The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Total Overdose'.
Another potential Far Cry or Half Life?
Page:
Chippxero wrote:
> odwyer wrote:
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
>
> Your talking about something different to me, i'm talking about the
> conversion not weather the end product was fun which your talking
> about. I mean small things like distructable objects they are poorly
> rendered because of a lack of effort went in to them, or look at
> light bulbs, they are blocky for no reason, they were like this on a
> console because they had to be but when something is taken to a PC
> things like that can be improved, but they just didn't bother.
>
>
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
>
> I haven't got a clue as i wouldn't bother with the console versions
> of a PC game as something is bound to be taken out and graphics
> lowered, but it may still end up being a good game compared to
> regular console ones.
Vice City was made (for the PC) in 2003 with '2003 style' graphics.
It wasn’t because of lack of effort, it was because in 2003 things were slightly blocky back then.
In all games.
In the 2 years since it was made, things have come a long way.
> odwyer wrote:
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
>
> Your talking about something different to me, i'm talking about the
> conversion not weather the end product was fun which your talking
> about. I mean small things like distructable objects they are poorly
> rendered because of a lack of effort went in to them, or look at
> light bulbs, they are blocky for no reason, they were like this on a
> console because they had to be but when something is taken to a PC
> things like that can be improved, but they just didn't bother.
>
>
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
>
> I haven't got a clue as i wouldn't bother with the console versions
> of a PC game as something is bound to be taken out and graphics
> lowered, but it may still end up being a good game compared to
> regular console ones.
Vice City was made (for the PC) in 2003 with '2003 style' graphics.
It wasn’t because of lack of effort, it was because in 2003 things were slightly blocky back then.
In all games.
In the 2 years since it was made, things have come a long way.
odwyer wrote:
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
Your talking about something different to me, i'm talking about the conversion not weather the end product was fun which your talking about. I mean small things like distructable objects they are poorly rendered because of a lack of effort went in to them, or look at light bulbs, they are blocky for no reason, they were like this on a console because they had to be but when something is taken to a PC things like that can be improved, but they just didn't bother.
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
I haven't got a clue as i wouldn't bother with the console versions of a PC game as something is bound to be taken out and graphics lowered, but it may still end up being a good game compared to regular console ones.
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
Your talking about something different to me, i'm talking about the conversion not weather the end product was fun which your talking about. I mean small things like distructable objects they are poorly rendered because of a lack of effort went in to them, or look at light bulbs, they are blocky for no reason, they were like this on a console because they had to be but when something is taken to a PC things like that can be improved, but they just didn't bother.
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
I haven't got a clue as i wouldn't bother with the console versions of a PC game as something is bound to be taken out and graphics lowered, but it may still end up being a good game compared to regular console ones.
odwyer wrote:
> Chippxero wrote:
> Vice city and GTA 3 were done teribly, alot of people got crap fps
> and
> laggy play out of them, SA is ok but thats because time was spent on
> that one to make improvements over the console versions.
>
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
Your hardware was probably up to spec then. When it was first released, it chugged
> Never had I played a game like this before, where you are allowed so
> much freedom. I thought it was quality. Was not poorly done at all.
That's a gameplay design issue, not a hardware / console / pc issue.
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
>
> Games like Far Cry, Call of Duty and Half Life were on consoles years
> after they were released on the PC.
Far Cry - specific version written for consoles, cut down from pc version.
Call of Duty - specific version written for consoles, cut down from pc version.
Half Life - Not the most hardware intensive pc game around (modded quake (2?) engine, so easy to scale down)
Doom 3 - scaled down (impressive though from what I've seen)
Half Life 2 - scaled down (again, impressive)
Xbox written Thief 3 to pc, not scaled up to take advanate of the hardware. Hence, you get console limitations in levels and design (small maps, not a great view distance, small rooms of limited complexity)
You get the general gist.
> Chippxero wrote:
> Vice city and GTA 3 were done teribly, alot of people got crap fps
> and
> laggy play out of them, SA is ok but thats because time was spent on
> that one to make improvements over the console versions.
>
> I disagree.
>
> GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly
> because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last
> December).
Your hardware was probably up to spec then. When it was first released, it chugged
> Never had I played a game like this before, where you are allowed so
> much freedom. I thought it was quality. Was not poorly done at all.
That's a gameplay design issue, not a hardware / console / pc issue.
> So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are
> poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box
> means what?
>
> Games like Far Cry, Call of Duty and Half Life were on consoles years
> after they were released on the PC.
Far Cry - specific version written for consoles, cut down from pc version.
Call of Duty - specific version written for consoles, cut down from pc version.
Half Life - Not the most hardware intensive pc game around (modded quake (2?) engine, so easy to scale down)
Doom 3 - scaled down (impressive though from what I've seen)
Half Life 2 - scaled down (again, impressive)
Xbox written Thief 3 to pc, not scaled up to take advanate of the hardware. Hence, you get console limitations in levels and design (small maps, not a great view distance, small rooms of limited complexity)
You get the general gist.
Chippxero wrote:
> Vice city and GTA 3 were done teribly, alot of people got crap fps and
> laggy play out of them, SA is ok but thats because time was spent on
> that one to make improvements over the console versions.
I disagree.
GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last December).
Never had I played a game like this before, where you are allowed so much freedom. I thought it was quality. Was not poorly done at all.
So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box means what?
Games like Far Cry, Call of Duty and Half Life were on consoles years after they were released on the PC.
> Vice city and GTA 3 were done teribly, alot of people got crap fps and
> laggy play out of them, SA is ok but thats because time was spent on
> that one to make improvements over the console versions.
I disagree.
GTA Vice City is the best game I've ever played on the PC. Mainly because this was the first GTA game I had ever tried (last December).
Never had I played a game like this before, where you are allowed so much freedom. I thought it was quality. Was not poorly done at all.
So if that's the general theory, that games meant for consoles are poorer, then the reverse - PC games converted to Playstation/X-Box means what?
Games like Far Cry, Call of Duty and Half Life were on consoles years after they were released on the PC.
Vice city and GTA 3 were done teribly, alot of people got crap fps and laggy play out of them, SA is ok but thats because time was spent on that one to make improvements over the console versions.
Damarus wrote:
> Driv3r adverts were on constantly. That is by no means a good game.
>
> I always use the Console Port + PC = Crap formula ad I
> don't think it's failed me once.
>
> Name me one good port?
Vice City, San Andreas, GTA III
All on the Playstation before the PC.
> Driv3r adverts were on constantly. That is by no means a good game.
>
> I always use the Console Port + PC = Crap formula ad I
> don't think it's failed me once.
>
> Name me one good port?
Vice City, San Andreas, GTA III
All on the Playstation before the PC.
Driv3r adverts were on constantly. That is by no means a good game.
I always use the Console Port + PC = Crap formula ad I don't think it's failed me once.
Name me one good port?
I always use the Console Port + PC = Crap formula ad I don't think it's failed me once.
Name me one good port?
Pandaemonium wrote:
> odwyer wrote:
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
>
> True.
>
> Until you see the Total Overdose trailer video, and come to the
> conclusion that it looks pretty naff.
It's also advertised on TV.
A San Andreas-esqe advert.
Adds more smoke to the fire that is could be good, although like you suggest, it might not.
That's why I asked.
> odwyer wrote:
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
>
> True.
>
> Until you see the Total Overdose trailer video, and come to the
> conclusion that it looks pretty naff.
It's also advertised on TV.
A San Andreas-esqe advert.
Adds more smoke to the fire that is could be good, although like you suggest, it might not.
That's why I asked.
odwyer wrote:
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
True.
Until you see the Total Overdose trailer video, and come to the conclusion that it looks pretty naff.
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
True.
Until you see the Total Overdose trailer video, and come to the conclusion that it looks pretty naff.
odwyer wrote:
> Far Cry
> Half life 2
> GTA San Andreas.
>
> 3 games on DVD Rom.
>
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
1) Far Cry came on 5CD's as well as the DVD version.
2) There was also a CD version of HL2.
3) San Andreas is crap.
Your conclusion is null and void.
> Far Cry
> Half life 2
> GTA San Andreas.
>
> 3 games on DVD Rom.
>
> Hardly crap are they? So it's pretty much a safe bet that this game
> could be the same.
>
> That's how I came to the conclusion.
>
> Pretty obvious really.
1) Far Cry came on 5CD's as well as the DVD version.
2) There was also a CD version of HL2.
3) San Andreas is crap.
Your conclusion is null and void.
Page: