Jump to content

Home

TFU for PC?


Recommended Posts

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

 

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

 

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

 

It probably wouldn't be cost-efficient for LA to do so anyway - people would need a very high-end spec computer to probs even run the game; a high-end spec comp that generally people can't afford or are unwilling to afford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone feel the game should or will possibly be released on the PC anytime soon? I believe its too good a game for them not to spend the little extra cash into developing a PC version, since a LOT of gamers prefer the PC over consoles. If anybody gets any news about a PC version please post it here.

 

Why exactly did they not want to develop a PC version up front? Was it anything related to costs? Or something else?

 

From what I remember one of the developer said that they weren't doing a PC version since the average PC wasn't powerful enough to handle the game. Sounds a bit odd to me since they do a PS2 version which isn't exactly state of the art hardware by now (even though the average PC owner hardly have the monster hardware some of the newer games today tend to require). I don't remember where I read that though, so take it with a grain of salt. :)

 

I'd guess it's probably easier and cheaper to develop for consoles as well since you know what hardware the player will have, and console makers often give extensive support to developers working on a product for their platform. Games, especially highly anticipated ones, often tend to sell better for consoles than for PC as well. Perhaps not too surprising since a good gamer PC can be prohibitively expensive in comparison, even though you can use it for much more in addition to playing games.

 

Kind of ironic in a way that the rapid advances of the PC hardware manufacturers and subsequent high requirements of many PC games are killing the viability of the PC platform as a gaming market. :)

 

I hope they eventually reconsider and do a PC version though since STFU looks very interesting from what I've seen so far. It would be a shame to not be able to play it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Agreed. Although, having played several games on my friends' PS2 systems, I personally feel a PC game is easier to handle, since there are much more mappable keys. Won't TFU have many different functions, powers, actions, etc? How will they map all that into a single controller?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gargoyle_King and stoffe are right, there minimum specs required to run the game would be too great for the average PC user. (I remember hearing one of the developers say that.)

 

Personally, I would love to play it on the PC. I hope they reconsider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've said before, if the PS2, PSP, and DS can handle a less "amped" version of TFU, so can practically any PC. They need to think before they say things about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines, when they can clearly release a less advanced version of it (no DMM or Euphoria or anything else of the sort) for PCs.

 

Besides, they are completely wrong about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines. Look at games like Crysis and tell me if that looks any worse than TFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there will be a PC version we probably won't be hearing about it for a while. Most games are ported to different platforms months or years after release. :(

 

If they think its too powerful why did they bother making Empire At War.

 

EaW's graphics aren't really that spectacular. That and the fact there hadn't been a SW RTS since Battlegrounds gave it a pretty good market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I remember one of the developer said that they weren't doing a PC version since the average PC wasn't powerful enough to handle the game. Sounds a bit odd to me since they do a PS2 version which isn't exactly state of the art hardware by now (even though the average PC owner hardly have the monster hardware some of the newer games today tend to require). I don't remember where I read that though, so take it with a grain of salt. :)

Totally agree stoffe...It was posted here btw, so no grains of salt need to be taken ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've said before, if the PS2, PSP, and DS can handle a less "amped" version of TFU, so can practically any PC. They need to think before they say things about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines, when they can clearly release a less advanced version of it (no DMM or Euphoria or anything else of the sort) for PCs.
Yeah, I think they could find a better way to phrase their response to the "Why isn't LA making a PC version of TFU?" question. My question to you though is would you (or any PC gamer) be satisfied with playing a PC version of TFU without DMM or euphoria or with dumbed down versions of those technologies? I'm thinking that is what the PS2 and handheld console versions of TFU are going to get and as for myself I wouldn't be satisfied if a PC version of TFU had inferior graphics to the PS 3 and Xbox 360.

Besides, they are completely wrong about how only next-gen consoles can handle the new engines. Look at games like Crysis and tell me if that looks any worse than TFU.
I think you're comparing two different things here. You'll need a DirectX 10 graphics card to get the full experience out of Crysis. DX 10 cards have been out less than a year. IIRC the Xbox 360 uses a graphics API based on DX 9. Remember the PS 3 and Xbox 360 were designed to support multi-threaded games and can process 6 or more threads at a time. Most PC's out there only support 1 or 2 threads. However without knowing what LucasArts came up with as a minimum spec for a PC version of TFU then I think it's hard to say they've got it completely wrong.

 

I'm very disappointed LucasArts isn't developing TFU for PC. It sounds like this is going to be a great story that bridges the time between Eps. III and IV. I hope they do end up porting it to PC at some point the road but think this isn't likely as LucasArts hasn't released a game for platforms it wasn't originally announced for in quite some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question to you though is would you (or any PC gamer) be satisfied with playing a PC version of TFU without DMM or euphoria or with dumbed down versions of those technologies?

If I knew for a fact that LA would never release a PC version of TFU with all the advanced technologies, I would gladly settle for a dumbed down version. At least I would be able to play the game. Obviously, it wouldn't be nearly as fun, but it should be just as good as the JK series, which I happen to like very much.

 

It's just not worth the $400-$600 that it takes to buy a next-gen console to have the ability to play one game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA won't release a dumbed down version - they'd have to re do the whole engine practically and it would definitely detract from the ability to smash everything up and do all the cool things with the environment and force. It also wouldn't be cost effective to re do the engine the worse gameplay in the new engine would mean it wouldn't actually sell as well.

 

I think the main problem isn't graphics - its processing the effects the force has on the environment which basically means releasing two different games - one with all the sub processes for throwing people through walls and moving the environment around - and one without.

 

Graphics are too overrated in games nowadays - we all know the best games we end up going back to are good stories and gameplay - thats why classic games stay (x-wing vs tie fighter?).

 

As for new gen I think with the release of Halo 3 later this year and Force Unleashed next year I might buy in just after Christmas when the price will proberably be lowest and go for an Xbox 360 (better and cheaper).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Yep

 

It's called reading between the lines (aka common sense) ;)

 

A PS2 version would be more than doable on any of today's mid to top range PCs...

Why not make it with the ability to turn off certain features even? Like so many other PC games do (KotOR for example, my PC can run it, which is all I need, but I've yet to play it on a system that can run it with every setting maxed out)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EaW's graphics aren't really that spectacular. That and the fact there hadn't been a SW RTS since Battlegrounds gave it a pretty good market.

 

:lol: The only decent RTS game to come out on the SW market, other attempts such as Galactic Battlegrounds & Force Commander were pretty shabby to say the least....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have to code the game on a computer before they ever create the different platforms, and it works on their own computers, which admittedly probably have high end hardware, I don't understand why they can't use that for a PC version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it absolutely necessary for high end graphics? I mean, something on the average level of KotOR or whatever would be totally acceptable by majority of PC gamers, right?

 

:lol: The only decent RTS game to come out on the SW market, other attempts such as Galactic Battlegrounds & Force Commander were pretty shabby to say the least....

While I haven't played EaW, I have played Battlegrounds and loved it. It's not at all shabby, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think the graphics are the issue. I agree graphics aren't necessary and if it was simply re doing the graphics I think they'd release it for PC.

 

Although they are programming the game on computers they are extremely high end computers as all programmers use for new gen - this means its not that it wont work on computers its just there are only a few people in the world who can afford a computer that will run it. The engine has been designed for the processor of Xbox 360 and PS3. No computer owned by a gamer can run as many threads and processes as the new gen consoles and so the computer wouldn't be able to run the basic engine. Its like not being able to do the maths - it doesn't matter what numbers there are if you dont know the method then you can't work it out. It would mean computers catching up with new gen to be able to run it (10 years, 20 years or if your serious invest in a massive computer that has the capability to run all sorts of console disks - basically the computers they're using to program it).

 

If you think about it to work out the physics of a person flying through the air and crashing through three walls all of which cause the person to spin in a different way and speed then the basics are pretty hard even without the textures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...