[Napper Hawkins]

Originally Posted by Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it wasn't amazing, but it was a pretty damn good game and a very good "experience".

also has the honour of being one of the few games with a truly ****ing hilarious sidekick

He was the only good thing about that game.

Thought it was ****e personally.

Holding the torch on the enemy for what felt like an eternity before you could even shoot them got old quick.

[Sir Digby Chicken Caesar]

indeed, who wants new or interesting mechanics into an otherwise stale genre

NOT ME

[Corkfeen]

Originally Posted by Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

indeed, who wants new or interesting mechanics into an otherwise stale genre

NOT ME

It would have been far better if it was an fps. Alan Wake could be a Marine turned writer fighting off hoards of super soldier. Sounds innovative.
To return to serious chat on the game, I remember when I got it and think I didn't give it enough enough of a chance as I was sick and stoned off painkillers when I was playing it. Was it just me or was it notoriously easly to run out of ammunition? Now that's a true survival horror...

Edit: Why does it seem as if there's going to be a random PC vs Console argument? People relax and stop all this sniping.....

[hooradiation]

Originally Posted by EnterNow

What is it your trying to say here exactly? That a games quality remains the same regardless of the platform? I generally don't understand your confusion.

My confusion mostly stems from the existence of people, with a straight face, saying "such and such was ruined by consolitis". I think it's a short hand for "I did not care for that game", dressed up in a persecution fantasy.

I mean, since when was "I didn't like that game" insufficient? At what point did people need to find a new word that lays the blame for whatever they don't like about a certain game at the feet of some unseen and sinister force is actively tainting and corrupting?
Or am I just mental for going "whelp, that's not for me"?

Absolutely it is one of the strengths of PC gaming, but the two games I specifically mentioned are a third person shooter and RPG genres have typically lent themselves very well to K/M play, so you shouldn't have to buy another peripheral to play them at their best.

Right tool for the job, really. I mean, a USB 360 pad is pretty cheap why not use it if it'll do the job better?
Also, 3rd person shooter and RPG games have also lent themselves very well to Joypad play too, I don't think claiming precedent is going to do much

And while I'm remembering, wasn't the KB&M thing on the original Dead Space got to do with the mouse being artificially and intentionally hobbled so as to match the console experience?
If they've gone and done it on purpose then I'm not sure it constitutes a lack of proper care and attention being given

Tell me how do you think versions Fifa or Batman AC that played best on a Kinect or Move would be recieved?

If that were possible, I'm not going to lie to you. I'd be all over that.

There are many silly demands made of developers, however some such as making Dead Space play better with a K/M (which they did for the sequel) or PC gaming staples such as adding advanced configuration options etc are not.

You know, I've never bothered with any of the advanced configuration options in any PC game I've played.
If it's running sluggish and I can just pick a simple drop down and go "Medium" and not have to worry about rejiggering twenty options then fine by me.
The less dicking about I have to do to get to the part where I actually play the game, the better.

[Napper Hawkins]

Originally Posted by Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

indeed, who wants new or interesting mechanics into an otherwise stale genre

NOT ME

I do. But new and interesting should also be good.

Alan Wake was ****. Sorry.

Hammy acting from the main character, story that didn't really go anywhere and the action was beyond predictable.

Played through the whole damn thing just to see if it would get better. It didn't.

Got it free with my Xbox, ****ing glad I didn't waste money on it.

Also, that's just my opinion. I'm sure there are games I like that you don't, so relax.

[Hercule]

I haven't seen a good xbox360 to PC port (or at least I can't think of one) Especially from microsoft game studios - who improve cripple any ports with "games for windows live" bull**** and black bars.

As with LA Noire delayed release, this is a last ditch attempt to bleed the wallets of the gaming population.

I expect to see it in the Steam summer sale for 12 quid - might pick it up then if I am bored and havent heard bad things about it

[Magill]

Originally Posted by Napper Hawkins

I do. But new and interesting should also be good.

Alan Wake was ****. Sorry.

Hammy acting from the main character, story that didn't really go anywhere and the action was beyond predictable.

Played through the whole damn thing just to see if it would get better. It didn't.

Got it free with my Xbox, ****ing glad I didn't waste money on it.

Also, that's just my opinion. I'm sure there are games I like that you don't, so relax.

Exactly !! Stop stating your opinion likes its fact !!! Jesus.

[gizmo]

Originally Posted by Hercule

I haven't seen a good xbox360 to PC port (or at least I can't think of one) Especially from microsoft game studios - who improve cripple any ports with "games for windows live" bull**** and black bars.

In what game?

I'd also wager that none of the games you had trouble with were developed by an MGS studio.

Originally Posted by Hercule

As with LA Noire delayed release, this is a last ditch attempt to bleed the wallets of the gaming population.

Or perhaps to bring the game to a wider audience?

As for why it didn't get a simultaneous release, well you're aware of the development process of the game, right? It was in the gaming news a wee bit over the last few months.

EDIT: Here's an interview with Aki Järvilehto, EVP at Remedy. Nice bit of info with regard to the Steamworks integration but there's already been some negative comments with regard the lack of DLC being bundled in. At the end of the day it'll all come down to price of the game itself I guess.

[SuprSi]

I just finished this about a week ago and absolutely loved it. I found the story interesting, the graphics excellent, the sound effects superb, and I thought it was very original. The enemies were varied and in some cases very spooky, and the fact that most of it is done in the woods at night makes it a very involving story.

Excellent game and highly recommended.

[richymcdermott]

i wonder would my pc be able to run alan wake , couldnt care less if it wont run on max settings

[Grumpypants]

Alan Wake is a good game, i really enjoyed it for about 75% of it but then it started to become a bit boring, you knew the second it got dark the enemies are coming, you kill them and the darkness pulls back and you move on.

But overall the idea was good, i played to the end to see how it finished and it had some interesting concepts with the light sources.

On the PC V Console thing i was talking to a developer of an upcoming massive RPG and i asked him was there much difference between making the Xbox version and the PC version he just laughed and said an Xbox is a PC you can stick in a new graphics card and improve the look but that's about it, the only difference in the process is there is a much higher standard imposed by Microsoft & sony to get game through the quality control on the consoles.

[Retr0gamer]

Originally Posted by hooradiation

And while I'm remembering, wasn't the KB&M thing on the original Dead Space got to do with the mouse being artificially and intentionally hobbled so as to match the console experience?
If they've gone and done it on purpose then I'm not sure it constitutes a lack of proper care and attention being given

That was the excuse. Any amount of playtesting would have told them that they had made a big mistake and had made the game unplayable on the PC. However more than likely they just did a lazy rush job port and didn't bother to even configure the controls to work well with a mouse.

Either way it was down to a lazy port, which is a genuine grievance for people when it affects how a game plays so dramatically.

Originally Posted by hooradiation

You know, I've never bothered with any of the advanced configuration options in any PC game I've played.
If it's running sluggish and I can just pick a simple drop down and go "Medium" and not have to worry about rejiggering twenty options then fine by me.
The less dicking about I have to do to get to the part where I actually play the game, the better.

Well then that's just you. A lot of other people like to mess around with advanced graphics options to get a game to run better. I've found that games that only off the low, medium and high options to be stupidly optimised. High would have ridiculously high system requirements while medium drops texture resolution to silly levels while keeping anti aliasing on. I know myself I can run the game with full texture resolution if I turn AA off since I don't need it when I'm running games in 1600x1200.

If a game is ported well then it will give you the lazy option of low medium and high settings while also having advanced graphical options. It's really not that much effort to add in.

[hooradiation]

Originally Posted by Retr0gamer

That was the excuse. Any amount of playtesting would have told them that they had made a big mistake and had made the game unplayable on the PC. However more than likely they just did a lazy rush job port and didn't bother to even configure the controls to work well with a mouse.

I do love how you pretend to know the inner workings of games companies and present your theories as fact.
Amuses me no end.

I'm certain you're correct and the game simply fell out the door without anyone ever looking at it, or thinking about what they were doing.
That's exactly what happened.

Originally Posted by Retr0gamer

Well then that's just you. A lot of other people like to mess around with advanced graphics options to get a game to run better.

Playing games and not wasting time fiddling with settings for a few more frames a second, is what I'd rather spend my time doing.
Astounding, I know.
Not that it'd make the slightest bit of difference in how the game plays if I did spend all that time toggling settings.

[Retr0gamer]

Originally Posted by hooradiation

I do love how you pretend to know the inner workings of games companies and present your theories as fact.
Amuses me no end.

I'm certain you're correct and the game simply fell out the door without anyone ever looking at it, or thinking about what they were doing.
That's exactly what happened.

I'm not a sheep, I don't believe the PR BS that the companies give to the press and expect to be presented as news verbatim. I'd rather come to my own conclusions and theories. I think it's a but of healthy skepticism is healthier and I'm pretty sure you've no better explanation how such a glaring design flaw got through QA.

[johnny_ultimate]

In fairness, while optimal settings are certainly a nice bonus, there are plenty of people guilty of overobsessing with tweaking. Looking at the Batman Arkham City thread, there's at least a few posters who have posted about various DX11 settings or whatever several times while barely mentioning the game itself. It's great if you can get a game running nicely, but there comes a point when you have to step back and just play the ****ing thing.

It's kind of like arguing that you should never watch a DVD because the quality is lower than it would be in the cinema. The best is nicest if at all possible, but ultimately the content will be pretty much identical either way. It's only when one version is crippled - whether it be Dead Space on PC, or the crappily ported Oshima films on DVD - that it's worth getting a little worked up over. But it's not a personal insult - just business.