Microsoft more or less own gaming on PC, if they could put some sort of xbox emulator in windows I think it could kill the Playstation altogether. Micrsoft would have it's customers on a purchasing track that could go xbox>windows which opens them up customers to the entire suit of Microsoft products.
Maybe instead of the term 'consolitis' we should be talking about gaming hipsterism. I think what people (not necessarily in this thread) are claiming is a dumbing-down, or a lowering of standards, is in fact a case of gaming hipsters getting uppity about the medium not being quite the same as it used to be.
Case in point & apt because the two games were already mentioned: in other forums, I've seen clear cases of people knocking Skyrim with comments such as "oh, well, Morrowind was much better. Far more complex and YOU probably didn't play it" and the like. The overriding theory being not so much Skyrim is dumbed down, but the idea that Morrowind was what the cooler kids played back in the day.
The PC version of the original had a substantially different tactical combat system, that was removed from the Dragons Age 2. Not removed because of consoles of course (after all the original was multiplatform), but it is an example of a lack of thought put into how the PC version plays out (ie. not very well in the case of DA 2 as the game had no controller support and the new combat system was 'clunky' with a K/M to put it kindly). Playing Dead space 2 with a K/M was a similiarly unplesant experience, but the sequel a massive improvement in this regard.
Most PC gamers would be more than are satisfied with a decent level of graphics / keybinding custom settings, more polished textures,unobtrusive DRM, and a UI / gameplay that plays nice with the platform primary control devices. Why the hell is that so unreasonable about that exactly?
Sure you do get will get some that make absolutely ridiculous demands of developer (like as 25 sq KM Skyrim be cover in Ultra HD textures), but to try and portray that as some sort of norm is very disingenuous of you.#
Probably mostly true, although I think with any RPG where the sequel changes aspects of stats /eveling/gameplay you will find an almost equal number of people who love / hate the changes. Mass effect being a great example of this. The one exception appears to be the lthe level scaling in Oblivion, now everyone hated that
good god no
I love the way you fixated on the utterly subjective part (DA 2 is better than Origins) and ignored everything else.
And what, exactly, does this have to do with this mythological phenomenon of 'consolitis'?
And more to the point since when have any of these been a problem? Did I miss something? Am I just getting special versions of these games in comparison to everyone else?
I certainly haven't experienced anything to suggest the above are an issue.
I'm all for developers simplifying systems and removing stuff that was overblown or needless. However when it's at the expense of complexity then I don't like it. It's when games are simplified and lose the complexity that people call it consolitis. An example of this is Bioshock which lost the excellent RPG mechanics of System Shock 2 meaning there was no choice in how your character developed. However some of the streamlining did work like getting rid of the controversial weapon degradation. I wouldn't really call that consolitis more a failed experiment. I do miss more complex games though, currently playing through the first system shock and loving all the little systems and tweaking you can do. Streamlining and simplifiaction is a good thing though just some times it goes too far.
There's also the problems of games compromising becasue of the hardware they are on, which would definitely constitute consolitis. An example would be Thief deadly shadows and Deus Ex 2. By no means bad games but both suffered form a console being the host platform. Gone were the sprawling non-linear levels of the originals and are replaced with tiny linear levels separated with loading screens. Still you don't see this anymore since the current generation are more than capable of these type of games without compromises. If anyone really believes that games don't get compromised because the host platform is a console then check out warren spectres lectures with the lead designer of Deus Ex 2. However as I said you don't really see it anymore. I think that the lack of complexity in games these days is a budget thing. It's too risk to risk complexity and alienate players due to the huge financial risks involved. However we've still got stuff like what Obsidian and Bethesda are doing and Dark Souls, so it's not like it's gone for good.
tl;dr, it's a stupid term foran industry that is trying to streamline complexity rather than remove it.
One of my biggest gripes with the consolitis term is how misused it is by so many people. Not only when it simply doesn't apply, such as the current context of Alan Wake, but when it is used as an excuse for simply poor design. Take the first reports of Counter-Strike: GO for example, the ones where it was claimed the game would feature no recoil. This triggered outraged amongst many gamers, all of them screaming bloody murder about how it was a "dumbed down console game", a "****ty console port" and how it suffered from "consolitis". It boggles my mind how people can actually think this. How many major console FPS games feature no recoil? The UI in Skyrim is another example, this was also criticised for being consolised but again, outside of a cross aspect used which worked with a d-pad, the most of the issues with it appear to be simply down to poor design rather than an subversive consolisation.
And I blame gamers for not supporting the games they want to see. You often hear of people saying "vote with your wallet" but that only ever seems to come up when they're saying they're not going to buy something. Where was the voting when it came to fantastic titles such as Rayman Origins? Only 200k sales so far there. The 1m sales for Bulletstorm, a game which despite featuring some of the nastier features prevalent in current console games, was still an incredibly fun old skool shooter at heart. Then there's more recent examples such as Hard Reset, Serious Sam 3 and The Witcher 2. How many people haven't bought the former two yet complain about consolitis? Too busy playing Skyrim? Waiting for it to reach the bargin bin? Picking it up for a fraction of the RRP from some .ru key site? Waiting on the end of year Steam sales? Short on cash so going to pirate it instead? Fair enough, just don't be surprised when a publisher announces there won't be a sequel or is changing the followup to appeal to a wider audience. At the end of the day, support works both ways.
Despite the increase in piracy on consoles it is still dwarfed by PC piracy.
I reckon they're moving in this direction for Windows 8 and beyond. The Live service will be tightly integrated into the gaming hub and there'll be a proper MS App Store which may also feature titles in there, all of which is a good start. Unfortunately you'll still have the same subset of PC gamers who will scoff at such moves and refuse to buy games that are on Steam but at the end of day, they'll remain the minority, albeit a vocal one.
Cranky much try?, try reading my posts more closely, focusing on the bit where I pretty well state that I don't believe in 'consolities', but firmly believe in existance of sub optimal PC versions of games. It has everything to do with the discussion because it is exactly those kinds of issues that are the reason that certain games tend labeled as such.
And plenty of people have complained both about the Dead Space controls and that the simplification of Dragons Age 2 combat system did not translate especially well to a K/M.
As to whether or not you got a special versions, I don't know, perhaps you did, or perhaps some people are less easily pleased than yourself.
Since I dont have an Xbox360 I'll be picking this up. Hopeful the deluxe edition thing happens. Would love it.
What is the included DLC like good/bad/indifferent?
jesus some people really get their knickers in a twist with the whole console/pc debate, of course consoles are holding back game development on pc (at least multiplatform development) they have 6 year old hardware how couldnt they be.
Also dont put something up about DA2 being better than DAO if you dont want people to call you up on it, im a life long bioware fan and that game was a big steaming pile of horse ****, they took a decent rpg (origins) and turned it into a weird hack and slash coolade hybrid where awesome stuff happened in the same dungeon a hundred times over
Then i'd put forward that people really do just use it as a catch all term for "things i don't like", given that we've got about five different definitions of what it is.
Which goes back to it just being something that exists in peoples heads and not a real, quantifiable phenomenon.
And to that I'd say "buy a joypad". There are plenty of USB ones, the 360 ones springs to mind straight away.
If people see no problem is using a joystick for flying aircraft in games like Battlefield then I refuse to listen to people complain that KB&M is suboptimal for some multiformat titles.
This is supposed to be one of those things that is a PC strength, play to it.
Or the "minority" you claim are making ridiculous demands of the developer aren't as small as you'd have me believe.
Yes, you've called me on the my entirely subjective opinion on a video game, well done.
I'm sure your "life long" status as a fan of bioware served you well in this pointless endeavour.
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.
Yes, a finished game, gameplay wise will likely be as playable on a console as it would be on pc. For me, the term means the games is designed in such a way that it removes either some graphical grunt, or general scope/complexity to allow it to run on console hardware.
But it only really applies if a games coding direction changes during coding, such as Alan Wake - & such examples are few & far between. Does it apply to Crysis 1? Not really for me, it's just an example of a console doing a damned decent job at running a high end pc game. Sure it doesn't look the same, but who cares? The gameplay is intact
I am not really disagreeing with you on that score though, as that is essentially what I have been saying all along. Most disquiet is caused by developers not fufilling the basic expectations of the functionality a PC game should have, such as a reasonable degree of customisation ability or have had controls simplfied (Which can be percieved as 'consolised' although it is usually for one of two reasons, either because not enough time was spent properly optimizing the PC controls, or it the developers intention was to make the game more accessible/improve playability, neither of whiich have anything to do with nothing to do with console hardware itself).
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. Obviously certain genres such as driving game are never going to be as good without specialised peripherals. Tell me how do you think versions Fifa or Batman AC that played best on a Kinect or Move would be recieved?
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.