"dumbed down for the console gamer"

[Netrigan]

1. Play BioShock
2. Play System Shock 2
3. Realize how terrible BioShock is compared to what it could be
4. Realize that certain UI elements are hard to effectively implement on the console controller scheme.
5. To the forums!

the inventory system in SS2 was fairly slow and clunky. I'm sure they could replicate it on the console, but if you're making a more action-oriented game than ditching the inventory system for a much simpler system makes sense. Bioshock's system was everything it needed to be so I think it was a game design decision and not a console limitation.

 

[The Wykydtron]

<------ my response to the fact that this arguement even exists...

 

[Jocose]

I want a PC only gamer to play through Demon's Souls or Megaman 9.

PSN is Travajador. I don't use the PS3 anymore, but if it's online at any time you can look up my trophies from beating Demon's Souls to hell. My brother who plays Fifa and Metal Gear Solid 4 are the only other games on that PS3 I think. And I agree with the statement that developers frequently remove what I see as vital components to games.
Fallout 2 -> Fallout 3 might not be the best example to use because I really liked 3, but it simply doesn't compare to 2 because it was "dumbed down" enough. It wasn't an RPG anymore; here's my reason why:

I played Fallout 3 on my first file without ever raising the Melee Weapons skill (Small Guns/Repair win). At the end of the game, I used the Shishkebab schematic (GREAT fucking weapon btw) for kicks with under 20 Melee Weapons skill. Know what happened? I easily slaughtered countless enemies, including top-tier ones (at the time, I never played any DLCs on the PS3). This, again, happened with a new game level of skill. The point of an RPG, to me, is that it's not supposed to be the player's skill, or not just the player's skill, that defines what the *character* in the game can do. The player builds the character and is confined within the game to that character's limits. It's about making choices and seeing them play out. For Fallout 3, that gets thrown out the window in favor of FPS-style gameplay.

Rewind to Fallout 2. Endgame, just like 3. I do not have beginner levels of Melee Weapons or Unarmed because frankly I usually die alot if I don't raise it at least through the first couple of hours on Rough/Hard difficult. Still, it's primarily a ranged character. So I pick up a Mega Power Fist, the most powerful Unarmed weapon in the game. And what's this now? I get my ass handed to me because my character's chances to hit are all-too-low for these Power Armored Enclave Bastards. And even without that handicap, it's hard in Fallout 2. The Enclave packs the best weapons, and they put them to much better use in FO2 than in FO3. It's actually realistic for them to kick your ass in a straight-up fight, assuming they have you outnumbered or you're low on stimpaks/ammo, because the game rolls by the numbers. It gives the game a level of equality that Fallout 3 can't give us because the player becomes too much of a variable.

Demon Soul's rocked, by the way. Those people playing it online are crazy. For some of them in the mid 100-200s, it's all I can do to survive for more than a few blows.

 

[ImprovizoR]

this term is used because PC gamers assume, that because the keyboard is able to carry out more complicated functions, and PC games are able to use more complex control schemes, and keyboards have a lot more buttons, meaning the games can have a more abilities, like using the hotkeys in Starcraft.
The mouse is also a more complicated instrument than an analogue, capable of many more movements, and having three buttons, all of which can be accessed by one hand, using the other hand for keyboard commands
on a console controller, most of the fingers are used to hold it, with a maximum of 3 fingers per hand on the buttons, with the thumb being used for most of the buttons.
overall, the term was made because you are capable of doing many more things at a time on a PC then a console, which implies that console gamers aren't smart enough to use a keyboard/ mouse interface.

It's not about the gamers, it's about the controllers. Developers just can't make complicated and fluid things on consoles because the controller doesn't allow that.

Also in the defense of Bioshock. I didn't feel that Bioshock was dumbed down. It was actually the longest gaming session of my life. I played it from 9am to 9pm and I didn't even notice the time go by. I still don't know how that happened. Bioshock was all about the atmosphere and story. Gameplay was alright. I didn't feel like anything was missing. I didn't expect it to be System Shock 2 so maybe that's the reason.

 

[komissar_kurwy]

1. Play BioShock
2. Play System Shock 2
3. Realize how terrible BioShock is compared to what it could be
4. Realize that certain UI elements are hard to effectively implement on the console controller scheme.
5. To the forums!

the inventory system in SS2 was fairly slow and clunky. I'm sure they could replicate it on the console, but if you're making a more action-oriented game than ditching the inventory system for a much simpler system makes sense. Bioshock's system was everything it needed to be so I think it was a game design decision and not a console limitation.

When design decisions like this belong to a trend, in this case simplifying inventories or removing them altogether, I think it's safe to assume that there's some bigger reason behind it. In this case, the fact that games are becoming more and more console-oriented is one of the more obvious culprits.

 

[Korten12]

It's used because people are ridiculous. I did a blog post on this recently, and the entire notion is beyond silly. 'Dumbed down for consoles' is just the insecure PC elitist's excuse to push blame from poor development (Because they love the developer) to other, 'inferior' platforms. It's a joke.

Another great podcast. totaly agree.

 

[repeating integers]

It's used because people are ridiculous. I did a blog post on this recently, and the entire notion is beyond silly. 'Dumbed down for consoles' is just the insecure PC elitist's excuse to push blame from poor development (Because they love the developer) to other, 'inferior' platforms. It's a joke.

That's a nice blog post - I agree with pretty much everything you said there.

I sigh in irritation whenever I hear a PC elitist say "OMG DUMBED DOWN 4 CONSOLES!!!" the same way I sigh whenever I hear a an idiot fanboy say "OMG HALO SUCKS HALF-LIFE 2 IS SOOO MUCH BETTER AND YOU'RE A COCKFAG FOR LIKING ANYTHING ELSE!!!". Elitism annoys me to no end.

funny i hear that about Halo instead of half life from console gamers that halo is the most awesome made gamer EVA! and half life series suck... tho i got nothing against the ppl who are calm about it, ive played halo 1&2 on PC wich i think is okay so i understand the halo fans. Halo is a universe of its own so you could never compare it to half life.

I have managed, through a combination of dumb luck and... er, more dumb luck, to avoid the raging Halo fanboys that give the series its bad name. I visit a grand total of 3 forums - one of these is a tiny little fan forum for an internet author which receives very few posts per day, another is a very civil and nice fan-forum for Relic (LONG LIVE THE GLORY OF HOMEWORLD), and the third is... this place. Which has a whole bunch of reasonable people and the odd elitist PC-gaming Valve/Bioware fanboy (usually Valve). The author's forum has about 1 other guy who's into freaking FPS games, let alone Halo, other than me - though Mass Effect is very popular. The Relic fan-forum is such ridiculous levels of civil, trolling is damn-near nonexistant (well, those few who fail to realise this and troll are quickly punished - discipline is harsh there, but it's all definitely for the better as it's an absolutely wonderful community). As for the Escapist forums, I haven't seen any raging prepubescent Halo fans yet - I can only assume they get drowned out by the loud, bullhorn-wielding Valve fans who do much the same thing, only with better grammar and a more extensive vocabulary.

I want to play Half-Life 2, if only so I can see what all the goddamn fuss is about, and plan to when I'm able. At that point, I will see how it compares to the Halo games (I'm expecting - from what I've heard - to go in, get terrified out of my wits and have to fight frantically to finish the game before I lose control of my bladder).

Wow that was a massively, hugely offtopic post. Eh, whatever.

 

[Autofaux]

It's the PC elitist vs. the console fanboy. It's two unstoppable forces colliding, and having a big whinge.

 

[Machocruz]

It's not the platform, it's the times. I remember some pretty challenging games and niche genres represented on the NES: loads of puzzle games, menu adventure games (Shadowgate, Deja Vu), hard RPGs (Legacy of the Wizard), even Chess; games that required problem solving -though not always logical- and on a controller that had alot less buttons than current consoles.

PC gaming has an advantage as it is host to Euro devs who seem to design against trends, and scores of indie and free games, many of which have depth and complexity equal or surpassing any older games mentioned here yet(ex Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, Knights of the Chalice).

With few exceptions every platform is getting simplistic product now.

 

[Netrigan]

1. Play BioShock
2. Play System Shock 2
3. Realize how terrible BioShock is compared to what it could be
4. Realize that certain UI elements are hard to effectively implement on the console controller scheme.
5. To the forums!

the inventory system in SS2 was fairly slow and clunky. I'm sure they could replicate it on the console, but if you're making a more action-oriented game than ditching the inventory system for a much simpler system makes sense. Bioshock's system was everything it needed to be so I think it was a game design decision and not a console limitation.

When design decisions like this belong to a trend, in this case simplifying inventories or removing them altogether, I think it's safe to assume that there's some bigger reason behind it. In this case, the fact that games are becoming more and more console-oriented is one of the more obvious culprits.

Most action games don't have complex inventory systems. More often than not, they don't have them at all. Duke Nukem 3D has one of the more complicated inventory systems of mainstream shooters. Only FPS/RPG hybrids have anything more complicated. Fallout 3, a console game, has a more complex inventory system than SS2, so I stand by my assertion that Bioshock is the way it is because of design. Complex inventory systems slow action games up which is why they seldom use anything but a very simple system.

Games like SS2 and Deus Ex were rarities. Games like Quake and Unreal, much more common.

 

[nimrodel]

Dragon Age is very very different on the PC as it is on the console. The PC version gets higher resolution graphics, a totally different camera angle, and a completely different control scheme. The console version gets lower resolution graphics, and a controller-friendly control scheme. Both parties get what they want and get to play the same game.

thanks for making the argument for "dumbed down for consoles" right there?
you just said this is such a big issue that Bioware released 2 games?

one dumbed down with new camera angles, and worse grapics, no friendly fire for console gamers? (your words pretty much)
ok? great? yey Bioware? Bioware rock!

so um.. what do you suppose happens if they don't release 2 games? they only release the console version, and port it?

the issue is when developers don't do this. when its more cost effective to simply release one version of the game, and port.

I love console games, I own 3 consoles, but I hate when console game developers do cheap things like make bullet holes vanish after you fire your 5th shot. (and get away with it)

 

[Stabby Joe]

I want a PC only gamer to play through Demon's Souls or Megaman 9.

I'm mainly a pc gamer and I played through Demon's Souls.... was there a point to that?

Because the notion a game is "dumbed down for the console" suggests that console games are simple minded cakewalks.

I want a PC only gamer to play through Demon's Souls or Megaman 9.

PSN is Travajador. I don't use the PS3 anymore, but if it's online at any time you can look up my trophies from beating Demon's Souls to hell.

Then can I also assume you know what I'm referring to when I point those out?

 

[Midnight Crossroads]

Consoles don't. Developers do.

Yeah and Developers do because of Consoles

And people are stupid in general. Thats why most people bought a console for gaming. And since this is all about money the developers go for as much turnover as possible.

No, developers do because they are lazy.

And your presupposition that only stupid people buy consoles for games is beyond silly.
I can't believe anyone actually thinks that. You've got to be trolling.

But whether you are or you aren't, you're far from willing to have a serious discussion about this.
Especially with remarks like that.

Hilarious.

Am I supposed to believe that developers are lazy because you said so? Where's your proof?

More importantly, where's your proof that consoles dumb down games?

I never claimed that it was true, only that in my experience it seems to be so. For instance, CoD. The original CoD had leaning and dedicated servers. MW2 has no leaning or dedicated servers even on the PC version, nor can you have servers larger than 18 people. All of these make sense in the context of a console, but are horrendous for a PC game. I can still play the original CoD online because of dedicated servers, yet there are games Microsoft and Sony have cut off support for online.

 

[Baby Tea]

Dragon Age is very very different on the PC as it is on the console. The PC version gets higher resolution graphics, a totally different camera angle, and a completely different control scheme. The console version gets lower resolution graphics, and a controller-friendly control scheme. Both parties get what they want and get to play the same game.

thanks for making the argument for "dumbed down for consoles" right there?
you just said this is such a big issue that Bioware released 2 games?

one dumbed down with new camera angles, and worse grapics, no friendly fire for console gamers? (your words pretty much)
ok? great? yey Bioware? Bioware rock!

so um.. what do you suppose happens if they don't release 2 games? they only release the console version, and port it?

the issue is when developers don't do this. when its more cost effective to simply release one version of the game, and port.

Hey there! Welcome to the point I was making the whole time!

The complaint is the PC GAMES are poorer when they are part of a mutliplatform release. I am saying that THIS CAN HAPPEN, but the fault is the DEVELOPERS, not the consoles. When developers don't properly developer for their platforms, then one platform (Or all) will suffer. That's the developer's fault, not the platforms.

Bioware did it right. They made a great RPG, and released a great version for each platform. The PC version tailored to the PC, the console version tailored to the console. I played DA on the console, and I loved the game. It was a blast.

When developers don't do this, that's their fault/problem.
Don't blame the console, blame the developers.

Yet again: That's my point.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

the majority of console gamers are mature but there is a loud majority that gives us a bad name.

The irony here is insane.

 

[cystemic]

Is that all it is? Buttons? I hardly think it's necessary to have a button for every possible action in the game. Oh, you need to wipe your butt to gain 3 crap? press f6. Maybe I'm just talking about the mmo people because most pc games I play use wasd and mouse which is less buttons than a standard console controller.

 

[The Funslinger]

I think you just proved my point with whole dumbing down of games. I'm sorry that those games actually made you think. Why don't you just call Diablo a steaming turd, Warcraft and Starcraft garbage, and the explain to me how awesome Halo is.

Actually, you do sound like a bit of a PC elitist... he never said a word against these three Blizzard games. There ARE trolls on both sides, but this guy isn't one of them. He's not going on about how Halo must trump anything PC can create, he's just saying elitists are douches, and from what I've seen, most inter-console bashing comes from PC gamers. There are console gamers who do likewise, but generally, they usually go for betraying teammates for that awesome weapon they can never get to first, or for instance on a good star wars RTS game I played a few years ago on the PC. 'twas a space battle, and our third teammate had loads of stuff on his production cue. Fairly decent stuff, so it took a while to make. Bum last was the space station upgrade we desperately needed to fend off the enemy ships. Did he listen to our pleas for him to cancel it so I could place it on my empty production line? No. Such is life.

In other words, there are trolls, and then there are trolls. One ruins the games for those he plays with, the other flames on forums and refuses to listen to structured arguments. Nobody said anything against your games, we just think people resorting to petty excuses suck. The point is they are rarely dumbed down, pretty much just confined to a more compact control layout. Console games achieve much the same results with versatility. The exception being communication and commands, though Halo Wars did well with commanding troops unlike most RTS console ports. Communication: microphone

 

[Machocruz]

I want a PC only gamer to play through Demon's Souls or Megaman 9.

I'm mainly a pc gamer and I played through Demon's Souls.... was there a point to that?

Because the notion a game is "dumbed down for the console" suggests that console games are simple minded cakewalks.

I want a PC only gamer to play through Demon's Souls or Megaman 9.

PSN is Travajador. I don't use the PS3 anymore, but if it's online at any time you can look up my trophies from beating Demon's Souls to hell.

Then can I also assume you know what I'm referring to when I point those out?

Games like that used to be constant years ago. So while it refutes the notion that consoles can't host hardcore or complex games, it doesn't contest the noticeable trend of increasing levels of handholding and leniency, and the decreasing levels of hard consequences (which is part of what defines a good W/PCRPG to me particularly. Now they are afraid of gamers not seeing every bit of content in the game) and problem solving.

 

[Red Albatross]

I don't think a lot of games have been dumbed down for consoles, but I do think greed has made developers try to fit a square peg into a round hole as far as some game mechanics and genres go. There are some games that are better on consoles and some that are better on PC, but there have been some that are shoehorned or ported over for the sake of simply making more money, and the results are rarely pleasing. FF14 is a recent example...MMORPGs do not work on consoles, no matter how much the developers may want them to. But I sure wouldn't play a hack n' slash or racing game on a PC.

As always, greed is the primary driving force behind terrible ideas.