Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Правила обсуждений
Пожаловаться
Kind of hard to form an opinion on liking something or not if you down try it first.
Can't really do that with this without buying it.
Kind of defeats your logic.
Completely untrue. We are talkng about games being unsupported by CAPCOM, not if you actually enjoy the game or not. Those are two seperate issues.
You saw the price of the game, you saw the DLC that came with it for the price you paid, and the fact their recent PC games are completely unsupported is widely documented on the net and especially here in the steam forums..
You bouhgt the game knowing there was no offline coop, knowing capcom were likely to not support it given their PC game history, and knew exactly what you were getting for that price, and yet, you bought it. Only to complain after you'd done so and tell everyone what you're so entitled to, after you'd downloaded the game.
To be fair to you, you are entitled to developer support after you've bought a game, and should get it too, but only to ensure the main game is entirely playable, not for added PC exclusive features like 60FPS or 4K support. You're not entitled to that, you never were entitled to that, and as much as you're a PC gamer and 'deserve a better experience', it's up to CAPCOM wether they include those things.
Does it suck? Yes
Does it make it a bad port? Yes
Would you rather play the classic old RE2-CV in 30FPS with over-the-top high specs for a 15 year old game, instead of them never at all appearing on steam? Probably, yes
How you simply can't understandw what i'm saying is beyond me. I even put the important word in capitals in my last post. I will reiterate.
IF (here is the important word again), IF our choices are 'bad' port (still runs fine if you meet min requiremets), or no classic RE on steam at all, ever. I would rather play a 'bad' port.
I 'just want to play some games to take my dose of gaming'? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? I barely get to play games anymore. If I can play for an hour every other day I would be happy. I haven't 'just past my gaming test' and want to go 'play anything because it's fun'..
I would like to play one of my favourite game series from when I was a teenager though (Resident Evil) on the PC. I would love to see them remade into 1080p 60FPS, smooth, low spec beasts, but I would also rather see a relatively high-spec, 30FPS only, straight Gamecube port, IF the alternative is nothing at all, ever.
If you don't agree with me, fair play. I just think people who don't agree with me, are exactly the kind I was talking about earlier in this thread. The poeple who feel 'entitled' to great ports and remakes all the time, just because they're on PC; and that's totally lame.
I think I understand what you are saying no problem...
Except it doesn't "(still runs fine if you meet min requirements)"... In fact it doesn't run fine even on higher than recommended system requirements hardware... And that is due to extremely poor and inefficient game design. So I would rather not have anything at all than this mockery of a port. That's the reason why I won't ever touch REv 2... not a port but a joke of a port... even worse than RE HD... I won't accept a great game like RE HD to be ported in such fashion that it won't deliver the full intended original experience due to performance problems or worse control schemes or whatever else. By definition, REmaster it's a term that implies in itself a better form of the former product, not a worse form...
That might fall yet again under false advertising... But hey, everybody's entitled to his own personal crazy selfish opinion... Even CAPCOM sure agrees with this one...
You're just acting like it though...
As do I... That's also exactly my goal...
As everyone else...
And this is where your problem really lies... You're confusing "HI-SPEC" with "BAD INEFFICIENT UNOPTIMIZED LAZY PORT"... You are just thinking that "hey, this port is a "Hi-Spec" PC game"... It's not... It's a half a**ed Low-Spec PC Port developed in the worst possible manner. Such manner that it requires 2 or 3 times higher specs than it would realistically need to. Guess it's easier to draw undocumented conclusions based on nothing at all though and argue unaware of what's "under the hood" Because let's face it... more than 95% of the gamer base don't care about such "technicalities"... And CAPCOM isn't taking advantage of that God forbids...
Yes, I've stated in more than one ocasion that I do not agree with you. You can do the same... Fair play.
Yes, I'm a selfish bastard that thinks he's entitled to nothing more than great ports just because I'm on PC... It's just the fact that I'm gaming on all systems since early 90's...
I'm still currently gaming on Consoles the same amount as I am on PC... I still keep a collection of Consoles and an old CRT TV just for those Consoles... Yes, I guess I'm "those people" you were talking about... On the other hand you are also "those people" (those 95% uninformed ones) that I was talking about...
So yeah, you keep accepting all the sh*t CAPCOM's selling you while I'll keep refusing it. Fair play.
When I say 'High-spec', I mean exactly what you're saying, a ♥♥♥♥♥♥, poorly optimised, 30FPS only, straight Gamecube port. As long as it runs fine.
I'm not thinking the REmake is a 'High Spec' game because it's real quality. It's a Gamecube upgrade with HD visuals and audio. It shouldn't be as demanding as it is. That's common knowledge.
This has nothing to do with me not understand 'what's under the hood' or drawing 'undocumented conclusions' (that doesn't even make sense btw). This REmake is a poor port. But it is also entirely playable, start to finish, as long as you meet with the minimum specs.
Given the chance, I would take a port just like this, of RE2,3, Zero, and CV, over them never being released on steam at all.
If you genuinely think you have some kind of right to a game that is 60FPS, 4K optimised, smooth as butter, uses minimum PC power to bring maximum results, and is heavily monitored by CAPCOM to ensure patches are released after launch to make it all as good as possible, all while paying the grand total of $0 extra, you have your head in the clouds.
I would love that too. But I sure as ♥♥♥♥ won't complain if they decide to release the classic RE games in bare-bones, console port form on steam either..
So you're stating that you are aware of what are the real technical issues with this game ?
This is far from true... I am exceeding the recommended system requirements and I'm still experiencing random stuttering and slow motion for random periods of time ranging from under a second to about 1 or 2 minutes... And yes, I keep my system clean and up to date...
I wouldn't. I don't have any plans to ever getting REv 2 just because of the same optimization sh*t.
I never asked for 4K. It was never advertised as a 4K game... But, given the fact the product is advertised as 60FPS, then yes I HAVE THE RIGHT to have a game that runs as advertised and heavily optimized.
I never ever discussed pricing of any game. What's with the "grand total of $0 extra" thing I don't get it... ? It's a standalone product, it has it's own full price and it should work "as advertised". All at that price. That doesn't make any sense at all. Completely no sense...
You're telling me that cheaper products can't benefit from support... ? Because that's kinda crazy...
I would genuinely be PERFECTLY FINE with a bare-bones straight console port as long as it's perfectly optimized and yes I would take that instead of this 60FPS mockery of a port any time without any second thoughts...
I was never talking exclusively about this game. I meant future games in general.
Clearly the pricing is in comparison to console copies of the same games, that usually only offer 30FPS, no 4K etc. You are paying $0 extra in comparison to those gamers is what I meant.
I literally have no idea how you misunderstood me there, and can't really understand the rest of your paragraph.
This is exactly what i've been saying all along, and that you had a problem with..
The bare-bones port in which the game runs completely fine for the masses that meet it's minimum requirements. Exactly what i've been saying all along. Now suddenly you agree. That's good I guess. Issue resolved.
As you might've noticed I wasn't specifically talking about this particular game either.
60 FPS and other "extras" are just hardware specific "side effect goodies" Moreover, the pricing isn't an excuse for a badly optimized, inefficient, inferior product. Ever. You don't just target a price tag and make the product "as good as the price dictates" You set the price tag after the amount of work needed to get the job done... PROPERLY.
From reading the following:
I understand this:
1. You are fine with REv 2 in it's current form... a bad port form... (better than nothing at all as you put it... )
2. You acknowledge that REv 2 and RE HD are bad ports... But you prefer them in their current form and would by more like them...
3. Your argument is pricing... Because pricing it's an excuse for bad porting and thus you prefer a cheaper half broken product instead of nothing at all... It's cheaper after all...
Btw... NO ONE asked CAPCOM specifically: "Hey, CAPCOM, make us a 20 bucks half a**ed PC port!" The pricing was their and their alone...
4. You have stressed out that "people feel entitled to... everything"... What exactly is wrong with you... ? Yes, people are entitled to get exactly what they've payed for! As advertised. And perfectly optimized and with full support...
No, what you just said is not accurate.
When talking about pricing, I was always comparing these games to their console counterparts.
Talking about this REmake, CAPCOM have released a stable, solid game, with few issues for the masses that meet minimum requirements.Yes many people are complaining about optimisation, but 9/10 of those complaining don't have high enough specs. Most people with a good enough rig aren't having issues (myself included, and my rig isn't even that good).
The price is $0 more than you pay for a usually inferior consoel port is the other point I was making about pricing.Half of what you are saying has nothing to do with what I was talking about, you simply didn't understand what I was arguing.
Maybe I should make it very clean cut.
IF my choice is a port of the older RE games, done just like this REmake, with just the same issues, and just the same amount of aftersales support (next to none), OR no classic RE on steam ever. I choose 'bad' ports, because they're not that bad at all.
Which it's irrelevant from a customer's point of view. A customer doesn't ask for lower/higher price or lower/higher quality port... A customer asks for the functional complete product. Very simple.
Completely wrong...
The game has quite a lot of issues... and it's barely struggling to run fine on higher than recommended specs hardware. As I was saying previously, you don't know what's "under the hood"...
1. The game renders at a fixed resolution (1920x1440) without any way to change it...
2. The game doesn't pre-cache or cache assets as ANY OTHER NORMAL PC GAME/PORT IN EXIXTENCE
3. The (natively 4:3) game does not support 4:3 or any other display aspect ratio monitor besides 16:9...
4. The game does on-the-fly read/interpret/render of game's assets EVERY SCREEN TRANSITION
And so on...
It's not about the specs. The game DOESN'T FUNCTION THE WAY A PC GAME FUNCTIONS... NOT EVEN CLOSE. And it doesn't run even remotely close to a playable state on minimum requirements spec hardware. Far from it... I don't even have to mention for the 1000'th time that the system requirements for this game are just the result of the stupid heavily inefficient design the game has...
Most people have decent enough hardware to basically "brute-force" the game... Hence the insane system requirements... Yes, I have the necessary hardware too... I'm still getting random slowdowns and stuttering now and then for absolutely no reason at all... The game it's not running fine... at all... You just have fine hardware... that's another animal altogether.
The 720p 30Hz inferior Console port it's an invalid argument... Bet you don't even realize what's wrong there...
You do realize that 30Hz on a TV it's in practice the same as 60Hz on a monitor don't you...
You do realize that 30Hz on any TV it's in fact a 60 (Hz) interlaced frames don't you...
You do realize that 720p on a TV (PS3/360) basically looks the same as 1080p on a PC monitor... because you're sitting further away in most cases from a TV then from your PC monitor...
You do realize that PS4/XBone also feature 1080p...
And so on...
You do realize that the ONLY supplementary development involved in a PC "port" (and I quoted port since it's not actually a port... it's a game running on a multi platform engine thus it's partially developed separately for each system... ) it's the fact that it need to support a larger variety of hardware configurations while a console it's a fixed well known hardware spec config...
I'm starting to doubt that i understand what you are trying to say lately... You don't make much sense and it feels to me like you're quite often contradicting yourself... But hey, maybe that's just me...
A very good idea. Now let's see what you actually want to say... Maybe this time I will get it right.
So let's analyze step by step, so I won't miss anything here...
"done just like this REmake," - This REmake being a bad port... right ?
So, further enforcing that I understand correctly... Just the same bad port as RE HD... right ?
"I choose 'bad' ports," - So you do chose to further purchase bad ports exactly like this REmake... Right ? So, what exactly wasn't I understanding... ? Leaving aside the fact that you were contradicting yourself in more than one instance...
"because they're not that bad at all." - That's your opinion based solely on your experience with how the game is running on your system... Not even close to cover how the game SHOULD run on a variety of other systems covered by the manufacturer's system requirements specifications...
Btw. I find it funny how you quoted ""bad" port" since you were stating quite recently that a bare-bone straight port it's a good port... Is that correct... ? Quoting ""bad"" implies that this very RE HD port isn't a bad port... right ? So... which exactly is the bad port in your opinion... ? I'm getting confused...
Good lord. Literally everything you post is exactly what I have been arguing all this time.
Yes, the REmake is a 'bad' port. Yes I know what's going on 'under the hood'. Yes I understand everything there is to know about TVs, monitors, interlacing, Hz, and just about everything else you've tried to tell me about. And YES, I would play a port just like this one, rather than no classic RE at all.
FML what is wrong with your comprehension?
This port isn't half as bad as you make it out to be. There are many problems, just like most games released these days, but the majority of players with rigs above min requirements are having no issues as opposed to a minority that have.
It's a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ bad port, I get it. But for me and for most, it works. And i'd like to play my classic RE just like this, if the only other choice is not at all on steam.
Wrong. GC RE2/3 have actual 640x480 backgrounds and render at the said resolution. I've already posted ripped backgrounds comparison from PS1 and GC in a previews thread.
GC RE2/3 are also "the real deal".
DC versions look a lot better, have more extras, and menues that make sense.