release date is Sept 16th. which happens to be my 40th birthday. i probably should've outgrown video games by now, huh?
This is coming out for PC right? I can't believe I have to ask that question this day and age. PCs are still much better than consoles and yet devs dont release a PC vers.
Does anyone else wish they would make this story into a movie instead? THIS is what GL shouldve done instead of those other silly movies. I dont care how he became Vader, tell that in the first one and move on to the good **** like this.
1. I know a lot of ppl pirating XBOX games etc. 2. How do you think a console is better than a PC. I'm not trying to start a massive debate and hijack this thread. I am just curious. This game does look impressive. Havoc physics engine that is only being improved. Destructable levels, looks great. As always, a Star Wars storyline, so you know that will never be a problem. I just hope this is being released for the PC.
1. Not even close to the amount who pirate PC games. The amount is causing a lot of developers to abandon the PC market all together. 2. I think console is better than PC for a. it connects to the tv and is played in the living room. b. Even the dumbest person alive can get in room multiplayer to work c. Everything you buy is actually compatible with the game (for the most part d. It is MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper e. I don't have to buy a new video card that costs almost as much as a console every two years so I can play the game as it is meant to be played. f. Overall a more pleasant experience.
I personally enjoy pc gaming far more than console. Console is fun but pc is just more suited to me. As for the game looks amazing easily one of my most anticipated games.
I enjoy PC gaming as well because my Atari Joystick is broken and the button sticks, I'm anxiously awaiting their new 5200 console I hear so much about.
Been anticipating this game I assume the gfx will be better on the 360 and ps3...but how would it look for the Wii...I heard you use the Wiimote as a lightsaber...that should be fun
Can't see the video here at work but what type of game is this? Is it a MMO, RTS, or is it like Jedi Knight?
All valid points. However, you are talking about cost and convenience. All those aside, I think the PC has the advantage. Graphics are much better with DX10, and you can buy USB PS and XBOX controllers. You don't have to play a FPS with a controller. My preference. To each his own.
I do enjoy PC gaming. I am not saying that it is horrible by any means. Myself I greatly prefer the console. UNLESS it is a strategy game. Sins of the Solar Empire and Civ games are always MUCH better on the PC. Plus those games you don't have to 'Keep up with the jones' like you do on FPS
MMO is Massive Multiplayer Online like World of Warcraft and RTS is Real Time Strategy like Knights of the Old Republic.
unless there is some strange sex change force power that we don't know about. I would call it a safe guess.
So you think they're going to go away from the SW formula of having a love interest??? That's not what I saw on the preview...I saw a blond w/ BOOBS!!!
exactly. Tomb Raider was 100% boobs 100% of the time. There are going to be long stretches of game with 0% boobs.
Yeah, but you get tear up the universe in the meantime...you couldn't do anything but shoot stuff w/ Lara. Affecting the universal laws of physics>>>>>>shooting ANYTHING. *Even if you do have impossibly large and perky breastsss.
I am not saying Tomb Raider is better. Just that Force Unleashed is similar type of game. Now if they gave Lara Croft force powers, WATCH OUT!!
Actually that is the vanilla flavored cop out of the era for developers. They look at the number of total downloads and see it as "sales lost", even though the vast majority of pirates would have not bought those games in the first place. If you really want to take those devs/pubs at their word, go for it...but it takes quite a bit of gullibility/naive thinking to buy that nonsense. What i comes down to is that there is less profit in PC gaming than the consoles. They can make dumbed down games with far more basic controls that make more money than the PC games. Of coarse the devs would not want to talk about this publicly, its far easier for them to cry "pirates pirates". A. PC's connect to the TV as well. You just need a proper video card/rig to do it. You can even use the 360 controllers. B. Even the dumbest person alive(that can read..) can get a PC game online. C. What are you referring to specifically? Peripherals? Hardware? D. Agreed, except that both are still large investments and you don't have to run out buying the most expensive parts for the PC. It's not as drastic of a difference as you are making it out to be at all. E. My nearly 3 yr old graphics card is still fine, can play all of the newest games that still look great. I will most likely upgrade it next year or so. It's all about the specs of what card you buy that matters how long it is going to last. F. Completely disagree. Consoles are ghetto PC's that are just there for a more simplistic experience. There is more depth in controls, online community, and game diversity in the PC not to even mention the graphics... and the consoles will most likely never match it in those regards due to it's inherent flaws.
It is not a vanilla cop out. THey are losing money. Of course I do, I work in the industry and see the numbers. You go where the money is. If there was a lot of money in PC gaming, their would be a lot of developer support. i) There you go, more money. Plus the average person cannot do such a thing. Plus you still have to worry about drivers and getting everything to work right. Much more of a hassle ii) Multiplayer online is like pornography. Like sex, real multiplayer is playing with someone in the room iii) Hardware. Sometimes drivers do not work. Sometimes the newest game doesn't work right with your newest video card. Something generally not having to worry about with consoles. Till Guitar Hero/Rock Band, however that is more of the exception and not the rule iv) Ps3 with blu ray costs 400 dollars. A good PC to run good FPS costs at least 800 dollars. That is if you want to run them on the min requirements. If you want a good pc it will run 1200 dollars. That is of course without blu ray or a monitor. That is 2 to 3 times the cost. Plus the fact that in three years it will be time to put more money in an upgrade of Ram, Video cards, motherboard, cpu, or whatever you need to do to keep up with jones. v) It is fine, yet it is not taking full advantage of the game that you just bought. If you want to do that, you need to buy the newest latest and greatest video card. Since you want to take advantage of those AMAZING graphics. vi) We will agree to disagree since the console is a much better overall gaming experience. That is what it is made for. Gaming, well and movie playing. PCs are awesome. I freaking love them. I am even the type of guy who wants to upgrade his machine every 2 to 3 years. Plus one thing that annoys me is the idea that "more complicated" = "more depth". PC will never match consoles due to the fact that it is just not made for it.
The amount of money being lost to piracy is laughable, and these companies that are pirated the most are also the most successful- obviously that is not shutting off the game's sales spickets. You say "oh money is being lost", yet you give no kind of evidence supporting that. All you can possibly even judge the "losses" by is to look at the number of downloads. This is pointless because by doing this you would have to know that every person who downloaded your game was 100% going to purchase it. So what about every pirate who was curious/bored/testing their rig? They were never going to buy XXXXX game in the first place, yet they downloaded it most likely for a brief time and now the devs are in tears because they idiotically feel that they lost money to that pirate. Please, unless you have facts/evidence to show me why I am wrong on this, don't just sit there claiming that you know better and expect me to accept it simply because you are part of the business. Congratulations btw. It's not a lot more money. Consider the differnece for someone to jump into "HD console gaming" if they don't have a HD tv...It's no different then someone who has a small budget and builds a gaming rig on $500. Perfectly agree for games that are for playing with up to 4 players. Some of my fondest memories were playing Goldeneye with 3 buddies. You, being in the gaming business should realize first and foremost that the future of gaming is online multiplayer, and it has been for some time. The sheer number of players you can get into an online battles(especially on the PC...) even currently is amazing. Many years down the line when there is some great games designed for 100v100, our generation's love for 4 player goldeneye/halo is going to seem like caveman games. 1) Patches. Every game that has issues with some of the newer cards have those issues worked out. Compatibility is surely an issue though, and it is also why people who don't know any better shouldn't try to build a computer. Consoles once again, a far more simplistic experience, but like a kiddie pool - they are easy to jump into and swim around in, theres just no depth. As I've already mentioned above, you are assuming that said person already owns an HDTV. How convenient of you Why does it matter if the newest video cards can make the game look better than my own? What matters is the game looking good on MY system, not some random guy on the internet. Mass Effect, Bioshock, Gears of War, Neverwinter Nights 2, etc all still look beautiful on my card. The fact that they would look better if I decided to upgrade my PC, is a good aspect of PC gaming not a bad one. How ******ed would it be if it didn't look better when upgrading? Or if you were forced to wait years and years....*cough* consoles. It's a better overall gaming experience to someone who is looking for a quick & easy experience, but thats about it. There are many things that PC gaming offer, many of which I have already brought up in this thread - that consoles simply will never have the ability to compete with. This is why anything that is made on a PC that is brought onto consoles has to be "dumbed down". You, being in the business should know exactly what I am talking about, because that is actually developer lingo. More depth does not always mean more complicated. How is it more "complicated" to have more depth to control schemes? A perfect easy example of this would be for any RTS game. It isn't more difficult to use the mouse for a RTS, in fact it is 100x easier for even a novice. Yet, these controls are far far more deep than a RTS being designed for a console. You have to design ways to make the controls "easier", which also by default makes the game itself a bit easier. A good friend of mine owns Command and Conquer on the 360, he loves it. I have it for the PC. Let me just say that there is a huge difference in the 2 games, far beyond the controls. EA knew they couldn't throw the same RTS at console gamers that they do with the PC. It wouldn't work due to the nature of the consoles.
As a huge Star Wars nerd Im really looking forward to this, it had better be good. I dont know if I want to grab it for the 360 or the Wii though. Graphics vs. Wiimote lightsaber, hmmmmmmm
HD tv is something people have. Not something people have because they bought a console. Unlike a computer monitor.
Why not just get both? If I had the Wii version I think i'd attach it to my FX Darth Vader light saber and play that way.
