{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by BannedLemön:
5/3/2014 6:04:32 PM
68
Do you care if games are visually downgraded compared to the demos?
A few examples are Colonial Marines, Dark Souls 2, the soon to be released Watch_Dogs.
Well, do you?
I'd just prefer that they just showed the actual version instead of lying.
I understand that it's to reel people in, buy still...
PC gamers:
Does it bother you that games are dragged down because of consoles?
Two examples being Far Cry 3 and Skyrim.
-
2 RepliesPC gamers got butthurt when they learned Halo wasn't originally going to be released on PC, but will be on Xbox instead so I have no sympathy for them.
-
Bothers me a lot. I am still looking forward to watch dogs. However, graphics really do to matter to me that much. It just angers me that game companies are lying to us.
-
Show me what you're going to put out on the market is what I tend to think.
-
Well I feel I've been screwed over a little, but I just get over it. Though I don't think consoles should be blamed just because developers were too lazy to make the game better.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Oddball: 3/22/2014 8:41:38 AM[quote]Far Cry 3 and Skyrim.[/quote] Skyrim and Far Cry look really pretty if you set the graphics on max. Also thank to the Skyrim modding community we players have been able to download ENB mods which makes the game look prettier than the vanilla version. Edit: Also Skyrim had an official texture pack which allowed the game to look better than consoles.
-
I think it's disappointing, especially if they knew their demos were not going to be indicative of the final product from the get-go, but it doesn't influence whether or not I buy the full game. Unless the game looks nothing like what they promised. As for PC games, someone normally comes out with a graphics mod eventually, so I don't really care.
-
1 ReplyNo I don't care. PC gamers should just shut up and accept that they're in the minority as well.
-
How I long for the days when they would actually show a game and it would be actually in game graphics..
-
I'd prefer if they didn't fancy up graphics for certain showcases, a la Watch_Dogs. I'm not a graphics/resolution nut but when they reduce the quality of that it makes me question what else they had to reduce. If the answer is that graphics are the only thing affected then not a big problem. The problem is that you won't ever know if it affected anything else.
-
Edited by Al-B-Querky: 3/22/2014 4:41:09 AMFirst question- It really isn't false advertisement until it gets to the point where early footage is constantly being showed to market the game (right before and even after launch is what I mean) and the final product is nowhere near the visual fidelity. So far, I've seen nothing of the sort. We saw what games like Watch_Dogs looks like now compared to how we first saw it. It's not a lie, it's a change. At this point in time, consumers still have the time to choose whether to buy it or not before being released. Pre-orders can be cancelled. No harm with the exception of hurt expectations. But still not a lie. They're called demonstrations for a reason. As for the second question- Consoles don't hold back games. They create a baseline standard within the industry to shoot for without alienating their audience. The PC standard equivalent would be whatever integrated graphics CPUs come packed; and consoles hold back the pc gaming scene as much as people who still play on integrated graphic laptops. Those people still need to be considered. I'm sure developers would like nothing more than to create a game with no resource limits, but that end-product would fit a very small niche. I'm a PC gamer, all this doesn't fly with me, because even I know that there are still graphical mods to be explored down the line. Ultimately, it doesn't bother me.
-
Edited by The Random: 3/22/2014 12:35:39 PM[quote]Do you care if games are visually downgraded compared to the demos?[/quote] It hasn't been a problem for me, but like you said I'd prefer that the developer just showed the actual version of their game instead of lying. [quote]PC gamers: Does it bother you that games are dragged down because of consoles? Two examples being Far Cry 3 and Skyrim.[/quote] Yes. It has become quite evident that PCs have been compromised of their quality just for some console limitations. That bothers me.
-
Yes it bothers me, PC games could be incredible, but they're held back by consoles, and I honestly don't care about a visual downgrade, unless they've showed nothing but cutscene footage and than I play the game and it looks like crap
-
Yes it does but I'm not really that bothered with it until it actually starts to distract me from the actual game.
-
Yea I care. Graphics ARE an important of the experience and they should have an idea of how powerful the hardware is before lying.
-
I don't like when the developer says what they know is blatantly untrue. With most reveals of course they show something polished and unrealistic for the entire game and we should know that, but fanboys and girls think that's what it's gonna look like the whole time and spout so much crap. I like good graphics but they don't have to be the first thing. I mean if the last of us looked worse I would probably still have played but I think the whole game was better for them. Graphics = not most important thing but a factor in the experience
-
I think Colonial Marines is kind of an outlier, in that the entire game was the result of a trainwreck of a development process. With regards to the other games, I'm inclined to give developers the benefit of the doubt. You show people the best game you have at the time; since it's still in a development process, there are going to be changes, and some of those changes may require a visual downgrade. That's the nature of development.
-
7 Repliesthis is all i think about when i hear people complain about graphics. I don't care so much about the graphics as i do gameplay, and in short, It is a bit upsetting to see the graphics get downgraded, but i carry on.
-
4 RepliesLol Far Cry and Skyrim aren't even graphic-wise impressive at all... Get better examples next time.
-
2 RepliesNo. Because according to everyone, I'm evil if I care about how a game's graphics look.
-
There were times where I felt that Reach was visually downgraded from the beta. Remember the beta Powerhouse? The beta Repeater? Beta Invasion? There was much disappointment. You're supposed to make the game better, not worse.
-
Edited by DE4THINC4RN4TE: 3/22/2014 10:01:58 AMYes and No to the demos. It really depends on the game itself and how big of a downgrade it is. In a multiplayer game it's not the end of the world, but in a story driven game I would care more since I'm looking to achieve a certain level of immersion.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Citadel Space: 3/22/2014 9:47:42 AMCan't wait for Star Citizen, now that's a PC game that's has been vowed to never be downgraded because of any limitations the PS4 and XB1 have. Assuming that it's announced to be on consoles. It's still being considered.
-
It will only bother me if the PC version of Dark Souls doesn't have the lighting reintroduced again. I can understand my PS3 not being able to run smoothly with that lighting, but I run nearly every other game on Ultra so should be able to cope with the lighting. Don't let me down From.
-
Graphically, all I give a shit about is frame rate and draw distance. If either of those is noticeably scaled down then I find it hard to enjoy the game.
-
I don't care if the graphics have been downgraded like in the case with Watch Dogs because we are still getting the game we were shown. I do care if they show us a product that is nothing like the final package at all.
-
9 RepliesSkyrim had an official hd dlc, so that's not too bad.
