Thomas Eshuis wrote:That's just silly pc vs console wars nonsense.
I don't bother with that. The dick measuring contest of which is better; PC or console, doesn't interest me. It's when developers don't take into account one side of the market when developing or porting their games, that get's me irritated. And that goes both ways.

This is hardly the same as "dumbing down" though. It's just lazy programming.

Animavore wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:That's just silly pc vs console wars nonsense.
I don't bother with that. The dick measuring contest of which is better; PC or console, doesn't interest me. It's when developers don't take into account one side of the market when developing or porting their games, that get's me irritated. And that goes both ways.

This is hardly the same as "dumbing down" though. It's just lazy programming.

But it sometimes results in the game being dumbed down, in the sense that you have less control options, or even gameplay options. And this is even more obvious when the previous version was designed for the PC or did compensate for PC use.

From what I can make out from lessons from Portal 2 the real culprit behind "dumbing down", especially as a game gets more popular, is play-testing/testers. The more popular something becomes the more accessible they have to make it and the broader the play-tester pool they have to create. When you get a lot of people complaining they don't really understand what they are supposed to be doing, or the game is too hard, that's when the dumbing down starts.

You can see this even in games which have never been on console like the Civilisation series.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:That's just silly pc vs console wars nonsense.
I don't bother with that. The dick measuring contest of which is better; PC or console, doesn't interest me. It's when developers don't take into account one side of the market when developing or porting their games, that get's me irritated. And that goes both ways.

This is hardly the same as "dumbing down" though. It's just lazy programming.

But it sometimes results in the game being dumbed down, in the sense that you have less control options, or even gameplay options. And this is even more obvious when the previous version was designed for the PC or did compensate for PC use.

I still wouldn't call that dumbing down, bad porting sure. Dumbing down tends to me to imply that the game is being made easier or less complex so a market of nongamers or not as "hardcore" gamers can play it.

You see it a lot in the retro game community in that regard. Overly complex RPG gets things streamlined and reaches a wider market and older fans lament the dumbing down. Often blowing smoke up their arses about how clever they were to have been playing back when it was a real game.

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Being simplified or streamlined is not always dumbing down.

Not always, but when it comes to a PC game becoming big on consoles; that's generally what it means.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Does it? Sounds like a bit of a leap based on preconceived ideas about console gaming. It is just as likely the refinements would have happened console or no. Because the mechanics were clunky even if people enjoyed them.

Refinements That's good. What was clunky about The Witcher's alchemy/menus/inventory?

DarthHelmet86 wrote:It should be pointed out that without the console market there was no Witcher 3.

I fully understand why it happens; there's waaay more money in the console market.

If the consoles are not involved there is no Witcher 3 as it is, we can lay it out that simply. We just cannot afford it, because consoles allow us to go higher in terms of the possible or achievable sales; have a higher budget for the game, and invest it all into developing this huge, gigantic world.

I don't believe there would be no TW3 without consoles though. They did really well with The Witcher release. It would just be different.

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Being simplified or streamlined is not always dumbing down.

Not always, but when it comes to a PC game becoming big on consoles; that's generally what it means.

Lol. No. This is an accusation by people who prefer the old, esoteric, and clunky systems, because they made the game 'special', level at console gamers, who are, like, stupid and shit, which has never been justified.

Strawman. A lot of PC gamers are also console gamers and I've never said they are all stupid.

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Being simplified or streamlined is not always dumbing down.

Not always, but when it comes to a PC game becoming big on consoles; that's generally what it means.

Lol. No. This is an accusation by people who prefer the old, esoteric, and clunky systems, because they made the game 'special', level at console gamers, who are, like, stupid and shit, which has never been justified.

Strawman. A lot of PC gamers are also console gamers and I've never said they are all stupid.

It's not a strawman. I see it all the time in comment sections of video game articles. Games are dumbed down for 'casuals', meaning 'console players' (because PC players are all hardcore apparently).

Animavore wrote:From what I can make out from lessons from Portal 2 the real culprit behind "dumbing down", especially as a game gets more popular, is play-testing/testers. The more popular something becomes the more accessible they have to make it and the broader the play-tester pool they have to create. When you get a lot of people complaining they don't really understand what they are supposed to be doing, or the game is too hard, that's when the dumbing down starts.

You can see this even in games which have never been on console like the Civilisation series.

Exactly. Its to do with popularity. The Witcher was a pretty niche PC game that came from nowhere, it did really well but nothing compared to what it can be on the consoles. Of course these games have to be 'streamlined' for the masses.

I can't comment on Civ. It never grabbed me in the first place but I take the point that PC games aren't immune, even if I can't think of an example off hand.

Briton wrote:

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Being simplified or streamlined is not always dumbing down.

Not always, but when it comes to a PC game becoming big on consoles; that's generally what it means.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Does it? Sounds like a bit of a leap based on preconceived ideas about console gaming. It is just as likely the refinements would have happened console or no. Because the mechanics were clunky even if people enjoyed them.

Refinements That's good. What was clunky about The Witcher's alchemy/menus/inventory?

DarthHelmet86 wrote:It should be pointed out that without the console market there was no Witcher 3.

I fully understand why it happens; there's waaay more money in the console market.

If the consoles are not involved there is no Witcher 3 as it is, we can lay it out that simply. We just cannot afford it, because consoles allow us to go higher in terms of the possible or achievable sales; have a higher budget for the game, and invest it all into developing this huge, gigantic world.

I don't believe there would be no TW3 without consoles though. They did really well with The Witcher release. It would just be different.

I barely remember The Witcher 2, like the first game I played before they dropped the huge Enhanced versions and never went back after spending a few hours in them not having any fun. I remember the menus being slow to navigate and some parts of the gameplay being overly clunky but without replaying I can't tell you the exact parts. I do remember that The Witcher 3 felt pretty much the same in how it handled alchemy and the inventory. But without the symbols for all the regents? Maybe they are still there been awhile since I have played 3 either really.

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Not always, but when it comes to a PC game becoming big on consoles; that's generally what it means.

Lol. No. This is an accusation by people who prefer the old, esoteric, and clunky systems, because they made the game 'special', level at console gamers, who are, like, stupid and shit, which has never been justified.

Strawman. A lot of PC gamers are also console gamers and I've never said they are all stupid.

It's not a strawman. I see it all the time in comment sections of video game articles. Games are dumbed down for 'casuals', meaning 'console players' (because PC players are all hardcore apparently).

It is a strawman when you use it in reply to what I've said.

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Lol. No. This is an accusation by people who prefer the old, esoteric, and clunky systems, because they made the game 'special', level at console gamers, who are, like, stupid and shit, which has never been justified.

Strawman. A lot of PC gamers are also console gamers and I've never said they are all stupid.

It's not a strawman. I see it all the time in comment sections of video game articles. Games are dumbed down for 'casuals', meaning 'console players' (because PC players are all hardcore apparently).

It is a strawman when you use it in reply to what I've said.

Soz. Too used to dealing with the more negative end of the PC base I guess.

DarthHelmet86 wrote: Overly complex RPG...

In your opinion it was overly complex. Obviously not for someone who sees it as being dumbed down once it has been 'simplified and streamlined'.

DarthHelmet86 wrote: ...gets things streamlined and reaches a wider market...

Well basically that's just another way of saying dumbed down.

Yes cause Save Vs Wands for dragon breath attacks is not overly complex or a system in need of some reworking so that it makes logical sense. Or the addition of automapping so players don't need to bring graph paper. That post had nothing to do with The Witcher by the way, that isn't retro in the fucking slightest.

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Strawman. A lot of PC gamers are also console gamers and I've never said they are all stupid.

It's not a strawman. I see it all the time in comment sections of video game articles. Games are dumbed down for 'casuals', meaning 'console players' (because PC players are all hardcore apparently).

It is a strawman when you use it in reply to what I've said.

Soz. Too used to dealing with the more negative end of the PC base I guess.

Actually if you are really a hardcore gamer I think you'd need to have a PC, PS4 and an Xbox One. I prefer the PC myself because many games I really like just aren't available on consoles and I like also like the flexibility of the games and modding. This is at last coming to consoles though, at least in some part.

Consoles are better for playing certain games though; I prefer sports action games and arcade racers on console for sure. The ones that confuse me are those like Mafia where part would be better on console and part on PC.

Animavore wrote:

Im excited.

In all honesty the systems I have are a PC, a WiiU, and a PS4. The first two get played a lot. The PS4 is a designated Blu-ray player essentially at this point.

I must be the most hardcore gamer of them all. With 8 consoles, 3 hand held devices, a high end gaming pc and an arcade cabinet.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Yes cause Save Vs Wands for dragon breath attacks is not overly complex or a system in need of some reworking so that it makes logical sense.

Strawmen are everywhere.

DarthHelmet86 wrote: Or the addition of automapping so players don't need to bring graph paper.

I don't think the addition of auto-mapping was seen as dumbing down when it came to personal computers; more an added feature. I hated having to draw maps when playing the early dungeon crawlers.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:That post had nothing to do with The Witcher by the way, that isn't retro in the fucking slightest.

Really? Thanks for letting me know.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:I must be the most hardcore gamer of them all. With 8 consoles, 3 hand held devices, a high end gaming pc and an arcade cabinet.

If you could only have one machine (for video gaming), which would you chose?

There are 3 things preventing me from buying a PS4:
1. No or very little backwards compatability.
2. The price.
3. The fact that you can't upgrade them but have to buy a new one every couple of years.

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Yes cause Save Vs Wands for dragon breath attacks is not overly complex or a system in need of some reworking so that it makes logical sense.

Strawmen are everywhere.

DarthHelmet86 wrote: Or the addition of automapping so players don't need to bring graph paper.

I don't think the addition of auto-mapping was seen as dumbing down when it came to personal computers; more an added feature. I hated having to draw maps when playing the early dungeon crawlers.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:That post had nothing to do with The Witcher by the way, that isn't retro in the fucking slightest.

Really? Thanks for letting me know.

No strawman anywhere. Me describing the actual thoughts behind what I typed can never be a strawman. By the way those are actual things I have seen people complain about being changed as dumbing down gaming. They aren't of course but just like refinement in games today being called dumbing down it happens.

If I had to pick one system? My PS1. Nothing beats the feel of that controller.