The "yet another thread ruined by ABF" Thread

[A Black Falcon]

As a matter of fact, no. Just like no one else beside you have problems with the Metroid games. You just plain suck, ABF.

Uh, you didn't even bother to read the post, did you? No, I didn't think so. Because none of those have even the slightest thing to do with how good you are at the game. They're all about interface, OB1. Not how challenging the game is or how good I am at it, about the interface. But as I well know facts are irrelevant where you are concerned, so I'm not surprised that when I come up with legitimate points you just try to insult them away. Typical of you.

Pikmin is great and you are dumb, but let's not get into that right now. My POINT (something you never ever seem to grasp) was that the controls in the game would (on the PC) be extremely convoluted, but Nintendo was able to make it extremely simple while still being as effective as it ever could be. You're missing the point again, stupid!

I'm not missing your point, I'm disagreeing with it! Difference there. :) I do not think that on PC the controls would be very confusing. See, unlike you I have no problem using a 'mouse'. It's a very easy thing to use. And when a onscreen interface is well designed, I don't mind if there are a bunch of buttons and features. As I said, in some ways simplicity is good -- while I have played some wargames, their exceedingly complex button interfaces are confusing and I've never really grown to like them that much --, but strategy games? Realtime, that is? Most of the ones I have used are fine. And I'm sure that if it came from a competent developer Pikmin would be as well.

Now, Pikmin on consoles. As I've said a billion times now, of course when it's a console game you have to simplify. That's the nature of console games -- they are less complex. But still, I think they over-simplified. Gather Pikmin, pick things up, drag them around... it's not exactly deep. I definitely feel that the game would have been more fun with more depth. On GameCube, even -- I'm not talking about wanting it to be on PC. It could work fine on Cube with more complex gameplay. More complex gameplay doesn't necessarially mean a hideously complex control scheme, after all...

As in, Nintendo made it simple and effective, but too much so. And I'm talking about gameplay, not controls.

Each and every one of those games you mentioned control exactly like a FPS, fool!

*sigh*

So, sooo dumb...

First, Giants doesn't really control much like a FPS. Well it kind of does but because of the gameplay and controls it ends up being quite different. I know you disagree with my opinion that when you go to the third person viewpoint the whole game changes even if the gameplay doesn't, but I think differently. I really notice it in games with both cameras like JK... the game really plays very differently from the third person perspective. You disagree, obviously, but that's my opinion. What's that PC demo I was playing... oh, right Enclave. X-Box port really, from last year. Third-person action game with a first-person view. And just like JK it almost feels like a totally different game when you switch perspectives.

Oh, how about the old PC game Die By the Sword?

PC racing sims, the kinds that PCs have more than consoles.

They are really hard and I don't play them either, but I recognize them as a good genre for people who like that kind of thing... like flight sims. :)

Please, the Keen games are barely even platformers. Platformers have complex platform jumping. Keen does not have that very important aspect. And it's not about how many buttons there are, it's about the positioning of your digits.

Um, then all that jumping between platforms and dodging obstacles I did in Keen wasn't platforming? Thanks for telling me, because I'd never have known that jumping between platforms wasn't platform jumping...

Or how about (other shareware platform/action titles) Jazz Jackrabbit, Jill of the Jungle, Xargon, Cosmo's Cosmic Adventure, Realms of Chaos, Crystal Caves, Paganitzu, etc, etc... yeah, I think that Apogee and Epic published a couple of platformers. I cannot even begin to understand how you are denying that games which involve running around jumping between platforms, getting items, and defeating enemies aren't platformers, but it makes about as much sense as saying that Sonic isn't a platformer because you go faster and might jump less than you do in Mario 1. As in, absolutely none.

Every PC genre has been ported over to consoles, you dolt, but only a couple of console genres that only somewhat work on PCs have been ported over. You will never see a game like Mark of Kri, Devil May Cry, Virtua Fighter, Zelda, or Castlevania done on the PC because it's NOT POSSIBLE TO DO IT WELL. The PC is home to three or four original genres that can be done at least pretty well on consoles, but the reverse is not true. THAT is a fact and if you deny that then I refuse to waste any more time with someone of such incredible ignorance.

OB1, that is 100% false. There is no genre that the PC cannot do well, and you know it. PCs have gamepads just like consoles, after all! So saying that they cannot do it is idiotic and is as wrong as you could possibly be.

So, when you port a PC game to consoles you need to totally remake the game. New graphics, usually, new simple control scheme, simplification of some aspects of the game, etc... but when you go from console to PC? All you have to do is support higher resolution graphics and put in a customizable control scheme. And recommend whatever controller type is best for your game. Simpler and easier and that's why it happens so much more. Think about it. How many PC games get ported to consoles? An exceedingly small number. How many console games get ported to PC? A great many. That says a lot, and it's not just about the relative sizes of the PC and console markets. PCs are easier to port to.

Now, who don't fighting games get ported? Probably because they think the audience is small and because they don't want people playing them on keyboards. Zelda-type games? There are a few (Zelda games of course would never be on PC, and neither would be first-party Sony or Microsoft titles, and the other third parties really don't make many games in this genre...), certainly. If you're talking about adventure-RPGs or action-RPGs, I could mention King's Quest VIII, the Quest for Glory series, maybe Ultima (IX? That one was third-person 3d...), Hype, BG&E... not many as I said but there are a few, if you stretch the genre definition a bit. If you stretch it farther, add stuff like Diablo. Anyway, there are a few.

I don't know anything about Mark of Kri or DMC, really, so I can't say much about those games. Castlevania? 3d platform-action, right? Kinda... anyway, most 3d platformers on PC are console ports, that is true. Croc 1 and 2, the Rayman games, etc. Not the strongest genre on the PC, sure, but there are a couple. Oh, how about Tomb Raider? Though that's really an action-adventure, it should be mentioned somewhere here. :)

And those PC developers complain when they try to port over games that were made with convoluted controls and are not talented enough to make them work efficiently. An example of a PC developer that is talented enough is Ion Storm, who very successfully ported over Deus Ex to the PS2, one of the most complex FPS/RPGs out there. And the controls worked amazingly well (except for the analog sensitivity and the fact that you couldn't switch the stick movements), a hundred times more efficient and clever than the PC controls.

I've only played the Deus Ex demo, but I don't remember it having an overly complex interface... now System Shock 2, that had a complex interface, but that game is also in a large part an RPG. :)