DICE admits PC was not lead platform

  • 69 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
#2 Posted by jetsetwillie (857 posts) -

is this something i should get mad about?

#3 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@jetsetwillie said:

is this something i should get mad about?

Only if you have emotional problems.
#4 Posted by JamesKond (232 posts) -

That doesn't mean it wasn't the lead platform. It just means they concentrated on the console versions at the end (Because they were very buggy / could patch PC version easier). Which is logical because the most players are on console :)

#5 Edited by UnrealDP (1222 posts) -

Grrrr, Dice said that at some point in the back half of Battlefield 3s development they took more priority over the console versions RAAAAAGE, even though Battlefield 3s already out and proven to be best on the PC and a great game on all systems....

Seriously though, why did you post this? It's not priority makes any difference now seeing as the games already out and most everyone's satisfied.

#6 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@JamesKond said:

That doesn't mean it wasn't the lead platform. It just means they concentrated on the console versions at the end (Because they were very buggy / could patch PC version easier). Which is logical because the most players are on console :)

They said "mid-production we switched to console as lead platform". That means that all that time they were bleating about PC being lead, they were lying. 
 
It goes some way to explaining 64player Conquest Metro.
#7 Posted by ericdrum (405 posts) -

Lead platform is a misnomer anyway. It amounts to, did the PC, Xbox or PS3 have the most devs on it? Not every game is developed on one system first and ported over to the others. It is actually possible to have those resources split pretty equally. I've seen it first hand.

#8 Posted by Tebbit (4465 posts) -

I don't care what they focused on, because the PC version is way-the-eff better than the other versions regardless. What if the PS3 or 360 was the lead for the entire project? Doesn't matter.

#9 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -

It plays and looks great on PC. Who the fuck cares what the lead platform was. The fact that devs even have to talk about what the lead platform was indicates there's a serious problem with a vocal minority of the gaming audience.

#10 Posted by MachoFantastico (4682 posts) -

That headline is somewhat incorrect. It seems that DICE realised they needed to develop the console versions further along with an up and coming release date so concentrate mid production to make those. It doesn't seem like they hurt the PC versions in any way really.

#11 Posted by N7 (3588 posts) -

And that's why the PC version is so good. It's like PS3 development. When you port a PS3 game over to the 360, it works out better than actually developing for that console by itself, as the PS3 has extra layers of whodunits and whyfixits that can end up translating into that console itself, that wouldn't have happened on it's own by making it on the 360 straight-out.
 
So, you start a game on the PC, with all of these extra doodads and whatchamacallits and switch over to consoles half-way for that extra clean feeling, no matter what!

#12 Posted by SomeJerk (3245 posts) -

It started as a PC for a lead, kept going for a bit, and that's what matters. I could tell where the focus group went "hey can you dumb it down a little more for us plz" in the single-player.

#13 Posted by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

Remember this is a Swede dude speaking in English

1st - Nordics are very direct dudes and don't buy into sensationalism bullshit, They haven't been infected with the FOX News virus "spin everything to make sound worst"

2nd - Some stuff is always lost in translation

Regardless the PC version is so much better anyway, seems to me like they switched developed resources to consoles so they can finish it on time. I don't blame them is a business after all.

#14 Posted by Jack268 (3387 posts) -

AHH MY BLOOD IS BOILING WITH RAGE I CANT TAKE THIS 
 
WUUUAHAHHHHH

#15 Posted by Dany (7887 posts) -

this changes nothing.

#16 Posted by Jeffsekai (7032 posts) -

IM SO FUCKING MAD AT THIS CRAP, HOW CAN DICE DO THIS TO US OH MY GOD

#17 Posted by Beaudacious (928 posts) -

Op is looking to troll hard here, should be banned from the lead platform of games news.

#18 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@Beaudacious said:

Op is looking to troll hard here, should be banned from the lead platform of games news.

What's trolling about it? Dev says one thing before release, and then after release it turns out to be untrue.
 
Is that not relevant? If you don't care about getting solid information, and/or you expect developers to lie to you, why even come to a news section of a gaming site?
#19 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -

I am giving up on BF3, just uninstalled it and am writing a nasty letter to EA saying how much I hate their awesomely running PC game and why it doesn't look like a console game at all. Those textures are way too high res, I want muddy textures god dammit. And 64 players is hard, I can't even count that high. I am going back to MoH!

#20 Posted by GS_Dan (1403 posts) -

Because PSM3 are going to write about how much better PCs are to the PS3?

#21 Posted by wolf_blitzer85 (5256 posts) -
@mosdl said:

 And 64 players is hard, I can't even count that high.

Haha!
#22 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@wolf_blitzer85 said:
@mosdl said:

 And 64 players is hard, I can't even count that high.

Haha!
LOL! You should do stand-up!
#23 Posted by Liber (648 posts) -

Uninstalled.

#24 Posted by groin (846 posts) -

AHMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!

#25 Posted by Vodun (2370 posts) -

If during half the dev process they focused on PC, and the other half on consoles...doesn't that mean there was no lead at all?

Stop getting into hissy fits over shit that doesn't matter. Is the game awesome? Yes? Neato! Moving on.

#26 Edited by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

Seems silly to get upset over stuff like this at this point, but I wish devs would stop letting release dates dictate the development cycle. "When it's ready" works well for Valve and Blizzard, I don't see why so many AAA titles fall into this trap. Unless they're only AAA by merit of their release window ><

#27 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

No, PC was the lead but development shifted focus onto the consoles towards the end. Look at how poor the beta was on 360 and PS3 compared to PC, it was far more glitchy.

#28 Posted by Hitchenson (4682 posts) -

And yet the PC version is still a ton better than its console counterparts. Oh consoles.

#29 Posted by mosdl (3228 posts) -

@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:

@wolf_blitzer85 said:
@mosdl said:

And 64 players is hard, I can't even count that high.

Haha!
LOL! You should do stand-up!

A PC, 360 and PS3 go into a bar. The 360 red rings before getting a drink, the ps3 gets stuck downloading a update at 3k/s and the PC has to wait for Steam to download yet another TF2 update.

#30 Posted by sp00nsie (11 posts) -

In his defense, though unrelated to an article, PC gamers (like msyelf) are very sensitive to PC game franchises developing on consoles for very good reasons. It doesn't matter if PC was the lead platform or not, the game takes a quality-hit for being developed or simultaneously ported to consoles at all. It's something I've come to see more and more as franchises wade out into the console waters. They may have made PC the lead platform, but consoles weren't exactly on the backburner...the Frostbite 1.5 engine was ported to Windows and wasn't optimized for it. So they made Frostbite 2 in attempt to cover all the platform-bases. They were not designing the game thinking of a mouse and keyboard...they designed it thinking of mice, keyboards, and dual-analogs all at the same time. As a PC gamer, I notice that in the controls. I can feel it. You know when a game has been designed with a PC in mind, BF3 wasn't. I know this because I love BF2, DICE's crown jewel which soared because it was optimized for it's platform...Battlefield 3 doesn't feel anything like Battlefield 2...it feels like Bad Company, which feels like X-Box. It has nothing to do with high res textures or hdr or what-have-you. It's about how the user interacts, and there is no clutch way to port the extremely different ways of interacting that exist between consoles and the PC. I love my PC and I love my X-Box, but for way different reasons and way different games. Of course I don't actually condemn any developer for doing multi-platform releases....we're talking about the difference between a few million and a billion+ monies to be made.

#31 Posted by RsistncE (4496 posts) -

This matters why? The PC is the best version and that's all that matters.

#32 Posted by Jonnyflash80 (499 posts) -

I gotta hand it to DICE. They made one hell of a PC game even if that platform wasn't their main focus near the end.

#33 Posted by jakob187 (21670 posts) -

I honestly don't give a rat's ass what lead platform development is for any game. As long as the copies that we get in our hands work and they are awesome, I'm happier than a pig in shit. If that doesn't end up being the case, then I would say developers need to focus less on lead platform development and more on making a good game before they release it. Then again, I would also tell publishers to get off the developers' asses and let them make their fucking games. Think of how many BETTER games we'd have if developers got that extra six months to work on a game.

#34 Posted by Turambar (6784 posts) -
@DonPixel said:
Nordics are very direct dudes and don't buy into sensationalism bullshit, They haven't been infected with the FOX News virus "spin everything to make sound worst"
What does that have to do with anything?
#35 Posted by Ghost_Cat (1435 posts) -

It looks incredible on my PC, so I guess that was the right thing to do? Or maybe I shouldn't think too hard about it and just drop some more dudes.

#36 Posted by Vexxan (4620 posts) -

People care too much about lead platforms. Go play some goddamn video games instead. 

#37 Posted by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

@Turambar said:

@DonPixel said:
Nordics are very direct dudes and don't buy into sensationalism bullshit, They haven't been infected with the FOX News virus "spin everything to make sound worst"
What does that have to do with anything?

It has everything to do with this article, Have you set foot on Europe yet? The DICE dude was being honest the cheap ass journo spin it's comments a la Fox News style to get page views and a good old fan boy war.

A more constructive approach to that article would have been:

DICE GM says "Our ambition at DICE is to use the power of each individual platform to get the most out of the game" but that wouldn't been any fun isn't?

#38 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@Vegsen said:
People care too much about lead platforms. Go play some goddamn video games instead. 
No, people care about honesty. At least some people do.
#39 Posted by ericdrum (405 posts) -

@Ravenlight: Make sure that you distinguish between dev and publisher. The publisher is the one pushing for release dates. DICE could have a 'deliver when it's done' philosophy, but EA is in control of when that really happens.

#40 Posted by mfpantst (2574 posts) -
@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:
@jetsetwillie said:

is this something i should get mad about?

Only if you have emotional problems.
AGHGHGHGHG SO MAD RIGHT NOW
#41 Posted by falling_fast (2221 posts) -

is this something I should act all surprised upon hearing about?

#42 Posted by nickb64 (214 posts) -

1. Who gives a shit?
2. It's a great game no matter what

#43 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@Pr1mus said:

I like the title of the thread. Have you considered applying for a position at IGN or Kotaku?

How is the title specifically misleading? DICE have said, all the way up to release, that PC was lead platform. Now it emerges they weren't being honest. How is that so hard to understand?
#44 Posted by BulletproofMonk (2720 posts) -
@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:
@Vegsen said:
People care too much about lead platforms. Go play some goddamn video games instead. 
No, people care about honesty. At least some people do.
Do you really give a shit? I mean honestly, is it REALLY that big of a deal? 
#45 Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro (945 posts) -
@BulletproofMonk said:
@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:
@Vegsen said:
People care too much about lead platforms. Go play some goddamn video games instead. 
No, people care about honesty. At least some people do.
Do you really give a shit? I mean honestly, is it REALLY that big of a deal? 
No, it's not that big of a deal. Neither are videogames. Or websites. Does that have to be spelled out for you?
#46 Posted by damswedon (3191 posts) -

I'M SO FUCKING ANGRY!!!!!

Why am I supposed to be angry?

#47 Posted by BulletproofMonk (2720 posts) -
@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:
@BulletproofMonk said:
@Zatoichi_Sanjuro said:
@Vegsen said:
People care too much about lead platforms. Go play some goddamn video games instead. 
No, people care about honesty. At least some people do.
Do you really give a shit? I mean honestly, is it REALLY that big of a deal? 
No, it's not that big of a deal. Neither are videogames. Or websites. Does that have to be spelled out for you?
You're the one who started talking about honesty here. No need to be a dick.
#48 Posted by OsvaldoMoreno (63 posts) -

so what?...

#49 Posted by zaglis (910 posts) -

Well that explains EVERYTHING.

#50 Posted by damswedon (3191 posts) -

@Pr1mus said:

@damswedon said:

I'M SO FUCKING ANGRY!!!!!

Why am I supposed to be angry?

Just because!!!! who needs a reason to be angry anyway

I'M MAD AS HELL AND I WON'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!!

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.