Witcher 2 Studio Approaching Consoles With "Caution"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Take two
The way the witcher is if they don't release the first why bother with the second. To me it seems like releasing ch 1 in only one language and ch 2 in many. Most will shrug it off not having played the first. More so with story driven games like the witcher.
The way the witcher is if they don't release the first why bother with the second. To me it seems like releasing ch 1 in only one language and ch 2 in many. Most will shrug it off not having played the first. More so with story driven games like the witcher.
I cannot speak for other console players, but for me it is simply too expensive to upgrade my computer (yes I know it can only take 200-300 US dollars, but that is 200-300$ I do not have! Not to mention I could use that same money to buy more games for my consoles) and the P.C. is an inconvenient platform for me to play games on (the only computer that can really play any games is the family computer and considering this is the Witcher we are talking about... yeah).Sneaklemming said:
I agree, I only have a notebook and a laptop, which means I only really game old rpg's like Daggerfall or similarly non-high end PC games like Minecraft or Runescape, everything remotely approaching modern standards will be bought for my 360. If The Witcher comes to the consoles I will buy it instantly.BreakfastMan said:
First Witcher wasn't even advertized much and it sold over 2 million copies on PC. I'm sure The Witcher 2 will be even more successful and even without a console version. But if they want to make a console version later on so what? As long as they don't make it at t he same time because that would mean ruining either PC or console version.
One thing that really annoys me about the console market is that since the hardware is locked in for multi-year cycles, it really stifles how hard developers are willing to push hardware when they are targeting multi-platform releases.Sneaklemming said:
Does anyone else remember back when it felt like developers were constantly trying to rape your visual cortex every year with better and better graphics? Sure this facilitated a lot of video card upgrades on my part, but there was a definite feeling that the games were getting more and more immerse and better. To me, it just seems that most things look the same, which is odd considering we've got like 6 core CPUS's and 2 GB video cards and all this other flash stuff floating around for next to nothing these days.
Maybe it's just nostalgia on my part, but a lot of the games I've played recently just feel like developers are recycling the same models, physics and textures from the last 3 years...
Because PCs are expensive to upgrade/ I had to spend $100 on a video card to play The Witcher, still had to run it on medium settings. I'm not spending hundreds of dollars every couple of years to play 3-4 games. Until PC developers realize that not everyone has a gaming rig set up, PC will continue to the platform that gets no major attention aside form Steam and major releases.Sneaklemming said:
Its not nostalgia.Jake Martinez said:
http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/11/25/c...generation-ahead-being-held-back-by-consoles/
The only positive I feel, is that it's given people a chance to catch up. (Hardware wise)
You make it sound like it's a desolate desert and famine of games on PC. We get all the homegrown stuff, mods and indie games (usually for free) - we any decent game that a console gets (aside from the exclusive stuff - which is only because of marketing). So I don't know what you mean by "major release". We don't get "generic japaneese 3rd person action adventure 4" ...but really? Isn't it better to have the shovelware filtered out for you? Generally speak most of the "major releases" have their best version on PC (see Fallout 3/New Vegas) and thats before the mod community get's their hands all dirty =DAzrealMaximillion said:
edit: I should add as a disclaimer - we don't have any Wii games on PC. Maybe thats what you were referring to...
I obviously know that there is no famine of PC games, but I don't find it worth my money to upgrade my PC every two years because a game it coming for it. PC can have all the free mods in the world, but if I have to spend more then the game it worth just to run it, it's not worth it to me. And what I mean by major release is something that actually gets attention, like Crysis 2, or S.T.A.L.K.E.R.2. Yes PC players get the best version of New Vegas, but right now, it's still one of the buggiest games out there. PC also got the worst versions of GTA 4 and Streer Fighter 4, so not all ports are great.Sneaklemming said:
The pace has slowed alot nowadays (in terms of upgrading) I'm on a 4 year old laptop and I'm only just about hitting games that I have graphics issues with.AzrealMaximillion said:
I'm not sure about GTA4, but yeh street fighter isn't great on PC unless you have a controller. The keyboard is not suited to fighting or driving games.
Witcher could work on consoles, I dunno. From Yahtzee's review, though, it seemed pretty PC oriented - so, one of two things are going to happen.
1. The Witcher 2 will be fairly different to first one in terms of how much stuff you can do and how you control. Since they're developing for the console (I know, they said go PC if you can, but if you develop for the PC and then port to the console I can see that as being a total nightmare) it's probably going to be radically different from the first. Or,
2. It's a bad port that'll get slammed because it's a bad port.
1. The Witcher 2 will be fairly different to first one in terms of how much stuff you can do and how you control. Since they're developing for the console (I know, they said go PC if you can, but if you develop for the PC and then port to the console I can see that as being a total nightmare) it's probably going to be radically different from the first. Or,
2. It's a bad port that'll get slammed because it's a bad port.