Bethesda: Consoles to be the lead platform for Skyrim, aim to make it ?really accessible?

[Nimcha]

Oh my, this is going to be great. BioWare was roasted for the same sort of statement on this site, I wonder how much hate will be poured over Bethesda this time. :3

The difference is, the hate was poured on Bioware because DA2 was inferior to Origins on all platforms.
Here it will simply be better on some platforms than others.

I wasn't talking about DA2.

 

[DaHero]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

 

[DaHero]

I'm going to be torn apart for this, but am I the only one who doesn't care if it's on a console? I'm really starting to get annoyed by the smug sense of superiority that a lot of pc gamers get, like if you use a console like everybody else has been for the last thirty years, you're an inbred retard who doesn't deserve to have fun. I understand it if they're dumbing some of it down for a more casual market, but come on. At least now I'll be able to buy it. It comes out on the console, and Bethesda makes a lot more money. It doesn't come out on console, and the pc gamers get to feel like they're in a special little club, while Bethesda doesn't make quite a hefty profit. Let the company make its money, but stop whining about everything not being built for pcs.

It's not using the console, it's the fact that a controller is very (and I don't exaggerate) different from a keyboard and mouse. With a keyboard you effectively have 80+ keys that can do any number of things, but there won't be any support for that. The horses will also be fine tuned for consoles, meaning that using the A or D keys to turn will be the same as mashing the control stick as far in any direction as possible. PC gamers also won't get the ability to carefully walk using the mouse, something half the time they really need. To top it off, the amount of video card bugs that will ensue from the cheap port will be staggering.

It's not "more accessible" it's just a dumbed down port, which is another way of saying "screw our fans, we're in it just for the money"

WHERE THE FUCK DID THEY SAY THEY WOULD DO THAT?! Seriously, what is with people like you? It's as though because something is being developed with consoles in mind, it'll automatically be the worst it possibly can be for PC gamers, when this only really happens with sandbox games like GTA IV and Saints Row 2. And why the fuck do you think you're the only people who deserve an optimized experience? That's just selfish, and you're a complete ass.

Because Skyrim is going to be a sandbox FPS RPG title where you get to do what you want and go where you want. Oh, as long as you have two analog sticks...

 

[Ninjamedic]

snip

Let's grant your proposition. This kind of thinking is elitist. So what?

By inducing PC elitism, you are transferring the blame of lazy games development from the developers themselves to the very existence of consoles. Overlooking that these "improvements" are completely unwarranted, most of these "console limitations" are non-existant and perpetuating the stereotype that console gamers are complete idiots who can't think.

 

[Ninjamedic]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

Assign a "walk" function to a button adjacent to WASD, like Q or Shift. Problem solved?

 

[Amphoteric]

As long as the UI isn't as terrible as the Oblivion PC UI was i'll be fine with it.

 

[Danceofmasks]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

Assign a "walk" function to a button adjacent to WASD, like Q or Shift. Problem solved?

No. Because when you want to turn less, you may not also want to go forwards less.

 

[DaHero]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

Assign a "walk" function to a button adjacent to WASD, like Q or Shift. Problem solved?

No. Because when you want to turn less, you may not also want to go forwards less.

That, pretty much, nice to know I'm not insane.

 

[Ninjamedic]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

Assign a "walk" function to a button adjacent to WASD, like Q or Shift. Problem solved?

No. Because when you want to turn less, you may not also want to go forwards less.

Would the "walk" button have to affect turning speed? Wait, why can't you lightly tap a turn key to turn slightly? How do you normally control the Rate at which you turn on a keyboard anyway?

 

[Danceofmasks]

and on walking, you know on most console games you walk slowly by pushing the analog stick slightly in a direction right?

and you know you can't do that for a PC, making riding horses nearly impossible right?

Assign a "walk" function to a button adjacent to WASD, like Q or Shift. Problem solved?

No. Because when you want to turn less, you may not also want to go forwards less.

Would the "walk" button have to affect turning speed?

Wait what ... isn't this conversation entirely about vehicle (horse) controls?

'cos if it's on-foot movement, PC controls are superior.
Your point of view can be anywhere, anytime, at any degree of acceleration, and given that fact, having 8 movement directions (with a walk toggle) is more than enough.

The problem with vehicle controls is, when you look around, the vehicle isn't changing directions.
So, if you're relying on digital directional controls to turn, you suddenly have the worst controls imaginable.

 

[latenightapplepie]

I don't care really. I'll be getting it for my 360.

 

[Lt. Vinciti]

While the PC gamers are raging wildly for...something I dont understand....

I'll be getting this on PS3 and can hope that they do the mod support like they said they wanted...

Sorry. I cant hate Bethesda....

 

[Synek]

The only thing im concerned with is performence issued caused if it turns out to be a bad port.
I don't mind if the game is focused on console audience,as long streamlined doesn't mean terribly dumbed down.
Hopefully Bethesda streamlines it in a good way,learning from Oblivion how not to streamline.

 

[drisky]

Oblivion and Fallout 3 weren't that hard to control or go though menus. I don't know how much more accessible it could get.

 

[caselj01]

As a PC gamer, this news is disheartening for me, but Bethesda have done well in the past (Oblivion, Fallout 3) so Im prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt until I play the game and get to judge for myself.

However, I cannot get over how stupid this spokesman was, he said 'We use the consoles as our lead SKU? So we develop towards the consoles and then porting to PC is usually not too bad actually .'

NOT TOO BAD?! What kind of game developer describes one of the versions of a game they are releasing as "Not too bad", let alone their flagship series? Is this guy trying to hurt sales? It boggles the mind.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

I'm sure the modding community will destroy any UI issues though.

I'm buying for the 360 anyway due to lack of funds to constantly upgrade my computer, but this seems like the end-all argument. As PC gamers you have access to mods and unofficial patches, so you really still have nothing to whine about.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Oblivion and Fallout 3 weren't that hard to control or go though menus. I don't know how much more accessible it could get.

How about taking a look at Fable 3 for an extreme case of accessibilitis?

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

Double post, my bad.