I've just been posting intro music, when what I like the most about Wild arms themes is the whistling in them (and trumpets, and other such instruments), and that wild westish feel some of the tracks have. Wild arms 3 properly being the best with it as the non westernish tracks unlike the later games actually had justification for their difference in style. The Prophets (villain group) had a techno track because they were super advanced scientists (yes scientists calling themselves prophets and dressing in robes looking all religious). Siegfried was a demon knight from the past so his track was more this track you'd expect a knight to have that sort of thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG0vrYxBWLY

Maybe at some point, but I have such a large backlog that I've almost been afraid to play that it'll take a while.

Its pretty darn difficult to recommend something to someone who just hasn't played that many and can't give any indication of what they'd like. Its like if you'd told me you played a "Tales" game once upon a time and liked it than I could just recommend say Star Ocean which plays very similar.

However not knowing that it becomes more difficult. Its that issue where people want something which isn't too "Japanese"..mmn. Well Dark Souls and Dragons Dogma are Japanese games trying to be more western so I suppose they'd be fine...but they'd not really be what you're asking for.

The go to answer these days from what I've seen is stuff from Atlus. Persona 4 is a very good game, but it requires something like 3-4 hours before it actually allows you to properly play the game which to some people is simply unacceptable (the . Shin Megami Lucifer's call (Nocturne in America) is a proper SMT game that is something you might like more. You're one of those "mute" characters (the intention is suppose to be its you I suppose) and their several endings based on the choices you make and the "reason" you pick (Might makes right, silence, individuality, none).

Strange Journey on the DS is a really good Dungeon Crawler I had a good time with, but its on the DS and I don't if you own that. I suppose you could always go way way back and play Shin Megami Tensei 2 which was released back in 1994 (so expect something fitting that time) in Japanese only...but I'm sure you can get round that issue if you look around Google.