FrankieSpankie3388
Hockey Nut
+243|6501|Boston, MA

Poseidon wrote:

FrankieSpankie3388 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:


I wasn't aware not having enough resources = laziness.
"well considering both Threewave and Terminal Reality have been around for 15 years...." they should have plenty of resources.
Oh yeah I forgot, just because a company's been around for a longer time means they have infinite resources. My bad!
Alright, I'm sorry, I figured companies being around for 15 years that have the resources to make games for all platforms would have the resources to add a multiplayer for one platform. Especially when multiplayer is pretty much a developer's safest bet to fight piracy. I guess they just don't care about losing money from potential PC sales. If they were a smart business, they'd either not release it for PC or make a multiplayer for it. Otherwise, they may as well give out PC copies for free.
firebolt5
Member
+114|6126
I don't get why there's so much hype about this game...
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6508|Long Island, New York

FrankieSpankie3388 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

FrankieSpankie3388 wrote:


"well considering both Threewave and Terminal Reality have been around for 15 years...." they should have plenty of resources.
Oh yeah I forgot, just because a company's been around for a longer time means they have infinite resources. My bad!
Alright, I'm sorry, I figured companies being around for 15 years that have the resources to make games for all platforms would have the resources to add a multiplayer for one platform. Especially when multiplayer is pretty much a developer's safest bet to fight piracy. I guess they just don't care about losing money from potential PC sales. If they were a smart business, they'd either not release it for PC or make a multiplayer for it. Otherwise, they may as well give out PC copies for free.
The PC sales are/were probably going to be miniscule. It's a console based game and they make it obvious.
mtb0minime
minimember
+2,418|6625

firebolt5 wrote:

I don't get why there's so much hype about this game...
Me neither. Seems like just another shit pile based on a movie.
Miggle
FUCK UBISOFT
+1,411|6712|FUCK UBISOFT

firebolt5 wrote:

I don't get why there's so much hype about this game...
because that's how you sell games.

much easier to advertise than actually make a game good.
https://i.imgur.com/86fodNE.png
Bradt3hleader
Care [ ] - Don't care [x]
+121|5907
Computers > Consoles


BTW what does Michael jackson and a console have in common? They're both made of plastic and little boys can turn them on.
Roger Lesboules
Ah ben tabarnak!
+316|6548|Abitibi-Temiscamingue. Québec!

AussieReaper wrote:

"Fuck you, Ghostbuster Devs."
specialistx2324
hahahahahhaa
+244|6659|arica harbour

Bradt3hleader wrote:

Computers > Consoles


BTW what does Michael jackson and a console have in common? They're both made of plastic and little boys can turn them on.
in terms of power, absolutely i agree with you. however you have to factor in the fact of hardware prices, upgrades to the hardware and software, tech issues , making the parts work the first time around and the damn OS problems/ drivers. i used to build computers for people  and it is too much of a hastle to do so piece by piece. one build cost the dude $6000 USD in parts. kick ass parts to be exact. i play console games now, a $300 Xbox 360 can play $60.00 games. to play the latest pc game that runs $30-$50.00 you need a good solid top of the line gaming rig, period..... anyone that says otherwise is just plain bullocks.

if you have the patience, and a crap load of money, then by all means be a pc gamer. other than that go get a PS3 or sexbawx 360. i got no time anymore to be the tech support of Windows XP or that shitcrap of an OS namely VIsta.
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6508|Long Island, New York
According to most reviews it seems that it's only really going to appeal to hardcore fans of the series.

Enjoyed the first one but not enough to warrant me buying a game based off the series.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

I can understand their reasoning. It's a $30 movie game, and they can always patch up the PC version later. Doesn't stop it from being a good game, though.

Mekstizzle wrote:

As a self described ex-PC gamer I'm not surprised these days that devs favour consoles more, there's just so much piracy in the PC market that it almost makes no economic sense to develop just for PC, especially if it's a single-player centric game (multiplayer usually requires legit keys)
Eh, you can pirate console games and and play certain pirated PC games online. It isn't a matter of piracy so much as it is target market.

specialistx2324 wrote:

Bradt3hleader wrote:

Computers > Consoles


BTW what does Michael jackson and a console have in common? They're both made of plastic and little boys can turn them on.
in terms of power, absolutely i agree with you. however you have to factor in the fact of hardware prices, upgrades to the hardware and software, tech issues , making the parts work the first time around and the damn OS problems/ drivers. i used to build computers for people  and it is too much of a hastle to do so piece by piece. one build cost the dude $6000 USD in parts. kick ass parts to be exact. i play console games now, a $300 Xbox 360 can play $60.00 games. to play the latest pc game that runs $30-$50.00 you need a good solid top of the line gaming rig, period..... anyone that says otherwise is just plain bullocks.

if you have the patience, and a crap load of money, then by all means be a pc gamer. other than that go get a PS3 or sexbawx 360. i got no time anymore to be the tech support of Windows XP or that shitcrap of an OS namely VIsta.
I'm playing the latest PC games on a Centrino Duo laptop with a 9600M GT. That's not exactly top of the line, is it. You don't need a gaming rig to play games. You only need one to guarantee that you can max all settings and never experience a slowdown for (hopefully) two years.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-06-18 20:00:54)

TopHat01
Limitless
+117|5875|CA

Mekstizzle wrote:

As a self described ex-PC gamer I'm not surprised these days that devs favour consoles more, there's just so much piracy in the PC market that it almost makes no economic sense to develop just for PC, especially if it's a single-player centric game (multiplayer usually requires legit keys)
Or do you mean:

Rod Foxx wrote:

I disagree.

If the game had a good multiplayer then people would buy it as online would require a legit copy. If the game ships without multiplayer to pc then it is more likely to be pirated as there is less of a draw to owning a legit copy.

Personally though i agree with Uzique. Multiplayer for a Ghostbuster games sounds fucking terrible.
Helps to read, then post.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Rod Foxx wrote:

Personally though i agree with Uzique. Multiplayer for a Ghostbuster games sounds fucking terrible.
Sounds like you could get away with a L4D-esque Ghostbuster-style city-wide apocalypse.
Rod Foxx
Warblgarbl
+78|5954|Perth, Australia

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Rod Foxx wrote:

Personally though i agree with Uzique. Multiplayer for a Ghostbuster games sounds fucking terrible.
Sounds like you could get away with a L4D-esque Ghostbuster-style city-wide apocalypse.
That could have potential, but i like L4D as L4D. I don't want to see other games copying the style and then completely ruining the gameplay.
voodoosniper7
BF2s Nublet
+71|6409|somewhere other then here
Well i rented ghostbusters cause there was nothing else there at blockbuster. The singleplayer is pretty entertaining but the multiplayer is repetative and sucks hard penis
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Rod Foxx wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Rod Foxx wrote:

Personally though i agree with Uzique. Multiplayer for a Ghostbuster games sounds fucking terrible.
Sounds like you could get away with a L4D-esque Ghostbuster-style city-wide apocalypse.
That could have potential, but i like L4D as L4D. I don't want to see other games copying the style and then completely ruining the gameplay.
Then stick to L4D.

If no games copied Wolfenstein and Doom, we probably wouldn't have the first person shooter anymore.

firebolt5 wrote:

I don't get why there's so much hype about this game...
It strikes a chord with the generation of people who were kids when Ghostbusters came out. Assisting this was the hype that this might be the first decent Ghostbusters game.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-06-22 08:08:22)

CanadianLoser
Meow :3 :3
+1,148|6478
boomerjinks may be interested
Zefar
Member
+116|6620|Sweden

specialistx2324 wrote:

in terms of power, absolutely i agree with you. however you have to factor in the fact of hardware prices, upgrades to the hardware and software, tech issues , making the parts work the first time around and the damn OS problems/ drivers. i used to build computers for people  and it is too much of a hastle to do so piece by piece. one build cost the dude $6000 USD in parts. kick ass parts to be exact. i play console games now, a $300 Xbox 360 can play $60.00 games. to play the latest pc game that runs $30-$50.00 you need a good solid top of the line gaming rig, period..... anyone that says otherwise is just plain bullocks.

if you have the patience, and a crap load of money, then by all means be a pc gamer. other than that go get a PS3 or sexbawx 360. i got no time anymore to be the tech support of Windows XP or that shitcrap of an OS namely VIsta.
6000$ PC O_O Are you serious?

If he payed that much he most likely have plenty to spare. You could spend like top $1000 and by then you'd have all the best stuff for the PC. 6000$ is either buying from rip off sites or just buys the wrong things.

My PC cost around 600$-700$ and it plays Crysis on high to highest on settings. It got a nice framerate too. I bought a new one recently for around the same price and it's pretty powerful.

With this setup I play most of the new games on highest settings exception for AA and AS. Also lately not that many PC games that have come out don't really challenge the PC power that much because you know, they still need to give it to a lot of people.

Where consoles games get bad framerates Sacred 2 to be exact, I get smoooooth gameplay. Where some games don't have highest setting on I CAN.


So you don't need to be THAT rich to have a decent rig. Ok, so it won't play the newest games after like 2 years but it will still play the games that are ported from the 360 to the PC on highest settings unless they really nerfed it.

I could afford this with my own money without a JOB. Now if I had a job I could easily boost this PC power in various ways without the need to worry about money problems.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

^ Yeah, I think lots of PC games are going to be scaled back just a bit on system requirements to fit the market.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Well, I played through Ghostbusters. The geometry is a bit demanding for my 'gaming' Vaio, but it handled quite well. Just a few complaints (assume SPOILERS):

1) You have to go to task manager and set the exe to low priority, or from the shortcut.
2) Once or twice dialogue didn't play, though I knew very well it was recorded because I've heard it before.
3) A couple areas where some of the sound goes dead. This could be my onboard sound or the game itself. It wasn't really a huge deal.
4) As epic as the epic orchestral buildups on Ghostbusters were, it's the same progression over and over: bwa Bwaaa---bwa Bwa BWAAAAAAA---BWAAAAAAAH. It made me tingly the first few times I've heard it because it capped a combination of excellent design elements, but after awhile it started to echo through my head. In fact, it's going through my head this very day whenever I turn the corner to see...the KITCHEN! (epic orchestral hit)
5) A 'shotgun' and an 'assault rifle?' I would've preferred upgrades like a helmet. I mostly kept to my slime, proton stream and the occasional Bosun dart to speed things up. I know the Ghostbusters were an inventive bunch, but the feel of it almost strayed out of bounds. Watching all four bots switch to the scattershot for a giant endboss rather than using the classic proton streams gave me pause for thought. I suppose it bridges the gap with gamers who've never seen Ghostbusters and it wasn't too obtrusive, but it still annoys.
6) The only time you can walk is with your PKE meter out, looking for icky stuff. I'm never going to let up on this, but all first/third person games need a walk function for the controllers at hand. On consoles, there's an analog stick. On the PC, there's either trot or stand still. Sure, I could use a gamepad for the PC, but if I was going to do that I'd have bought a PS3 copy. If they wired in a sprint control, they could've given us a walk control. Besides which, it looks damn goofy while you're trying to 'look professional' or just idly exploring home base.
7) Too much responsibility is foisted onto the player's shoulders. Now first, I understand that it's important to make it a challenge for players (and he's being trained story-wise), but the bots mostly stand around acting stupid until you find a clue, a secret passage or stumble on some ancient horror. There is some scripted initiative, but it's kept very low key, making the player look like a supergenius next to Ray and Egon. In addition to this, it's an end-of-the-world plot, so you think they'd get serious. All this could have been side-stepped by having the player compete with the bots in initiative for achievements or some sort of in-game reward.
8) The bots walk in front of your line of fire all the time, so make sure your proton stream arcs over where their heads would be when they do.
9) There's a few glitches in AI and physics that halt mission progression. Luckily, there are also numerous checkpoints that counteract these annoyances, but they are still there.
10) A great deal of configuration is done outside the game itself, which means (among other things) you're going to have to exit and re-enter until you get just that keyboard setup you're comfortable with.
11) The last guys were easy. The hardest boss was the librarian towards the beginning of the game. There was so much shit going on and so many high-damage swarms of projectiles that I was firing randomly trying to get hits.
12) Very little Slimer interaction on a friendly basis. You chase him around on a couple of missions, but then he's captured and that's a wrap until right before the credits roll. It's a short game and all, but I hoped for some 'Real Ghostbusters' Slimer action.
13) The main character is mute except for heavy breathing while sprinting, mouth breathing while cold and screaming when sprinting away from something that wants him dead. If it weren't for those brief vocalizations, I'd have expected him to be adressed as 'Doctor Freeeeee-maaann.' If the Ghostbusters are starting franchises, is it a great idea to get someone who can't answer the phone? Nothing's wrong with mute video game characters, but at the same time I don't have a problem with ones who aren't.
14) A vast amount of replay value on the PC has been eliminated by a lack of multiplayer, specifically coop.
15) No real bonus features. An video interview with the cast would've been nice. After all, the films were cult classic.
Other than that, yeah. For $30? 5/5. Go play it. Just make sure you have the system specs for it.

Favorite parts:

* Stay-Puft climbing up the building: Great job with the agonized, determined, worried and sad expressions. I almost felt bad blasting him off until he puked molten marshmallow at me.
* Library map: That pretty much sums up my experience. There's more cleverly-scripted sequences than you can shake a stick at, and it's as creepy as Thief 3's 'Cradle' map and AvP2 Marine maps combined.
* Realizing that the proton accelerator pack looked, played and sounded just like I hoped it would. Even wrestling ghosts into traps is fun.
* It's not a repeat of some of the more notorious Ghostbusters games.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-07-05 09:43:12)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard