nightwraith40k nightwraith40k

What do you think about LucasArt terrible excuse for not having The Force Unleashed on PC?

▼

What do you think about LucasArt terrible excuse for not having The Force Unleashed on PC?

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26384807
from Sins Forums

Here is the original topic

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26384807

Copied a bit for quick reading

"US, May 12, 2008 - LucasArts, once a prominent PC gaming company, decided to develop Star Wars: The Force Unleashed on every major gaming platform except the PC. Cameron Suey, producer on the game, said the game is not coming to the PC because it was hard to develop a game that would satisfy both killer gaming rigs and outdated computers. The Force Unleashed takes place between Star Wars Episodes III and IV and puts players in the shoes of Darth Vader's secret apprentice and is due out in September for the PS3, Wii, DS, PSP, PS2, and Xbox 360. Suey elaborated why there will be no PC version of the game in an interview with Videogamer.com.

If LucasArts had delivered a PC version, it would have been based on the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of the game, which feature new technologies that LucasArts has either licensed or helped to develop, such as the Euphoria for emotion-based character actions and Digital Molecular Matter for destructable materials.

"The PC being the gaming platform that it is, someone with a $4,000 high-end system would definitely be able to play the Euphoria, the DMM and really technical elements of the game. But someone with a low-end PC would have a watered down experience, they would have to turn all the settings down and it wouldn't be the same game," said Suey.

Gamers might wonder why the developer isn't opting for a more down-scalable game that would reach a wider install base; after all, that philosophy has worked well for Stardock's successful Sins of a Solar Empire strategy game. Suey believes that developing the game to reach a more mass market will hinder the potential of killer rigs. Therefore, no matter how you cut it, only "a select few people" can enjoy the game as it was intended.

While Suey said the team will continue to support the PC with future releases, he did cite the variance from low-end to high-end PCs as a bigger problem than it has been in the past. When asked if the game will ever come to the PC, Suey said there are currently no plans to bring the game over to the platform."

 

$4000 dollar rig?? Console games are less graphical intense than PC games altogether (and its on DS Wii and PSP). It doesn't need a computer with major cooling and SLI to run it. Its a very bad excuse.

Well anyways the editor did mention Sins style of reach to us gamers and why LA is not doing that. Apparently LucasArts says expanding the reach to low and high end computers would hinder killer rigs?  

What do you think? I think its hogwash and they can't bother to port it properly to computers.

269,310 views 99 replies
Reply #26 from Sins Forums Top
I'm really quite ticked at Lucasarts right now. Not so much for the slap in the face that they just delivered to us PC gamers, moreso for the fact that they can't even come up with a halfway decent excuse.
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Suey uses as an excuse that they don't want to optimize the game for the wide variety of PC's, both low and high, and also says that they don't want to dumb down the game so people with lower spec machines can't enjoy it the way it's supposed to be enjoyed? Then they turn around and specify it's coming out for PS2, PSP, and Wii? All 3 of those platforms get eaten alive by the PC gaming market, not the general PC owner market.


I would like to point out that the non-360 and PS3 versions were outsourced to external developers. Those external developers don't get to use the high-end tech that the PS3/360 versions get. Which is fine, since if you're buying the DS version, you don't expect 360-level graphics.

So, you could either have them do a port of the 360/PS3 version, which they said would not be optimal for low-end PCs, or you could have them outsource it, which would then not compare favorably to the 360/PS3 version.

I would also like to point something out: The Force Unleashed is not a PC game. That is, it is not in a genre that has ever done well on PCs: third-person action. Major PC game genres are strategy, RTS, FPS, and simulations. 3rd-person action games simply are not well suited to PC gamers who don't also have consoles.

In short: most of you who are complaining either enjoy console-style games and therefore already have a console or wouldn't be interested anyway. Unless you're the rare PC gamer who won't buy a console yet harbors a deep, burning passion for third-person action games.
Object Desktop - Get all of our enhancement utilities in one suite
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Unless you're the rare PC gamer who won't buy a console yet harbors a deep, burning passion for third-person action games.


I think I played such a game on a PC a long time ago, and liked it. I'm not sure the PC is such a bad platform for it, I think it's just that the PC has been saturated so much with other genres.

Right now, the PC market is so dominated with MMORPGs, FPSes, and the occasional RTS that pretty much every other genre has been overshadowed. I do wish that some of the other genres could make a comeback. Another genre I'd like to see again is the Descent style games. I have an old DOS game called "Terminal Velocity" that I still occasionally play on DOSBox. You may have also heard about Fury and Hellbender, which are similar games.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_(computer_game)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_Velocity_%28video_game%29
Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm not sure the PC is such a bad platform for it, I think it's just that the PC has been saturated so much with other genres.


It's not that the platform is bad; it's that the people who want to play such games all have consoles, because the genre is so much more prevelant on consoles. Also, I tend to think that the interface device (a controller) is much better for that kind of intimate control than a mouse&keyboard.
Reply #30 from Sins Forums Top
What a shame. LucasArts games like X-Wing, TIE Fighter, Rebel Assault, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis are what I cut my teeth on growing up, now I can't remember when I picked up a lucas arts game... well EAW, but I just didn't click with that at all. Do they even make PC games anymore? :P

I have a PS2 for college football and basketball, and fighting games. I also just finished stage one of my gaming rig, which ran me about 1000 to get a solid dual core machine featuring 2 Radeon 2900 Pro 512 bit cards Crossfireized. If you live on pricewatch and newegg for a few months you can spot some hella deals. Could have gotten a 360 and a PS3 for that, but I'm loving my choice. Yeah the crossfire improved performance all of 25-30% for a hefty price tag, but for me it seems that 25-30% is like the last mile that just makes everything run like gravy.

I suppose I could get the PS2 port of FU (ha!), but I had a bad experence. After dropping 50 bucks for Madden 08 for the PS2 (pre finishing my rig) I was totally disgusted at how the game would lag and skip just a little, but enough between each play. I could resolve it by turning off the announcers... but I hadn't bought a madden for years and actually wanted to hear it! :) Dunno if it was the port or just not caring enough about a non next gen release, but it left a bad taste in my mouth.

My final comment will be that since PCs can use 360 controllers and hook into LCD TVs, there should no longer a reason to stereotype what can and cannot be played on a PC. Assassin's Creed looks amazing and plays well on PC.
Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There is only one LucasArts game I'm looking forward to and its only LucasArts cause it happens to be from their universe.
the KOTOR MMO made by.......BIOWARE! Cause honestly people, Bioware knows RPG's, they know PC's, and they know their players. Why else would I still be playing KOTOR and enjoying it after knowing every little secret...seriously?


You're forgetting one small detail.

Bioware are now owned by Electronic Arts. (I have a friend who works for them.)

All bets are off now.

As for the comments about Crysis not being that hard on systems... We're talking MAINSTREAM systems here. Most people buy systems and keep the graphics card it comes with. In two years time, a large percentage will most likely have systems that can run Crysis. Right now, the majority of people don't. (I know one person who has a system that can run it and have it playable.)

Posting on a gaming forum about how you can run it just fine is kinda dumb, as you're obviously a gamer who is more likely to have a system that can run newer games.

And the fact is people aren't just leaping to this conclusion about Crysis. The ones I know who wrote it off did so after trying the demo and finding it ran like crap.
Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
After laughing my ass of to Seth's funny replies, I've come up with a statement.

Hopefully, LucasArts will release the Force Unleashed for PC. It will be a stripped down PS2 version. And it will fail, making LucasArts forget its own stupidity and not want to develop for the PC ever again.

But, if you want to think on the bright side, LucasArts might release a PC port a few months after the console release. It may follow Gears of War for PC, and have a lot of new features. And maybe, maybe LucasArts will announce Jedi Knight III.

Even though the second prediction is a dream, it's good to think on the bright side.  :) 

Etrius
Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
behold the more two anti-christ video gaming worlds,

and
Reply #34 from Sins Forums Top
Bioware said that Mass Effect wouldn't be released for the PC either, but lo and behold, it wasn't long before the PC version was announced. I guess they thought that PC gamers would drop 300 dollars for an XBox 360 just to play that one game. When it didn't happen, they scrambled post-haste to get it to PC.
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Huh? What has Aaron Hall got to do with Lucas Arts, or Starforce for that matter?
Reply #36 from Sins Forums Top
I do wish that some of the other genres could make a comeback.


The comeback I'm waiting for is that of flight sims. I remember back in the day when Janes had the best flight sims out there.
Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There is only one LucasArts game I'm looking forward to and its only LucasArts cause it happens to be from their universe.
the KOTOR MMO made by.......BIOWARE! Cause honestly people, Bioware knows RPG's, they know PC's, and they know their players. Why else would I still be playing KOTOR and enjoying it after knowing every little secret...seriously?


And KOTOR II, which was a no less brilliant sequel.
Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
KotOR II was actually developed by Obsidian Entertainment, not BioWare. And it was, of course, published by Lucasarts.

-HM
Reply #39 from Sins Forums Top
I've made my point.Seth, the only point you've made is that consoles make a lot more money than PC games.Makes perfect sense to me. I would have done the exact same thing LucasArts did if I were them.


Done the same thing maybe but make up a stupid excuse no. If they gave a decent answer we'd either be like aww or darn. With that stupid excuse its more like screw you, ur an idiot and a backstabber.

Reply #40 from Sins Forums Top
Lucas can kiss my ass.

I've bought about 10 PC titles, mostly SW type games, and Force Unleashed not coming to PC just sucks bantha scrotum.
Reply #41 from Sins Forums Top
I would also like to point something out: The Force Unleashed is not a PC game. That is, it is not in a genre that has ever done well on PCs: third-person action.

Tomb Raider. Max Payne.

In any case, stop making excuses for them. It's not that hard to do and as far as economic confederations - you know very well that it's not like they're going to go poor if they spend money on making a PC version of the game. Even with the lower revenues from PC market they'll still make plenty of money on it. They're just being greedy, lazy douche bags - that's all there is to it.



Reply #42 from Demigod Forums Top
Their excuse for not putting it on PCs (the real reason is undoubtedly a fear of piracy that might eat into their console sales) is about as weak as their excuse for not having any multiplayer on the 360 or the PS3.

Can you believe that crap?

They said that the reason the PS3 or the 360 will not have any multiplayer support is because the handhelds will feature multiplayer and that's all.

That's really not an answer.

I think the truth is that they don't have any programmers to develop multplayer networking.
Reply #43 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's not that hard to do


And you, with your extensive knowledge of game development, are certain of that?

Even with the lower revenues from PC market they'll still make plenty of money on it.


What makes you think that?

Their excuse for not putting it on PCs (the real reason is undoubtedly a fear of piracy that might eat into their console sales)


You know, if they were afraid of piracy, why not just say so? It's not like game developers haven't expressed fear of piracy anymore; it wouldn't cause any kind of backlash against the game.

So I'd take them at face value; they simply don't want a PC version. They don't expect that it would recoup development costs, so they don't bother.

They said that the reason the PS3 or the 360 will not have any multiplayer support is because the handhelds will feature multiplayer and that's all.


Shocking though it may be to believe, multiplayer is not a fundamental feature that every game needs lest it not be a game. A game without graphics (that is, not rendering anything) is not a functional videogame. A game without sound may be functional, but could be 10x better.

Multiplayer is not like that. Multiplayer is something you do for a game when you feel it is appropriate. It may be designed from the ground up for multiplayer (Team Fortress, etc), or it may be designed without multiplayer at all. But neither of these options is fundamentally better than the other. Neither is correct or incorrect; it's all a question of the essential vision for the game.
Reply #44 from Sins Forums Top
And you, with your extensive knowledge of game development, are certain of that?

Actually I am a programmer, and while I'm not involved in game development right now, I have worked on multiple game projects in the past. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying it's not that hard, there's a difference. Sure it will take more time and people (and hence money) but it will be barely noticeable for such a large studio like LucasArts.

What makes you think that?

Ummm... because dozens of studios do it every day. If Stardock can make money on GC2 or SoaSE, you don't think that LucasArts can? Seems like you're not giving them enough credit.
Don't forget, we're only talking about a small increase in expenses - they are already spending money on developing engine, recording sound, hiring actors, etc., all they need to do is add a bit of money for another few people and extend the production time another month or two, to get a good PC version out.

Cameron Suey, producer on the game, said the game is not coming to the PC because it was hard to develop a game that would satisfy both killer gaming rigs and outdated computers.

Let's analyze this for a second... first, SoaSE is a good example of a game that satisfies both killer gaming rigs and outdated computers. HL2 is also a good example of that. Second, since when most developers (especially the big ones) worry about outdated computers??

I don't know why are you having such a hard time seeing this - they practically spell it out for you - "it's too hard and we're too lazy to put a bit of effort into it".
PC gamers put these guys on the map, they made them. And what do we get in return? A stab in the back that's what.
Reply #45 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If Stardock can make money on GC2 or SoaSE, you don't think that LucasArts can?


The Force Unleased is not comparable to GC2 or SoaSE. Those games don't have or need the sheer quantity of art assets that a third person action game gets. It's just not comparable.

Games like those can be made on the cheap and still look nice. Action games, any kind of game where you have people on the screen, and you need them to look comparable to other games with people, requires lots of art assets. And that means lots of money.

HL2 is also a good example of that.


And? All Valve makes are PC games.

they practically spell it out for you - "it's too hard and we're too lazy to put a bit of effort into it".


I see it as, "It's not worth our time or money to care." Which is a perfectly valid point of view on this issue.

A stab in the back that's what.


Here's an idea: rather than taking stuff like this personally, why don't just buy a console. If you honestly would like The Force Unleashed, you'd probably enjoy it more sitting in front of your TV with a controller in your hand than on the PC. And if you wouldn't like it, then this entire argument is moot.
Reply #46 from Sins Forums Top
I'm sorry, but the idea of having to buy an entire gaming platform just to play one game seems a bit extravagant to me. Not to mention that LucasArts started as a PC production company, the entire franchise upon which the FU (pun intended?) was on PC and now - there is no PC version? They are making a friggin handheld version but not one for the PC? And they dare spout crap about how PC's wouldn't be able to run all those next-friggin'-gen "break-o-matic" and "screaming-believably-while-being-force-slammed-into-a-wall" engines of theirs? Like handhelds can.

What do you think would be the reaction of console gamers loyal to a game franchise if, after four titles, the developer suddenly decided they will make the next title for virtually everything *but* the original platform, and said to their loyal fanbase to "go and buy a PC"?

Personally, I don't like consoles. I don't like the control method, the overly large and simplistic UI, the imprecision of controllers compared to the sheer uberness of my keyboard-and-mouse scheme. The fact that nearly every other console game somehow forgets to include such mundane things as jumping. Or invisible walls. Now that's an old console tradition. Let's not forget the inability to fall through holes or from ledges. Bleh.

I love Star Wars, loved the Jedi Knight series, and Dark Forces before that. And now this. Though I firmly believe the "quest-for-more-money", as Yoghurt had so niftly said once, will prevail, and we shall see a PC version eventually.
Reply #47 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm sorry, but the idea of having to buy an entire gaming platform just to play one game seems a bit extravagant to me.


If you would enjoy The Force Unleashed, then there are at least 5 other games on the platform that you would also enjoy.

They are making a friggin handheld version but not one for the PC?


No, they're not. They're publishing a handheld game, but they are not developing it. They hired an external studio to do the handheld versions.

And they dare spout crap about how PC's wouldn't be able to run all those next-friggin'-gen "break-o-matic" and "screaming-believably-while-being-force-slammed-into-a-wall" engines of theirs?


That's not what they said. What they said was that they can rely on the 360 and PS3 being able to do it, but relying only on the PCs that can would put the game into too small of a market. That is, their developers expect a certain level of performance that is greater than that of the average PC.

after four titles, the developer suddenly decided they will make the next title for virtually everything *but* the original platform, and said to their loyal fanbase to "go and buy a PC"?


Well, that wouldn't happen for PCs, but this did happen when Square switched from Nintendo platforms to Sony platforms exclusively. People complained, people griped, then people bought PlayStations, because the games are what matters, not the platform that they're on.

he fact that nearly every other console game somehow forgets to include such mundane things as jumping. Or invisible walls. Now that's an old console tradition. Let's not forget the inability to fall through holes or from ledges.


So, now you're saying that you hate console-style games. Well, brace yourself: The Force Unleashed is a console style game. If you hate them, you will not like it. And if you won't like the game, why does it bother you that it won't be coming out for your platform of choice?

Like I said: people who don't already have consoles wouldn't like the game to begin with.
Reply #48 from Sins Forums Top
How do you know that? How do you know anything about how the game will play and feel since it hasn't come out yet?
This ties into another important question - how would *I* know if I like the game since I cannot try it before I buy it - an issue more and more common with PC titles as well, yes; but with PC titles I don't end up with a new computer and a game I don't like. If I bought a console just for this game, hoping that if I like it I would also like five or six other titles... well, what if my hope turned out to be false and I don't like the game?

Anyway, all this is moot. The PC market is too big to be ignored by a major title like this. Just like with Mass Effect, I am quite sure there will be a port to PC, and an improved one at that.
We just have to practice some of that Jedi patience.

In in the case there won't be... well... we can always mod Crysis. :p
Reply #49 from Sins Forums Top
"Last decent Lucasarts games was "Secret of Monkey Island II" anyway.


I pity the fool that has not played neither Day of the Tentacle or Grim Fandango.
I pity you.
You have my pity.
Pity is your middle name.
Come to think of it, pity is a pretty funny word.

Reply #50 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Both games were genial. Too bad they do not work any more. I saw only one as excellent adventure game since those two - Polda . I don't know if this Czech game was sold worldwide. Perhaps the picture can tell you more...