51–60 of 84 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unlike most others, they updated this one with care. I guess it's a somewhat notorious dev joke, so it makes sense. https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2246626-grand-theft-auto-the...
That's the front of the sign. The back of the sign is the real secret :) I'm trying to find out if they kept the back of the sign. See the Reddit link I posted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, Windows 2000, the newest consumer Windows in 2002 when Grand Theft Auto 3 was released.
Windows 2000 wasn't a consumer OS, and it is older than Windows XP which came out in October 2001.
Win2k was in fact already very suited for home users just from a technical standpoint. DOS compatibility was obviously lacking and indeed slightly improved for xp, but even that didn't run a lot of games. But it ran pretty much every win9x game I threw at it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, Windows 2000, the newest consumer Windows in 2002 when Grand Theft Auto 3 was released.
Windows 2000 wasn't a consumer OS, and it is older than Windows XP which came out in October 2001.
http://en.m.wikigta.org/wiki/User_Track_Player_(GTA_San_Andr...
I’m sure you can look up yourself what the consumer Windows was when that game came out, but clearly it did not come with an mp3 codec by default and the game definitely didn’t.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, assuming the PC version isn't a half-hearted console port...
Is there a mature discussion on the history of 'consolization' anywhere online, first examples I am aware of are 2003: Deus-ex Invisible War and 2004: Thief - Deadly Shadows, where the PC port is deliberately gimped due to being developed for console. GTA VC/San Andreas were worth at least waiting for at the time, due to proper mouse support and higher resolution. Previously the Doom/Quake version that was on console…
The console market is huge as not everyone is tech savvy enough to maintain a gaming PC and bother with all the OS updates, driver updates, patches, HW upgrades and such. Lots of people just want to hop on the couch after school/work, pick up the controller and start playing.
And since the console market is so big, it made financial sense for the game studios to use them as the lowest common denominator during development. More sales on more platforms = more $$$, despite the PC ports ending up sub-par.
The dark ages ware during the PS3 and Xbox 360 days since those consoles used custom CPU/GPU architectures, radically different than PCs, which coupled with the low quality of the SW tooling and SDKs of the era made cross-platform game development a nightmare at the time so more often than not games made for both console and PCs turned out janky AF.
But thankfully, since the last couple of console generations are basically x64 AMD APU powered PCs, and SW tooling is way simpler and more efficient and of higher quality so game devs can scale their engines and visuals much easier between console and PC reducing the quality discriminations.
However, I have noticed that console gaming experience has gotten a lot more janky in the last few generations as their HW and SW have reached PC levels of complexity, with long waiting times, errors and crashes being more common than in the days of ROM cartridges. The new and powerful SSD-only, generation of consoles seem to reverse that trend though and bring back a snappy and more responsive UX.
Although I gave up on modern gaming for the most part, especially the over-hyped AAA titles, the progress on the tech side pleases me (baring the chip shortage scalpocalypse we live in)
Seeing how it is treated is just sad. This industry doesn't care about art.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, assuming the PC version isn't a half-hearted console port...
Is there a mature discussion on the history of 'consolization' anywhere online, first examples I am aware of are 2003: Deus-ex Invisible War and 2004: Thief - Deadly Shadows, where the PC port is deliberately gimped due to being developed for console. GTA VC/San Andreas were worth at least waiting for at the time, due to proper mouse support and higher resolution. Previously the Doom/Quake version that was on console…
Consoles and PC have influenced eachother- how many PC gamers today use controllers? The distinction has blurred somewhere in the 2010s.
> At the time of writing the Rockstar Games Launcher has been down for 24 hours. I wondered why I couldn’t start GTA 5 yesterday after finally finding some time to play PC again. So yeah not only fuck DRM, but ban it. Why is punishing honest customers allowed?
The whole notion that if I install that game in five years time and half the music is gone due to licensing issues is just absurd. I have no expectations that I'll be able to (legally) play such games five or ten years down the road when I buy them today.
I'm looking forward to playing Hitman 3 eventually (if the previous two instalments are anything to go buy it will work flawlessly on Linux too), but I'm not getting it until its on sale (I guess Christmas 2022?); it seems like a game that is way too dependant on the parent company's servers to run as well, even though I only play the single player content.
I miss the days when even the big titles just booted up without phoning home for permission to run.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, assuming the PC version isn't a half-hearted console port...
Is there a mature discussion on the history of 'consolization' anywhere online, first examples I am aware of are 2003: Deus-ex Invisible War and 2004: Thief - Deadly Shadows, where the PC port is deliberately gimped due to being developed for console. GTA VC/San Andreas were worth at least waiting for at the time, due to proper mouse support and higher resolution. Previously the Doom/Quake version that was on console…
> the PC port is deliberately gimped due to being developed for console.
If you want to have a mature discussion on the topic don't start out with this attitude. Timelines are finite, and plans change. Remember that the games you're talking about existed before licensing ue4/unity was the default option for AAA games. The games were likely only ever planned to exist on console and the request for PC cones in way later, however at that time the game just barely runs on PC (it doesn't need to be performant or representative, just play), and relies on an engine architecture based on having cell SPEs or an (almost) unified memory architecture.
The game is likely unplayable for anything other than "test you can do X and Y" on PC, and all development of the look and feel is done on the console itself. Naturally as consoles have moved towards x86 these differences have been reduced, and now it's common to develop the game on PC and test occasionally on console.
The differences do still exist though; PS5 having hardware decompression, dualsense controllers, both consoles having raytracung hardware and super fast SSDs as a guarantee.
> Between this effect, subscription MMORPGs and the inevitability of microtransactions I lost interest around that time.
You've missed 2 decades of excellent games that don't suffer from this, don't have subscritions and don't have microtransaction by doing that!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a mature discussion on the history of 'consolization' anywhere online, first examples I am aware of are 2003: Deus-ex Invisible War and 2004: Thief - Deadly Shadows, where the PC port is deliberately gimped due to being developed for console. GTA VC/San Andreas were worth at least waiting for at the time, due to proper mouse support and higher resolution. Previously the Doom/Quake version that was on console…
Consoles today are more powerful than the average PC. I didn't believe it until I saw the steam hardware survey. Consoles and PC have influenced eachother- how many PC gamers today use controllers? The distinction has blurred somewhere in the 2010s.