"Speaking with Visceral Games at a recentDead Space 3 event, games.on.net learned that the PC version of Dead Space 3 will be a straight port of the console versions.

The PC version is understood to have some graphics options, but no support for DirectX 11, no additional high-resolution textures, and no further graphical enhancements above and beyond those seen on the PS3 or Xbox 360."

http://games.on.net/2013/01/dead-space-3-on-pc-to-be-straight-port-no-additional-features-added/

Seems real lazy considering the support that many other devs have for the PC.

Between this, the recently announced micro transactions, and the more action focused direction of the game, EA and visceral seem hell bent on not getting my money.

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

I'll still get it for PC. The only real bummer is the lack of high res textures.

So no KB/M support?

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

I thought SimCity fans were hyped for the new game. What changed?

@TooWalrus said:

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

I thought SimCity fans were hyped for the new game. What changed?

I obviously can't speak for all fans, but for me, the bullshit surrounding SimCity has drowned out any good that that game had to bring. The DRM, the complete lack of a single player experience, the inevitable rise of DLC, lack of modding etc. And I really did love SimCity, I spent all day Sunday working on a Megapolis on the SNES version (30k short, woo/boo.)

I'm sure the game as it is will be fine, and I'll probably get it when it's a LOT cheaper, but right now I want nothing to do with it.

No real PC port, microtransactions, removing what made the original game fresh and interesting.

EA, ladies and gentlemen.

It was the same with the first 2. Sad but not unexpected.

I just love how in recent years Capcom and Electronic Arts decided to throw all the good will they amassed straight into the shitter.

Wee I for one am shocked.

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Will it run ok on my pc unlike Most wanted? [y]/[n]

All I care about.

EDIT: Ok, and custom resolutions.

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Except for the part where you think the developer owes you DirectX 11 features and hi-res textures and a bunch of other bells and whistles that they should've been hard at work on just for a small segment of their user base. I fail to see how having all three versions run at the same quality (which, for Dead Space, is excellent for the record) is somehow a bad thing. Sure they won't have hi-res textures or a bunch of DX11 features out of the box, but does that really mean the developers were somehow lazy and that they deserve derision because boohoo you can't max out uberdupersupersampling on this one game?

It's not a big deal and does not impact the quality of the game one fucking iota.

@Oldirtybearon: They don't owe us but we can make a choice and decide not to buy a product based on features missing or lacking. I am a PC gamer, I don't buy products that run less so on my PC than they otherwise could because of a decision of the makers of said product. This is a simple transaction. They fail to offer what I am looking for of course I am not going to buy it. They don't have to offer it but neither do I have to except a lower quality that other titles on the PC are offering, i.e. other ports of games that come with better options built with a PC market in mind.

@Ekpyroticuniverse: So you're not going to buy what could be a fantastic game because you don't get directX 11 and higher resolution textures? Alright, I'll enjoy my game on the 360.

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Except for the part where you think the developer owes you DirectX 11 features and hi-res textures and a bunch of other bells and whistles that they should've been hard at work on just for a small segment of their user base. I fail to see how having all three versions run at the same quality (which, for Dead Space, is excellent for the record) is somehow a bad thing. Sure they won't have hi-res textures or a bunch of DX11 features out of the box, but does that really mean the developers were somehow lazy and that they deserve derision because boohoo you can't max out uberdupersupersampling on this one game?

It's not a big deal and does not impact the quality of the game one fucking iota.

Yeah, was expecting as much from EA.

shit, were is that 'pc snobbery gif ' when i need it.

Square-Enix may have shit for JRPGs but how did their financially pressured studios do so much good work and deliver onto us the god sent game that is Sleeping Dogs PC, when this is what EA's going to give us?

@Baillie:

No I am not going to buy the game because Dead space 1 and 2 had poor mouse implementation, because the game is lacking in features I want from a game I am going to pay for and because it is not a product that appeals to me anymore. This loss of appeal is for a whole host of reasons, including the change of game style from horror to more action, in a similar move to resident evil games. The loss of PC features is another straw that made me not want the game any longer. Can I ask what features appeal to you on 360 and what if removed would make you not buy a game? Would kinect only controls for example make you not wish to buy a game or not? I am not a crusading PC gamer, But i am a consumer willing to only spend my cash on games that appeal to my tastes including my tastes of being able to make use of my high end PC rig. Also why are you so angry because others choose not to spend their money on something because it lacks features that appeal to them.

How is this a surprise to anyone? I seem to remember Dead Space 1 & 2 being straight ports as well... weren't they both locked at 30fps by default? I'll still be picking it up for PC, either way. I love this series.

@Oldirtybearon said:

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Except for the part where you think the developer owes you DirectX 11 features and hi-res textures and a bunch of other bells and whistles that they should've been hard at work on just for a small segment of their user base. I fail to see how having all three versions run at the same quality (which, for Dead Space, is excellent for the record) is somehow a bad thing. Sure they won't have hi-res textures or a bunch of DX11 features out of the box, but does that really mean the developers were somehow lazy and that they deserve derision because boohoo you can't max out uberdupersupersampling on this one game?

It's not a big deal and does not impact the quality of the game one fucking iota.

If they aren't going to release a PC port of their game with features that are the norm for almost every other PC game in existence, then don't do a PC port.

It's easy to say the developers don't owe me anything, which is 100% true, but guess what, I don't owe the developers anything either. If they are going to release a half assed PC port, then I am not going to give them a cent of my money.

You can't say that it's OK for them to be lazy, and that the developers don't "owe us anything", and then suggest that we are "difficult" because we refuse to buy that terrible port, we owe the developers as little as they owe us.

I remember Dead Space 2 having a pretty decent PC port. The graphics were great and the controller worked, so that's kinda all I need. Now if this is Origin only, count me out. I haven't even finished with DS 1 or 2, so I'm not going to reinstall origin for this one.

I never understand why developers who are going to make a PC version of a game, don't just develop the PC version as the lead platform and then port it to consoles after. It is far easier to port to the 360/PS3 with their homogenous hardware than it is to port to the PC after.

Either they figure that the pc market isn't going to be very important for the game or don't have faith in it so don't want to waste money on it. Is it getting a lot of advertisements?

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

Why that? Actual hands-on feedback for both those games is overwhelmingly positive, especially for SimCity.

The first two games were straight ports as well and were both, in fact, gorgeous games that could run on a wide variety of hardware and had a decent number of options.

I am not too concerned about this aspect of the game. I do wish we could get good mouse and keyboard controls, though. I remember thinking "Wow, these games ought to control really well with an M+K!" and then being thoroughly disappointed when I actually got to play Dead Space with a mouse and keyboard.

@ajamafalous said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Except for the part where you think the developer owes you DirectX 11 features and hi-res textures and a bunch of other bells and whistles that they should've been hard at work on just for a small segment of their user base. I fail to see how having all three versions run at the same quality (which, for Dead Space, is excellent for the record) is somehow a bad thing. Sure they won't have hi-res textures or a bunch of DX11 features out of the box, but does that really mean the developers were somehow lazy and that they deserve derision because boohoo you can't max out uberdupersupersampling on this one game?

It's not a big deal and does not impact the quality of the game one fucking iota.

Why does somebody come up with this fucking terrible line of thought every fucking time? If a company doesn't want to put in the extra work to release a decent (I'm not even talking mindblowing here, just decent) PC port, then they don't deserve my money. It's as simple as that. They're still a company trying to sell me a product, so shitting on a disc and trying to sell it to me like Saints Row 2 or Dark Souls isn't something anyone should happily and eagerly let them do. They don't owe me anything, but if a product fails to meet my needs and expectations, I don't owe them my money, either.

Vote with your dollar.

Follow the money.

Dead Space 2 still looks pretty sharp on pc, soooo...

@Seppli said:

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

Why that? Actual hands-on feedback for both those games is overwhelmingly positive, especially for SimCity.

Wait, yeah, what's wrong with SimCity now exactly?

@ajamafalous: I play PC games and I really like when developers put in extra effort on that version of the game, but @Oldirtybearon is right. They don't owe everyone a fancier version of their game just because it's possible for them to make it. They're not shitting on a disc; it's theoretically the exact same game as the console versions, take it or leave it. Minus the petulance.

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity...

Always-on DRM? I'm curious as to what the negativity might be.

@ajamafalous said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

Except for the part where you think the developer owes you DirectX 11 features and hi-res textures and a bunch of other bells and whistles that they should've been hard at work on just for a small segment of their user base. I fail to see how having all three versions run at the same quality (which, for Dead Space, is excellent for the record) is somehow a bad thing. Sure they won't have hi-res textures or a bunch of DX11 features out of the box, but does that really mean the developers were somehow lazy and that they deserve derision because boohoo you can't max out uberdupersupersampling on this one game?

It's not a big deal and does not impact the quality of the game one fucking iota.

Why does somebody come up with this fucking terrible line of thought every fucking time? If a company doesn't want to put in the extra work to release a decent (I'm not even talking mindblowing here, just decent) PC port, then they don't deserve my money. It's as simple as that. They're still a company trying to sell me a product, so shitting on a disc and trying to sell it to me like Saints Row 2 or Dark Souls isn't something anyone should happily and eagerly let them do. They don't owe me anything, but if a product fails to meet my needs and expectations, I don't owe them my money, either.

In Dark Souls' defense, it was at least fixed. Not by the developer, but it was fixed and is more than excellent as a result. Please don't misconstrue this as me saying Dead Space 3 will be "fixed" on PC as I really doubt it will or can be, but Dark Souls is juuuuust fine.

@PillClinton: @Seppli: I will be completely honest in my answer. It's not the SimCity I was expecting, nor is it a SimCity I want to play. Because I already played it.

Remember SimCity Societies? That was the SimCity not made by Maxis. In that you plopped down specific buildings to gain specific effects, much like they've been demoing with their Casino city demonstrations. In SCS, you could make prosperous, creative, totalitarian etc. cities and your citizens would react accordingly. This new SimCity seems like that game, refined, with a better simulation engine, and that's great! I really liked SimCity Societies, but like I said above, I've played it.

Not to mention the DRM, total lack of single player, no local save game storage, no modding, DLC (it's EA, I'm sure there will be some, they're already touting special city looks if you buy into the special editions.) All of that combined has just driven me away from the game. Saying EA killed it is perhaps a bit too strong.

@Seppli said:

@dekkadekkadekka said:

EA have killed two franchises recently that I fucking ADORED: SimCity and now Dead Space 3.

Thanks EA.

ThEA.

Why that? Actual hands-on feedback for both those games is overwhelmingly positive, especially for SimCity.

You don't understand, those people who've actually played the games don't know what they are talking about and besides they are probably being paid by EA to say nice things.

@Baillie:

Either you are being woefully ignorant to my point or you simply don’t get it. I do not want to buy the game. It does not appeal to me. It is lacking features I look for in a product of this nature and features I can find in its counterparts. Look would you buy a 360 game that lacked features of a PS3 for no good reason other than that the developer had not taken the effort to include them? Would you buy food you once liked but now dislike because the makers had changed the taste? I doubt it on both accounts. All I am saying is you are right, EA don’t owe us anything but I also don’t have to buy a game I know I will be dissatisfied with. They can choose to not implement features I look for and I can choose to not buy the game. It really is that simply and I don’t understand why someone clearly cognitively able to use a keyboard is unable to grasp such a simple thing.

I'm mostly concerned about if the PC version is going to get DLC or its gonna be shit on like it was previously in the other DS games.

@Huey2k2 said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

so there's parity across all three versions (something Dead Space is known for) and suddenly the game is shit and nobody wants anything to do with it?

Christ you PC guys are difficult.

This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever read.

The PS3 and 360 are relatively close to each other when it comes to power, also they are CONSOLES. Every single 360 and every single PS3 is exactly the same. PC's are all over the board, some people have far more powerful ones, some have far less powerful ones. Not giving PC gamers the options to utilize their more powerful systems is absolutely lazy from a developer standpoint. Just because you don't have a powerful PC doesn't mean we should be punishing those people who do.

I really don't get the beef as long as the port is completely functional. Yeah it won't have some extra graphical perks on PC, as long as it runs as well or better than the console versions is it really that much of an issue? I wouldn't call it lazy either, the game they designed was designed for consoles so DX11 and High Res textures weren't part of the design process. Adding in extra stuff for what will probably be a minority of their audience just doesn't make sense. Complain all you want if it's poorly optimized and is difficult to run on most systems but complaining that it doesn't have extra stuff is just being greedy. It's a trend that many PC gamers follow, of feeling entitled to more than the consoles cause they have a more powerful system. If you want to utilize your powerful PC then play games that were made with powerful PC's in mind not consoles that are running nearly 6 year old hardware. A PC exclusive game, or multiplat that was designed for PC as a priority, should have DX11 and high res textures but expecting them from something that was never designed to utilize those components is just foolish.

I can't see the logic in calling the game a bad PC port if it doesn't include extra features yet runs equal or better than it's console counterparts.

As long as it's a stable experience that doesn't crash or drop in frame rate then I'm fine with it, it's the game play people should be concerned for and hopefully early coverage was misleading.

@Miketakon said:

"Speaking with Visceral Games at a recentDead Space 3 event, games.on.net learned that the PC version of Dead Space 3 will be a straight port of the console versions.

The PC version is understood to have some graphics options, but no support for DirectX 11, no additional high-resolution textures, and no further graphical enhancements above and beyond those seen on the PS3 or Xbox 360."

http://games.on.net/2013/01/dead-space-3-on-pc-to-be-straight-port-no-additional-features-added/

Wow, that is a no-buy for me if so.

Why would I play old gen stuff on my PC.

@deox said:

How is this a surprise to anyone? I seem to remember Dead Space 1 & 2 being straight ports as well... weren't they both locked at 30fps by default? I'll still be picking it up for PC, either way. I love this series.

No, the framerate on both DS games was unlocked.

Anyway, people seem to be forgetting they're still getting a much higher resolution and framerate on PC, same as the previous two games, so what's the problem? Extra bells and whistles are nice and all, but let's face it, DX11 wouldn't exactly make much of a difference when the game isn't built for it from the ground up.

@clstirens said:

Will it run ok on my pc unlike Most wanted? [y]/[n]

All I care about.

EDIT: Ok, and custom resolutions.

It's still the same DS engine which ran ridiculously well on anything.

Most Wanted was a terrible port in terms of optimization. Nice looking game maxed out but no reason that even a 680 can't get a constant 60FPS.

The no additional textures is a real bummer. DS2 was a pretty straight PC port as well and that game was fine, but it's 2013 and I feel like not even incorporating higher resolution textures is unacceptable in this day and age.

@deox said:

How is this a surprise to anyone? I seem to remember Dead Space 1 & 2 being straight ports as well... weren't they both locked at 30fps by default? I'll still be picking it up for PC, either way. I love this series.

I didn't play the second on PC but the first was pretty barebones, still, it looked decent and it wasn't locked at 30 FPS. Only issue was the v-sync/mouse smoothing jank, but that was fixable.

As long as it has v-sync and I can crank up AA & AF i'm fine with this. I havent needed to upgrade my PC in over 5 years thanks to shoddy porting ;p