The Last of Us PS3 vs. PS4 - "Like DVD vs. Blu-ray" Says Naughty Dog

[Rozalia1]

When you pander to weaker hardware, it effects everyone negatively.

So the PC suddenly stopped being able to display its better visuals, its ability to run AI imploded on itself, and all the rest? They didn't pander to weaker hardware, they simply didn't care about yours enough to give you above and beyond special treatment (if we're talking about the really high end stuff).

Going by a post of yours I saw on the witcher you struck me as someone who very much enjoy being pandered to...yet you have a problem with companies supposedly pandering to consoles?

Look at the xbone. Do you think PS4 players are happy they won't get to use their hardware because the xbone is 50% weaker?

No, they would be furious. The xbone is whats holding back the PS4, its holding back everyone. We can have bigger more complex games but the xbone won't be able to handle it.

I don't deny such people exist, but why would I really care. Most of the games I actually care about, and thus feel are actually worth something aren't going to be maxing out even the Xbone (if they were on it to begin with).

When it becomes scripted, it turns into an interactive movie. Basically, it turns into COD.

And that kills creativity if you are limited. Limits are bad. Limits is how we got to this stage in gaming where everything is a 4 hour movie, and no replay value for 60$.

You can watch 4 2 hour movies for that price.

Everything? I thought you were one of those "cool cat" indie guys so what are you doing caring about such games? I certainly don't as the games I play aren't counted in that bracket of yours.
Also ultimately the public eat such games up...so opinion isn't quite on your side on that, and besides short games have their place too you know.

and did you just call amnesia a bad horror game? The game that brought back the genre from death because it didn't sell on console?

It did sell on consoles (of course many did fail), just not the huge numbers they wanted for more and more profit (which ironically has lead to those same figures they aspired to now being too little). That is if we talk about Resident Evil.
Dino Crisis was fine until Capcom sacrificed it to the Xbox for a laugh. Parasite Eve had... "rights problems" with the book from what I recall, Capcom than turned it into a third person shooter and had Motomu "I love Lightning" Toriyama completely bury it. Clock Tower never did amazing sales but it was enough of a success to keep producing sequels...until of course Capcom acquired it and than killed it after a game they gave no chance failed. Alone in the Dark suffered consecutive reboots no one asked for. Fatal Frame suffers one of those "too Japanese" problems that causes their recent games to not even be localised. Silent Hill, well I'll not even bother going to what the problem there is.

What I'm getting at is that it wasn't so much a case of them not selling, more of a we want it to sell more so when it doesn't we're going to kill it. Some survive (no pun intended) to this day, others were killed off when they failed in the one shot they were given.

As for Amnesia clones I'm just not a fan of that style, its the FPS of the survival horror genre shall we say. Characters are usually non existent, plots barely there, monsters unimaginative and limited in variety, bad visibility is the norm because dark = super duper scary, those that have actual combat do it in a terribly dull way, and really I could go on.

I suppose you can the genre has evolved (too much if a dull and shooting mad game like L4D can be called a survival horror game) and I much preferred the older ways

 

[Something Amyss]

It does to me. First of, I am not even certain it is illegal

According to your profile, you are in a WIPO nation. Signatories to the WIPO signed into law copyright practices based on the 90s WIPO treaty that makes this illegal.

and second... that is in the distant future, who knows the official stance.

And that's the rub. Your best argument is that maybe it won't be illegal in the future.

I am NOT ADVOCATING piracy (even though people should be able to talk about it, not here though...) and have no idea how you arrived to that conclusion.

How are you getting your games, then?

The thing is... I still have not been shown proof that emulation is illegal,

You mean I haven't proven it to you before you hit post? Quelle surprise.

nor that emluating TLOU PS4 version in 12 years time will be illegal.

Nor have you proved that it will not longer be copyrighted data protected under the WIPO treaty in 12 years.

If you talked about breaking into someone's house in 12 years because you didn't know it would NOT not be legal then, it would be as absurd.

First there is the very simple problem that they are not required to make the product available to you, and if they don't for any reason than doesn't give you free reign to "legally" download their games as you put it.

Indeed, part of the right to distribution is the right to not distribute. "I want it but I won't buy it for that system so I'll pirate it" really isn't much different than "I want it but I don't feel like paying so I'll pirate it."

There's no reason to expect entitlement to content. I mean, I get the "wanting" it part. I even get that it might be stupid to not release to a certain platform (I can't help but wonder if JK Rowling and Stephen King's status at the top of the "most pirated" lists a few years back had to do with both being anti-ebook because they were against piracy...EYE ROW KNEEEEE!), but it should be their choice. Or at the very least, in line with a contract they chose to enter into (as is the case with, say, Titanfall or any PS exclusive).

The age argument is the one that really bugs because where is this magical line drawn? And who bloody agreed to put the line in the sand.

It's not something I particularly have an answer to, but I doubt any answer would completely satisfy all sides. IP laws right now disproportionately favour content creators to the point that we're slowly losing our public domain. At least in the US, which is currently trying to control the rest of the world.

As for the eighth example yes, like with everything else they by law have no leg to stand on yet its perpetuated like its some right.

Just imagine if everyone who had a problem with these laws actually took a stand instead of so many who just silently pirate.

There'd probably be enough force to get something done--I mean, people stopped SOPA and PIPA.

 

[Strazdas]

Am I wrong that the large part of such people are shameless hypocrites? Certain posters in this thread alone don't disprove me.

Not the tools fault if they can't make a good game. Not the consoles fault Crytek didn't care about the PC version as much as people would have liked.

yes, yes you are wrong. and unless you can prove hard evidence that you are not wrong you should stop posting FUD.

Actually, Consoles do directly influence PC versions. for example Unreal Engine 4 took out features for all platforms because the consoles could not support it.

AI and UI are all things that could have been easily upgraded with the PCs "lack of limitations" shall we say. So explain to me how it is the consoles fault? Perhaps you never ran across it before, but it has happened many times where a game will have better AI on one version over the rest.

It is extremely rare to meet a game where the versions are cardinally different, all of them being downscaling for consoles, not the other way around. Most game developers develop identical version. after all, why work when you can not work and still get paid the same.

Wasn't the Crysis series a failure? Wasn't Crysis 3 supposed to address certain issues of 2? How did that sell?

Crysis series was a financial success. Crysis 3 suffered from same issues that 2 suffered, so their adressing wasnt really to be seen that much. Crysis 3 sell poorly mostly due to bad story according to critics.
Even if Crysis was not a financial sucess though, its a sucess for Crytek. This is because Crysis exists solely to showcase CryEngine and works as an advertisement for licensing. Its a beautiful engine, but people who work with it tell me its much harder to program for than other engines.

So you want to play/on PC console exclusives because you want those games to reach more people (namely you), but don't want PC exclusives going to consoles because only you must be able to play them, and them experiencing it would "ruin" your own.
The truth of the matter is that console exclusives are just business done by corporations. Your want for hoarding PC games on the other hand you can dress up however you like, but in the end you can't hide your own selfishness.

No, as i have stated to you multiple times already i want games to be ported to all devices, be it PC, consoles, handhelds or phones with two exceptions i already defined. Maybe you should stop our crusade a bit and read.

Pretty sure I've shown you the link from Nintendo that lays it all out

Nintendo is not a legislative body and has no power to set laws. It was also proven to be wrong multiple times in courts and employs illegal bullying tactics and abuse copyright laws. Nintendo is the last place you want to look for fair copyright law interpretation.

First you need an actual copy of the game, simply having played it in X period of time does not count. So yes ISOs as a whole are illegal...unless of course you actually do buy it from an online store that makes use of emulation to allow the use of the product (something I'd normally not think need to be said, but clearly it does here). So anyway you need a legit CD to emulate a PS1 game for example legally.

If you have a legit CD for a PS1 game it is legal to make a copy of it in any format you see fit for personal use, including ISO that can be emulated.

 

[Rozalia1]

yes, yes you are wrong. and unless you can prove hard evidence that you are not wrong you should stop posting FUD.

Actually, Consoles do directly influence PC versions. for example Unreal Engine 4 took out features for all platforms because the consoles could not support it.

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=crysis+2+ruined+by+consoles

Same crowd that talks about hostages. You, nor the other folk in this thread of that opinion prove me wrong.

It is extremely rare to meet a game where the versions are cardinally different, all of them being downscaling for consoles, not the other way around. Most game developers develop identical version. after all, why work when you can not work and still get paid the same.

The Last Remnant is a far superior game on the PC, I should know as I've seen a friend play the 360 version and I have the PC version myself. We aren't talking just loading and graphics being better on the PC version (texture pop in still a mess), but the gameplay itself is better as while you are restricted to a certain amount of unique characters while the rest have to be generic jobbers in the 360 version, the PC version has no such restriction and allows the usage of all the unique characters you want.

I'm sure there is many more examples today, and definitely if we go back some years.

Simply put you blame consoles for what is really the fault of the developer, do not blame consoles if your internet darling turns out to care less for you than you first thought. If Sqeenix can do it of all companies than why can't they?

Crysis series was a financial success. Crysis 3 suffered from same issues that 2 suffered, so their adressing wasnt really to be seen that much. Crysis 3 sell poorly mostly due to bad story according to critics.
Even if Crysis was not a financial sucess though, its a sucess for Crytek. This is because Crysis exists solely to showcase CryEngine and works as an advertisement for licensing. Its a beautiful engine, but people who work with it tell me its much harder to program for than other engines.

So bad story is the excuse for the PC sales? Shocker I know but Crysis 1 was hardly a titan itself in that department.

No, as i have stated to you multiple times already i want games to be ported to all devices, be it PC, consoles, handhelds or phones with two exceptions i already defined. Maybe you should stop our crusade a bit and read.

Two exceptions being the "ruining" of a game and...?

Also if you want them to be ported to all devices than you should suck up your game being possibly "ruined" not through the existence of consoles may I add, but because of the laziness of your game's developers.

Nintendo is not a legislative body and has no power to set laws. It was also proven to be wrong multiple times in courts and employs illegal bullying tactics and abuse copyright laws. Nintendo is the last place you want to look for fair copyright law interpretation.

They used to be a very large bully back in the day and you could say they still are. However as I said you'd likely be the first guy to say companies have too much power, so how can they be overly powerful if they can't have the law on their side in this very easily won case?
They have the law on their side simple as, you can argue the law is wrong, but you can't argue that opinion of yours somehow makes what is illegal legal.

If you have a legit CD for a PS1 game it is legal to make a copy of it in any format you see fit for personal use, including ISO that can be emulated.

You've brought up a non point there. Yes my words were a little strong there as I forgot about extracting the ISO of your own disc (how did I remember legal emulation through storefronts and not this...), but its a non point in the end.
Just because you have a legal ISO doesn't mean you're allowed to make copies and than hand them out over the internet...now you can argue this if you like but I'll let you know this now, you will be arguing for piracy simple as.

If the xbone moved up to the same level of the ps4, we would have 50% less work. 50% more head room to make more ambitious (not bigger) games. We would be where we should all be.

multiplatform games are only as powerful as its weakest platform. The weakest platform determines the scope of the game.

the xbone is whats keeping us from dynamic economies, dynamic wars, full structural simulation with heat tracking, etc.

AAA games should be doing what indies can't afford to do. Right now, indies are being more ambitious than the AAA because of limits of a single platform. With 1/110th of the budget.

The weakest hardware is a problem. It sets up a limit.

The 7th gen was cutting edge, we didn't have a limit for a while. But this gen we ran into a brick wall right out the gate because of the xbone. We could be doing great things in gaming, but we are stuck with last gen rules and will be for the next 10 years if the console makers get their way.

Starcitizen was it...you know the game the maker said was going to be an experience only possible on the PC and all that. Kind of shoots what you're saying the head. Blame developers for that not other devices, or will you be including the average computer in the blame game too?

It's not something I particularly have an answer to, but I doubt any answer would completely satisfy all sides. IP laws right now disproportionately favour content creators to the point that we're slowly losing our public domain. At least in the US, which is currently trying to control the rest of the world.

I can see that side of it, but someone thinking something is wrong does not change it from being illegal to legal.

Just imagine if everyone who had a problem with these laws actually took a stand instead of so many who just silently pirate.

There'd probably be enough force to get something done--I mean, people stopped SOPA and PIPA.

Don't think the general public and especially the companies would be too thrilled. Companies especially must oppose emulation (in the illegal variety) because while many will not mention it, loads of games are actually available for you to legally purchase and have on your machine. Yet those people still excuse the illegal emulation of those games.

I draw the line in a simple way: the Console the game was on is dead (no more manufactured consoles and is impossible to get from retail stores in my country), actual game is dead ( no more are made and no way to get it in my country apart from second hand copies from internet).

On the second part:
Not exactly. If somehow (not likely as I said) I see it as illegal and *WRONG* (very unlikely) then I wont do it.
If it is only seen as illegal, then honestly, yes, I would not care. At all. You can be right, though your line of thinking would be seen by me as damaging in the grand scheme of things to gaming, so no points from me


As for Nintendo:
Here you get me. I have been losing respect for them as a compnay for 4 years now (especially with the youtube "we really want to self destruct"thing). And if thair stancs is a NO on emulation, then well they fell even more.
If, however they believe that their own games should not be emulated, then fine. Do not emulate them. Though that begs the question, if both console and game are present in my posetion, am I still not able to emulate thme (in order to play a superior version)?
Though this kinda does not answer all other console emulations.

Now as for the HardWare does not matter:
STALKER would be impossible on a PS2 and DAMN near impossible on a PS3/360.
As simple as that

That line is incredibly weak. Some games, like say Atelier Meruru have one run and than production is stopped because obviously their sales aren't going to be out of this world. So by your logic it becomes morally right to emulate (though PS3 emulation is iffy, lets say it wasn't) practically straight away...but than that example was later supported on the VITA so does it swap to being morally wrong to emulate until after the VITA version comes out? Its all nonsense when you put it up to scrutiny.
Also as I've said many times a lot of those games are available on the internet (hell there is more and more), yet its still "correct" to emulate them.

Superior version does not justify emulation/piracy. To use Last Remnant again, would I be morally right to pirate the 360 version because the PC version is superior? No, not yesterday, today, or tomorrow.

As I said I wasn't using the "hardware doesn't matter" card as it was put. I've responded to that already.

 

[Rozalia1]

Average PC on steam beats or matches the next gen consoles. Specifically, the ps4. The cheaper options from both Nvidia and AMD beat them too.

By quoting everything I really don't know what this is responding to...actually having a look I don't see what this could be responding to. Perhaps the Last Remnant example? Well if so you're missing the point, its not that graphics or loading is better on PC, but that restrictions put in place because of consoles were removed for the PC version that came out at the same time (well EU/US version on console came out a little before as per usual).
If an often attacked company like Sqeenix can do it than why can't the internet darlings?

star citizen is a rare game. Its a benchmark game meant to push the limits. Right now, only PC can go there. What I am talking about is that everyone goes there.

Its existence still shoots what you were saying dead. If developers want to develop this marvelous never before seen experience...they can, they simply choose not to.

The limits should not be limits. Everyone should be there. It should be mainstream instead of something only 1 platform can do. If we can raise the limit, the limits of what PC can do rises too.

PC has limits itself but lets just say they don't have limits for simplicity's sake. There is nothing stopping a company making a far superior version on the PC with all the limits put in place removed, nothing.

So PC needs consoles to raise the bar because the PC can't do itself? Come on now. If the developers want to put a game on the PC that is above and beyond they can. Sony ain't going to hunt them down and eat their insides if they do.
You're blaming the wrong companies as usual with this, look closer to home at your internet darlings on whose fault it is.

Raising the limits helps everyone.

Strange because a line often peddled is the increasing cost of the limit being raised is having a monetary negative effect on many companies, and if they go out of business than that means less games being made. Lets also not forget that if you push the limit into the stratosphere than you start putting it out of reach of people.

 

[Strazdas]

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=crysis+2+ruined+by+consoles

Same crowd that talks about hostages. You, nor the other folk in this thread of that opinion prove me wrong.

maybe you have personalized results from google, but all i see is crytek talking about PC power being reason the users want it there and some blogs/steam forums. I havent bothered to read through those so i dont know how logical are their arguments or who those people are.

Google search is not hard evidence though, it does not quantify PC gamers nor does it determine majority. If anything your search terms show research bias.

The Last Remnant is a far superior game on the PC, I should know as I've seen a friend play the 360 version and I have the PC version myself. We aren't talking just loading and graphics being better on the PC version (texture pop in still a mess), but the gameplay itself is better as while you are restricted to a certain amount of unique characters while the rest have to be generic jobbers in the 360 version, the PC version has no such restriction and allows the usage of all the unique characters you want.

admittedly, i have never played The Last Remnant, so i cannot compare. After a quick look at the game i saw no info on that but i do believe that higher amount of RAM on PC has allow them to simply unlock the unique character gate. This is however hardly a big change from programmer perspective. Now if Xbox version had no unique characters and PC one had them, that would be extra work they put in. As it is now from what i understand they just changed the setting in game engine to allow unlimited (likely not unlimited but set to ridiculous numbers) of unique characters.
Looking at reviews PC version does have better ratings overall but at least Wikipedia says that biggest criticism came from actual graphics and how poorly they were on Xbox.

So bad story is the excuse for the PC sales? Shocker I know but Crysis 1 was hardly a titan itself in that department.

Crysis 1 while no titan had a good story. at least compared to other shooters of the time. Well, reviewers said that Crysis 3 had bad story, which influenced sales. so yes, there is a connection.

Two exceptions being the "ruining" of a game and...?

Also if you want them to be ported to all devices than you should suck up your game being possibly "ruined" not through the existence of consoles may I add, but because of the laziness of your game's developers.

Ok, i will repeat them again then.
There are two cases where i think a developer is allowed to not port a game.
1. A game cannot run on another platform. For example another platform simply does not have enough ram for AI or does not have movement control stick like Wii does.
2. A developer lacks knowledge in porting the game and the game didnt sell well enough to afford porting for hire.

Notice how corporate bullying and bought exclusives are not in there.

They used to be a very large bully back in the day and you could say they still are. However as I said you'd likely be the first guy to say companies have too much power, so how can they be overly powerful if they can't have the law on their side in this very easily won case?
They have the law on their side simple as, you can argue the law is wrong, but you can't argue that opinion of yours somehow makes what is illegal legal.

Which case would that be?
Case of emulation? yes, the law is on their side as it is currently (btw, it is changed every few years, "updated" we call it).
Case of Nintendo bullying youtubers? No, they are using a loophole in the law.

Note here that i didnt argued against your case of emultion being illegal, but your case of Nintendo being a source for legislative knowledge.

You've brought up a non point there. Yes my words were a little strong there as I forgot about extracting the ISO of your own disc (how did I remember legal emulation through storefronts and not this...), but its a non point in the end.
Just because you have a legal ISO doesn't mean you're allowed to make copies and than hand them out over the internet...now you can argue this if you like but I'll let you know this now, you will be arguing for piracy simple as.

I never said you can hand them out to anyone. Merely that ISOs of PS1 games are not in themselves illegal as you were indicating in your post.

By quoting everything I really don't know what this is responding to..

Ultrawinkie always quotes whole post.
It was quite obvious he was responding to the part where you quoted him, since he specifically mentioned titles you mentioned there.

Strange because a line often peddled is the increasing cost of the limit being raised is having a monetary negative effect on many companies, and if they go out of business than that means less games being made. Lets also not forget that if you push the limit into the stratosphere than you start putting it out of reach of people.

a wrong line. Game developement did not become "more expensive" with new hardware. In fact in many ways it has become cheaper, especially when "optimization" for very low amounts of memory is no longer necessary, so thats many paid hours of work saved. What has grown in size is marketing departments that now dwarf the game developement itself. This is thanks to competition, because your competition is also developing games but you want ALL the costumers ALL the time. In fact if hardware limits would not exist developing would be quite cheap due to licensing the engine and not caring about people whos hardware cant run your unoptimized bullet detection calculation.

 

[Rozalia1]

PC can do it, but the question is money and time. Only AAA publishers have that. When you have 2 platforms and one is weaker than the other, they won't put that much extra effort into the higher power platforms.

Yet a popular occupation of PC gamers is whining about bad ports to the PC. The fact which you like to avoid is that it ultimately lays with the developer. Square Enix didn't have to take the restrictions off the PC version yet they did. Crytek, EA, Ubisoft, and the list goes on could have done all you wanted in their games to make it better.

If they don't put the effort than they are to blame, not consoles. As the big three doesn't put a gun to their heads and force them to cut down the PC version, the developers do that themselves with the justification of saving money, and you promote that behaviour by blaming the wrong people.

They won't add dynamic weather to the ps4 is the xbone can't handle it. It turns into a mess. If the xbone was the same, both versions would have dynamic weather.

So no multiplat has added features like dynamic weather if it couldn't be done on a different platform? Are you really making this large claim that can be annihilated with one example?

Some people DO choose to push the limits, what I am saying is that its not common enough. The old suits don't want to push any special work into any platform. They want a one size fits all.

When one size is smaller, everyone else gets a smaller size.

Not always as you even admit, and again ultimately the blame lays with the developers and not the console manufacturers.
The big three have no power over what an independent company cuts, they have no power over the time/money an independent company invests in something.

Find me Load Runner The Legend Returns for me to buy it, as I really do want to. Yeah...

Thanks for your agreement there. If such a company can do it why can't the internet darlings of PC gamers do it?

And here we come back at the legal vs illegal thing. This is not something I like arguing, it is hard to do on a site like The Escapist, though again I am not advocating piracy...
But yes. Sales are not important to me. The game is. If its illegal, fine, be right. Sleep safely now. Does not mean I will stop being against it, does not mean I will stop using it as a pro and does not mean I will stop seeing your (and the companies stance) as damaging on a grander scale. Just the way it is.

I'm going to give you straight questions than using the previous example.

1: Atelier Meruru ships 10,000 copies (a figure for this example), and there will be no further production as its a niche title. By your logic as its no longer in production I'm morally correct in pirating as soon (lets say a week) as its available to do so?
2: When a PSV version later is announced showcasing it will be supported further does pirating the original version suddenly start being wrong?

You keep giving me non answers here using the fact this is the escapist to get away with it. You support piracy for art reasons fine whatever do so as its your view on the matter, but lets not try to mislead people in what you're advocating.

Now lets talk hardware and another favorite topic- Mods
You want all games to be on all/almost all platforms. That is a GOOD cause now. One I can back.
However, some things are downright impossible unfortunately. As I said, STALKER could not have been done on a PS3/360.
Also, what about mods, must they too become multiplats? How will you handle Lost Alpha and Black Mesa and R&D on all platforms?

So you're telling me STALKER is such an advanced game that it is literally impossible to have it on a console? So they can't downgrade anything now? Next you'll be telling me no PS3 game has ever appeared on the PS2.

As for mods Unreal tournament 3 allows mods on the PS3 (not 360 though)...I'm unsure about games like Little Big Planet, or Mod Racers as I haven't played them.
Fact of the matter is as I'm sure you're aware the big three have to maintain an image of sorts of "protecting" the children shall we say to keep conservatives away (which is why you ain't going to see any hentai/porn games on console anytime soon). Mods would have to either be restricted like I believe they were in the case of unreal, or they'd have to go through a system that checks the mods and sees if they are suitable to be on the platform.

The big three would have to use resources on what would be very little gain for themselves financially...perhaps if the big publishers were to set it up it'd be possible to see more mods on consoles but we all know the publishers ain't going to do that.

Than of course there is vulnerabilities it might open on their platform and all that.

 

[Rozalia1]

maybe you have personalized results from google, but all i see is crytek talking about PC power being reason the users want it there and some blogs/steam forums. I havent bothered to read through those so i dont know how logical are their arguments or who those people are.

Google search is not hard evidence though, it does not quantify PC gamers nor does it determine majority. If anything your search terms show research bias.

The fact of the matter is no I can't hand you a survey with data on every PC gamers thoughts on matter X, Y, and Z. However that doesn't mean you can just whitewash it. There are people like that, I'm not wrong there.

admittedly, i have never played The Last Remnant, so i cannot compare. After a quick look at the game i saw no info on that but i do believe that higher amount of RAM on PC has allow them to simply unlock the unique character gate. This is however hardly a big change from programmer perspective. Now if Xbox version had no unique characters and PC one had them, that would be extra work they put in. As it is now from what i understand they just changed the setting in game engine to allow unlimited (likely not unlimited but set to ridiculous numbers) of unique characters.
Looking at reviews PC version does have better ratings overall but at least Wikipedia says that biggest criticism came from actual graphics and how poorly they were on Xbox.

Its relevant however because there is always talk of restrictions being left in the PC version because of consoles. SE didn't have to lift those restrictions, but they did. Why didn't all those companies that hide behind consoles not allow you to carry more than 2 weapons on PC? Its simple too yet they don't do it, explain to me how that is console's fault.

Crysis 1 while no titan had a good story. at least compared to other shooters of the time. Well, reviewers said that Crysis 3 had bad story, which influenced sales. so yes, there is a connection.

You know reading this I tried to recall just what the ending to Crysis 3 was...and I'll admit it took me a good minute to recall. However when it comes to shooters story isn't the main stumbling block to a games success, I mean there are shooters out there with no story at all.

Ok, i will repeat them again then.
There are two cases where i think a developer is allowed to not port a game.
1. A game cannot run on another platform. For example another platform simply does not have enough ram for AI or does not have movement control stick like Wii does.
2. A developer lacks knowledge in porting the game and the game didnt sell well enough to afford porting for hire.

Notice how corporate bullying and bought exclusives are not in there.

Hardware isn't a valid excuse, I'm pretty sure some companies have straight up made a different version of a game to get it on another platform (take the ports to gameboy for example that used to be done).

Well the developer not wanting to risk spending further money for little gain is what I've been saying the whole time is responsible.

Case of emulation? yes, the law is on their side as it is currently (btw, it is changed every few years, "updated" we call it).
Case of Nintendo bullying youtubers? No, they are using a loophole in the law.

Note here that i didnt argued against your case of emultion being illegal, but your case of Nintendo being a source for legislative knowledge.

I posted another link so I wasn't using Nindendo solely, however they are very much in the right on the matter of emulation. If they were wrong you could assured they'd make sure it was corrected very quickly (as in the law, not what their website says).

I never said you can hand them out to anyone. Merely that ISOs of PS1 games are not in themselves illegal as you were indicating in your post.

As I admitted by wording was too absolute on that, I listed one exception but failed to bring up that one.

a wrong line. Game developement did not become "more expensive" with new hardware. In fact in many ways it has become cheaper, especially when "optimization" for very low amounts of memory is no longer necessary, so thats many paid hours of work saved. What has grown in size is marketing departments that now dwarf the game developement itself. This is thanks to competition, because your competition is also developing games but you want ALL the costumers ALL the time. In fact if hardware limits would not exist developing would be quite cheap due to licensing the engine and not caring about people whos hardware cant run your unoptimized bullet detection calculation.

So what you're saying is if the limit is higher than they can release quick bloated pieces of mess. How does that help the weaker PCs?

I am not talking about AA, uncompressed textures, or graphics. Better graphics are easy to make.

I am talking about basic gameplay. You keep talking about graphics.

Do you honestly think that someone would make dynamic wind ONLY for the ps4? No. Basic game play functions do not get added with power.

You keep inserting graphics and I am very sure you don't understand 99% of what I say.

dynamic economy =/= graphics.

dynamic war =/= graphics.

Nothing I said equals graphics.

and the big 3 are responsible. They take advice from devs when developing these consoles. Microsoft chose to push Kinect over power. the xbone's faults are its own.

Really now? In my example I state its not a case of graphics or loading...and apparently I was talking about the graphics the whole time?

The big three aren't at fault if the developers decide to not bother with a feature because they know they can hide behind the big three when people look for who to blame. If they didn't include dynamic economy in the PC version its not because the consoles mandated they couldn't, they simply didn't include it.

No. Please stop it. Emulation is not illegal in all situations. That isn't up for debate. Saying it is makes you look like you're just arguing black is white to irritate people.

Except I'm not. I already listed when emulation is legal (save one correction by Strazdas which slipped my mind), and it is under very specific circumstances and requires you to own a PS1 disc, and console in the case of the PS1. Otherwise the only other way is to emulate by way of a storefront that is officially selling the game.

 

[Rozalia1]

Load Runnder is a PC game mate... dont get what you are saying. It still needs an emulator to work and is not sold anywhere. Dont get what company and what agreeing you are talking about :O !

You'll forgive me for not realising Load runner was a game. I saw Load Runner The Legend Returns and thought it was a jab towards Square Enix's Lightning returns, and its apparently long load times (not played, or researched it so I can't know if it has long load times or not).

1. Yes. By my definition it is. Though this (my) definition also accepts that it will be much later then the game came out.

So niche games on release are morally correct to pirate. Well if the day does come that everyone starts seeing things your way I hope they can really enjoy all those generic AAA games because that'll be the only thing left...than again with your way of thinking they'll likely not survive themselves, well I suppose free to play games are always an option.

...actually now that I think on it...you wouldn't actually care if there was 100% piracy would you? After all mods would still exists so they'll always be "new" games for free.
Weird way of thinking if so as no amount of mods will make up for the new experiences you'll be missing out on but you're free to think how you like (if you do think like that).

2. No. Then I would say it is not right. If you have already been playing it emulated by then, well tough luck . If you havent, I would suggest to buy it for PS 5.

Whatever happened to the idea of buying a copy of a game you liked after having "demoed" it? Why not as you are justifying doing illegal things based on the arguments of art and morality, not buy the game to give the developer something back? Its surely by your own viewpoints the correct and moral thing to do...or are you telling me that you place your money above the art you speak you preach about by not supporting it.

You want a distinction between emulators and pirates, but it seems if there is a distinction its very small. Its all I'll take what I want, and screw what the law says.

Yes. STALKER is that advanced. I am not even talking graphics (though I probably should, they ARE ACTUALLY important to GAMEPLAY in STALKER), but A-Life, Weather, Zone size and keeping all of this working. It simply will not work/wont work in any decent way.

Poppycock on its that advanced as even if all those features were hardcoded to the point they couldn't possibly be toned down/removed, than they could always build up the port from the ground up like those gameboy ports I mentioned.

UT 3 is nice to support mods for PS3. Too bad that is not enough/NOR is it even close to what examples I gave. Some mods wont work even on the PS3 version, whilst total conversion mods again wont work. I do suggest you look up the examples I gave here...
I do understand the need to "regulate" content. Still, I think your perception of mods is warped to hell. Not your fault though... people only imagine nude models for Skyrim when you say mods, not epic games that can make AAA developer wheep tears like me

Not my perception, they are just one of the roadblocks for having mods on consoles and have to be brought up if that particular issue is talked upon.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

When I hear that DVD vs BluRay I associate that with 720p 30 to 1080p 30. Sure looks like it.

I wonder if they will make more for the game than just make it prettier.

 

[Rozalia1]

Load Runner was brought up as an old game that can not be bought nor found (at least not in my country, and am 100% it would be hard no matter where you live) anymore AND does not work on current OSes. Therefor, it is emulated.
No idea what you meand by load times?

I thought it was a jab at lightning returns as I had no knowledge of such a game as Load Runner (though all my searches on it turn up Lode Runner).

Now as for the Lode Runner: The Legend Returns game...if you follow the chain of acquisitions it seems like Activision owns the rights to it unless a separate company at some point bought the rights to the licence off the hands Lode Runner passed through.
Activision doesn't have to make it available to you, not that it would matter if they did of course as to you even brand new games are morally right to emulate for free if you can.

I'm somewhat surprised they've not made it available on steam but I'm sure they'll get round to it as they have a ton of old games kicking about no doubt. Whatever the case copyrights owned by corporations are valid for 75 years from the date of first publication so don't think you can get away with the abandonware argument to start with. Even if the original company isn't around anymore, the rights are still owned by someone so they are still active.

Nope, not just niche games. Imagine in a world 40 years from now, TLOU came out on PS4 and that is that. No more PS4s and 3s are made, no more copies of both versions are made, no digital stores that had em are up or still have them. Bascially, you either have a still working PS4/PS3 AND the game (unscratched) or installed and never uninstalled, or you never play it.
Under those conditions, I will give a rat's ass about legal/illegal, UNLESS they make it avaialable on a store in working condition. But the above situation does not have that. Kinda like Lode Runner.

Except you know that more and more games are made available for you to buy online, and you'll emulate them illegally anyway. Say we go forward 20 years right now, you'd be here saying its your right to pirate (as that is what it is) TLOU because its old, and your right to enjoy a product you did not buy.

Onto STALKER:
If you start toning down AI, then it is not STALKER anymore. Yes, it is THAT important. If you are toning down the Zones, weather, cycles and simualtion part of the game, then this is not STALKER anymore. Most of those are central to immersion OR gameplay. Even the graphics.
And building fro mthe ground up wont really make that much of a difference here.

Are you it's creator? Than who are you to define what it is? I mean this with no offence, but you can't go about defining it by its AI, or whatever.

Onto mods:
I brought mods, especiall mods like Black Mesa, R&D and Lost Alpha, simply because they are exclusive content, and one that is pretty damn important. Those I listed are like seperate games. How do you bring them over? And how do you make sure console players are not dependant on porting PC modders

What the? This goes completely against your hostage argument. So it being exclusive actually has importance as a reason you bought it...and you are against console exclusives?
I can't believe you'd tell me straight that you have no problems with emulating a brand new game for free if you can, yet now tell me you pay for mods. Its like something out of Bizarro World honestly.

Well they'd have to make STALKER available on the consoles, so it'd either have to toned tone or built up from the bottom. Than the modders would have to either modify the mod if the console version was just toned down, or build it from scratch (if the game had to be built up from the bottom).

Having experience of modders quickly working to make a mod available after a patch renders the mod nonworking, I'm sure someone out there would sort it out.