Set before the events of the original Star Wars trilogy, The Force Unleashed casts the player as Darth Vader's secret apprentice tasked with hunting down the last of the Jedi Order.
Link has spoilers, but the new DLC with Boba Fett and Tattooine stuff and whatnot is a continuation of the story from Force Unleashed. Color me double psyched!!!
" Its also coming to 360/PS3, so we can safely assume NO NEW STAR WARS THIS HOLIDAY. AT ALL. "
OOPS! Didn't notice the part about PS3 and 360. NOW I'M PSYCHED!!! "
Reading articles again, for those that skimread the first time, since 1993. Its a service I provide. "
Dood, between seeing the C&C 4 trailer, hearing about this, all the shit at Comic Con, and still busting nuts over the Tron Legacy trailer...my brain is cranking on overload to the point of detonation right now!!!
Plus, I've still gotta wrap my head around this holiday's release schedule!!!
" Its also coming to 360/PS3, so we can safely assume NO NEW STAR WARS THIS HOLIDAY. AT ALL. "
OOPS! Didn't notice the part about PS3 and 360. NOW I'M PSYCHED!!! "
Reading articles again, for those that skimread the first time, since 1993. Its a service I provide. "
Dood, between seeing the C&C 4 trailer, hearing about this, all the shit at Comic Con, and still busting nuts over the Tron Legacy trailer...my brain is cranking on overload to the point of detonation right now!!!
Plus, I've still gotta wrap my head around this holiday's release schedule!!!
"
Good luck paying, son. *looks at own empty wallet and sighs*
Im so going to get this. I got Force Unleashed on my PSP and love it but the 360 almost seemed diffrent enough to get seperate but not enough but this seems worth it, especially if its released at a slightly lower price since its a rerelease.
Also what happened to them saying it wouldent come to PC because it couldent handle all the physics? Apart from the fact its total bullcrap and they know it (unless its just bad coding on there part) are PC's suddenly capable of physics according to them?
As long as I get my game and a lightsaber he holds behind him, that made the PSP version ;) well not quite lol but its damb cool.
Also what happened to them saying it wouldent come to PC because it couldent handle all the physics? Apart from the fact its total bullcrap and they know it (unless its just bad coding on there part) are PC's suddenly capable of physics according to them?
Well for one it's being ported by Aspyr, not the makers of the game. The other thing is the game may still end up being super taxing, PCs have come a ways since the game came out. Maybe they're implementing hardware accelerated PhysX?
"Well for one it's being ported by Aspyr, not the makers of the game. The other thing is the game may still end up being super taxing, PCs have come a ways since the game came out. Maybe they're implementing hardware accelerated PhysX? "
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = /
"Well for one it's being ported by Aspyr, not the makers of the game. The other thing is the game may still end up being super taxing, PCs have come a ways since the game came out. Maybe they're implementing hardware accelerated PhysX? "
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = / "
Thats what I was saying too lol neither console is as powerful as a high or even a medium end PC. If they stick by what there saying, that PCs somehow couldent handle the physics, and are implementing hardware PhysX then how many people will actually be able to play there game? PhysX cards were never that populer and Nvidia implementation is a powerful Gfx card and an 8 series or higher second card (as the PhysX card) which isnt a very common thing to find in PCs.
Unless they code it badly I very much doubt that it will tax and reasnoble PC.
@Pazy: The original quote that was given by LA's representation, being producer Cameron Suey, sounded something like this kind of nonsense:
"In this case, it just really wasn't feasible. As much as I really understand everybody's concerns and I really understand that people want to play the game on their platform of choice, the truth of it is, the way this game is designed, based around these physics, that are simulation based and very procedural, it would take a very powerful PC to pull them off. This is definitely strecthing the Xbox and the PS3 really to the farthest they can go."
I mean, I'm sorry...but there have never been any REAL details released as to why it wouldn't run. However, Crysis and its CryEngine2 features a pretty heavy set of graphical and physics requirements from a computer. When I look at Company of Heroes and the physics in that game, or even Dawn of War II, I just don't see how this game THAT CAME OUT ON CONSOLES can outdo a PC. It's a ridiculous idea that is continually presented by people who want to say that PC gaming is dead...only because it takes more than the intelligence of an incompetent 9-year-old monkey to play on a PC.
Oh, and let's not forget that the PC runs Half-Life...muthafucking...2...better...than...the...consoles.
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = / "
Consoles are often more powerful than PC. And I think Lucasarts was referring to the average gaming PC, not any gaming PC. "
Than an average PC? An average PC bought now (or in the past few years even) has at least a Dual Core CPU probably in the 2.4-3.0 range with 2gb of Ram. If its a gaming PC in the last few years its probably got atleast a Dual Core CPU 2.6-3.0, 2+gb Ram and a Nvidia 8600/8800 or more recently something in the 9 series.
Thats what you get if you walk into a PC store and say "Gimme a PC", that could easily run this game, it can run Crysis and Far Cry 2 as well which is a pretty high benchmark.
Think about Cod 4, it can run on consoles at about 70/80% of the graphics quality and half of the resolution of a standard gaming PC, plus consoles games are optomised for one hardware set and PC games are optomised for many which means Consoles games need less powerful hardware to run the same engine and assets.
Basically what im saying is this game could be done easily on a standard PC. Im not trying to be PC fanboy about this (I hate fanboyism) but it is a fact that PCs are more powerful than consoles but are less user friendly of course thank a console.
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = / "
Consoles are often more powerful than PC. And I think Lucasarts was referring to the average gaming PC, not any gaming PC. "
Average gaming PC? Are you even AWARE of what an "average" gaming PC is?
The sole reason they didn't release the game on the PC is easy: kids play on consoles, and they know that's who is going to buy the game. Therefore, they came up with a bullshit excuse without realizing that the PC crowd is smarter than that. Again, I point out Half-Life 2 and Crysis. Half-Life 2 was running on PCs LOOOOOOOONG before the consoles...and even on the consoles, they had to dumb the graphics down quite a bit to fit the physics into it!!!
Pazy makes a great point in saying that Call of Duty 4's graphical quality is trumped when put on the consoles. That game is not EVEN physics-intensive...so WHY did the graphics have to be toned down?
It's a simple, simple, simple fact: consoles are weaker in power than PCs.
" Correction, consoles are weaker than gaming PCs =P "
Correction, consoles made for gaming are weaker than PC's made for gaming.
It would be unfair to say a PC made for surfing the internet (like a low power netbook) is inferior to a console since its made to handle Email/Im and maybe at a stretch SD streaming video and a console is made to play high quality games which is a lot more intensive than reading email.
Whereas it would be fair to say a console is inferior to a gaming PC since both are made to play games (or in the case of the PC made to play games well in addition to other things).
" @Pazy: The original quote that was given by LA's representation, being producer Cameron Suey, sounded something like this kind of nonsense:
"In this case, it just really wasn't feasible. As much as I really understand everybody's concerns and I really understand that people want to play the game on their platform of choice, the truth of it is, the way this game is designed, based around these physics, that are simulation based and very procedural, it would take a very powerful PC to pull them off. This is definitely strecthing the Xbox and the PS3 really to the farthest they can go."
I mean, I'm sorry...but there have never been any REAL details released as to why it wouldn't run. However, Crysis and its CryEngine2 features a pretty heavy set of graphical and physics requirements from a computer. When I look at Company of Heroes and the physics in that game, or even Dawn of War II, I just don't see how this game THAT CAME OUT ON CONSOLES can outdo a PC. It's a ridiculous idea that is continually presented by people who want to say that PC gaming is dead...only because it takes more than the intelligence of an incompetent 9-year-old monkey to play on a PC.
Oh, and let's not forget that the PC runs Half-Life...muthafucking...2...better...than...the...consoles.
It was a business decision on Lucasarts part obviously. That didn't want to recreate a Crysis or GTA4 like scenario where porting wouldn't be worthwhile to them. They acknowledged that there were capable PCs, but it'd require a high end one to run properly. The idea that PCs are always better than consoles is a ridiculous idea pushed by PC fanboys and technically ignorant individuals only.
Why bring up Half Life 2 anyways? The port probably could have been better, although you may or may not be aware it runs with extra details that you can't get on PC. Basically the entire Episode 2 set of effects from HDR, better fire, better character models, dynamic shadows cast from the flashlight.
@Pazy said:
" @Diamond said:
" @jakob187 said:
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = / "
Consoles are often more powerful than PC. And I think Lucasarts was referring to the average gaming PC, not any gaming PC. "
Than an average PC? An average PC bought now (or in the past few years even) has at least a Dual Core CPU probably in the 2.4-3.0 range with 2gb of Ram. If its a gaming PC in the last few years its probably got atleast a Dual Core CPU 2.6-3.0, 2+gb Ram and a Nvidia 8600/8800 or more recently something in the 9 series.
Thats what you get if you walk into a PC store and say "Gimme a PC", that could easily run this game, it can run Crysis and Far Cry 2 as well which is a pretty high benchmark.
Think about Cod 4, it can run on consoles at about 70/80% of the graphics quality and half of the resolution of a standard gaming PC, plus consoles games are optomised for one hardware set and PC games are optomised for many which means Consoles games need less powerful hardware to run the same engine and assets.
Basically what im saying is this game could be done easily on a standard PC. Im not trying to be PC fanboy about this (I hate fanboyism) but it is a fact that PCs are more powerful than consoles but are less user friendly of course thank a console.
I'm not talking about the average PC bought today. I'm talking about the average PC used for gaming today. Look at Steam's hardware polls. The average gaming PC today is weaker than the consoles. That's just the way it is.
@jakob187 said:
" @Diamond said:
" @jakob187 said:
I'm sorry. I must've missed the part where consoles were more powerful than PCs. -_- That's why they have Crysis on the 360, I guess. = / "
Consoles are often more powerful than PC. And I think Lucasarts was referring to the average gaming PC, not any gaming PC. "
Average gaming PC? Are you even AWARE of what an "average" gaming PC is?
The sole reason they didn't release the game on the PC is easy: kids play on consoles, and they know that's who is going to buy the game. Therefore, they came up with a bullshit excuse without realizing that the PC crowd is smarter than that. Again, I point out Half-Life 2 and Crysis. Half-Life 2 was running on PCs LOOOOOOOONG before the consoles...and even on the consoles, they had to dumb the graphics down quite a bit to fit the physics into it!!!
Pazy makes a great point in saying that Call of Duty 4's graphical quality is trumped when put on the consoles. That game is not EVEN physics-intensive...so WHY did the graphics have to be toned down?
It's a simple, simple, simple fact: consoles are weaker in power than PCs.
I am aware of the average gaming PC, you however are not, apparently.
What's with the BS of kids playing on consoles anyways? That's just the kind of shit PC fanboys always bring up. Statistically kids actually play more on PC, and I can link you the study that makes that claim if you like. Yes, me getting a high end modern PC hasn't changed my opinion on idiotic PC fanboys either. They're as annoying as they ever were.
Point out Half Life 2? Please, read above. If you still don't get my point, let me point out GTA4 on PC? You don't even know what the fuck you're talking about anyways, as they dramatically UPGRADED the graphics on 360....
Another simple fact, when 360 came out it was more powerful than any gaming PC for a good half a year if not more. When you make ignorant generalizations like you've been doing you're the one that ends up looking ignorant.
I don't remember you being such a ignorant fanboy in the past.... What the hell is wrong with you?
This is always the kind of shit a person has to deal with when arguing against PC gamers. It's such a fucking pain.
@Diamond: Goodness. Really? Have you SEEN where I work, sir? Let me refresh in case you missed it, man:
I'd like to think that the 40 Antec 900 cases we've got sitting in here and the Associate's Degree in CNIT...as well as my many years of PC building...tells me you are speaking condescending remarks to the wrong person...so back off. Yeah, 360 WAS more powerful when it first launched. WAS. PS2 WAS more powerful than PC when it came out. WAS. You notice that word keeps coming up? I did, too.
You can throw GTA4 around all you want, but it's not my fault that Rockstar has a poor ability to port a game over. Meanwhile, you are pointing out a game that runs on RAGE, which is an engine BUILT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CONSOLES!!! It was NOT built with PC porting in mind.
Going over to these Steam hardware polls - which I've looked at plenty of times - how much of that takes into account overclocked processor speeds? How about shadowing for increased performance? RAM simulation? Sure, it might bog down some parts of your system a bit, but Right, I forgot...you are talking about the AVERAGE GAMING PC - go to Wal-Mart and get your kid whatever the fuck a sales clerk tells you is okay. Yeah, I'm SURE that the lot of 9-year-olds going down there are the ones that are rockin' CS:S and DoD:S on a regular basis. Then again, I also have no idea what it's like to play CS:S on LOW END SPEC SYSTEMS because I don't want the highest graphic settings on the game, but rather turning all my specs and such LOW in order for me to get the best frame rate possible. Therefore...I don't need 4 gigs of fucking RAM!!! Thanks for the info on that, though. *EDIT* P.S. - I was a Dell salesman at one point...so I know what it's like to work "retail" and sell someone something they don't even need...
All you are talking about is HARDWARE SPECS...and not how it's USED. So please, don't belittle me with this bullshit about me not knowing what the fuck I'm talking about. I've been a PC gamer since Doom and Quake. I would suggest taking your hardware specs and information from more than Steam next time you want to hit me with some argument.
The purpose of this thread was not to say "ZOMFG THEY LIED ABOUT PC". It was about the DLC stuff mostly, and how much fun it will be to finally get more story from the game...as I quite enjoyed it.
Also, show me a side-by-side comparison of Half-Life 2 on 360 to PC on a comparable PC setup to 360...and we'll see which one is running with better graphics and physics.
Now, BACK ON TOPIC (and if you have anything else to say, TAKE IT TO THE PM!!!)...
" @Diamond: Goodness. Really? Have you SEEN where I work, sir? Let me refresh in case you missed it, man:
I'd like to think that the 40 Antec 900 cases we've got sitting in here and the Associate's Degree in CNIT...as well as my many years of PC building...tells me you are speaking condescending remarks to the wrong person...so back off. Yeah, 360 WAS more powerful when it first launched. WAS. PS2 WAS more powerful than PC when it came out. WAS. You notice that word keeps coming up? I did, too.
You can throw GTA4 around all you want, but it's not my fault that Rockstar has a poor ability to port a game over. Meanwhile, you are pointing out a game that runs on RAGE, which is an engine BUILT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CONSOLES!!! It was NOT built with PC porting in mind.
Going over to these Steam hardware polls - which I've looked at plenty of times - how much of that takes into account overclocked processor speeds? How about shadowing for increased performance? RAM simulation? Sure, it might bog down some parts of your system a bit, but Right, I forgot...you are talking about the AVERAGE GAMING PC - go to Wal-Mart and get your kid whatever the fuck a sales clerk tells you is okay. Yeah, I'm SURE that the lot of 9-year-olds going down there are the ones that are rockin' CS:S and DoD:S on a regular basis. Then again, I also have no idea what it's like to play CS:S on LOW END SPEC SYSTEMS because I don't want the highest graphic settings on the game, but rather turning all my specs and such LOW in order for me to get the best frame rate possible. Therefore...I don't need 4 gigs of fucking RAM!!! Thanks for the info on that, though.
All you are talking about is HARDWARE SPECS...and not how it's USED. So please, don't belittle me with this bullshit about me not knowing what the fuck I'm talking about. I've been a PC gamer since Doom and Quake. I would suggest taking your hardware specs and information from more than Steam next time you want to hit me with some argument.
The purpose of this thread was not to say "ZOMFG THEY LIED ABOUT PC". It was about the DLC stuff mostly, and how much fun it will be to finally get more story from the game...as I quite enjoyed it.
Also, show me a side-by-side comparison of Half-Life 2 on 360 to PC on a comparable PC setup to 360...and we'll see which one is running with better graphics and physics.
Now, BACK ON TOPIC (and if you have anything else to say, TAKE IT TO THE PM!!!)...
I'm sorry but if you wanted me to reply in PM, you should have done the same. You're not going to spout some absolute crap in public and get away with it, I'm gonna call you out. That's the way it is. Where you work obviously isn't relevant because apparently those qualifications aren't enough. I too have decades of experience in working with PCs. I've done all sorts of PC work, building PCs for shops, tech support, 3D graphics work, some minor programming stuff, and I'm pretty good with networking too.
I'm not arguing that a modern high end PC isn't stronger than a 360 or PS3, at least in most all ways (Cell processor might have an edge in something like Flower). Don't try to use that strawman against me. Lucasarts simply judged the high end PC market to not be able to sustain the costs of porting Force Unleashed to PC. My PC is certainly stronger than my 360, but most people don't have a PC like mine.
I'll throw around bad console to PC ports like GTA4 when you throw around bad PC -> console ports.
Just look at GPUs on Steam. Look how many people are using 8600s or worse. Overclocking CPU speeds are mostly an irrelevant factor, but if anything that would weigh against the average because Steam lists the clock speed outright (not that it's in any way relevant). The average gaming PC has been owned for several years. What you can buy today at Wal Mart or build on newegg is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
I've been a PC gamer since BEFORE Doom & Quake. Before you go talking complete fabricated bullshit out computer hardware or incorrect shit like how the graphics in Half Life 2 were downgraded in 360 when they were actually upgraded, I would suggest doing some research.
Apparently you still don't believe me when I talk about HL2 on 360 and PC. It's not about the framerates or resolution, it's about graphical features available. I have no doubt a high end PC today could run those same features better than a 360, some can be modded in for that matter. The problem was you started talking shit about Half Life 2 on 360, when you didn't know what you were saying.
...So what's up with neglecting the Wii this time then? Force Unleashed Wii was rated and sold on the same level as the other versions (sold better than PS3, worse than 360)... It's not a brand-new engine base that they couldn't afford a port of. Oh well, free on Steam it is. Thanks LA.
" ...So what's up with neglecting the Wii this time then? Force Unleashed Wii was rated and sold on the same level as the other versions... It's not like this a brand-new engine sequel or something, that they couldn't afford a port of. Oh well, free on Steam it is then. Thanks LA. "
Probably because the cost of developing for 360 and PS3 is shared, they outsourced the PC version (Aspyr probably paid Lucas for the rights then Aspyr gets the profits?), so that cost was shared too. Developing the new content and giving it to Aspyr was probably part of the deal. Basically 3 platforms for the price of 1.
Wii could be shared with the PS2 version, which also sold around a million, so along with the Wii sales the "low-fi" version didn't sell much worse than the "high-def" versions combined... Though I'm sure the PC version will sell more this time since it's the first release of the game on it. Still... They cut costs sure, but they also probably cut their profits overall, unless this is intended as a limited release... It doesn't sound like one.
Basically overall Diamond is saying the average PC used for gaming (which is distinct from a gaming PC) in the wild is less powerful than a console.
And Jakob is saying a gaming PC is more powerful than a console.
This is of course a huge simplification of both your arguments but what im trying to convey is arent you arguing two similer but distinct points?
Lucasarts are aiming to make games that sell to lots and lots of people so they aim at the average PC used for gaming which in their beleif, a few years ago, wasent capable of the physics involved in the Force Unleashed (though computers made for gaming probably were) but now its more likely a PC used for gaming is capable of running the Force Unleashed.
If ive gotten both your arguments wrong please tell me but thats what it seems to me.
@Diamond: *UGH* No point in arguing with you, as you'll dismiss anything that anyone says. Needless to say, stop using Steam numbers for everything, especially when the top five games on Steam involve four tourney games where folks turn their settings down low for better framerates and the fifth game is Football Manager 2009.
As it stands, Force Unleashed Sith Edition is coming out. It's coming to the PC and Mac. I'll be playing it on 360, as that's where I usually play my games. I'm psyched about the game.
@Pazy said:
"Lucasarts are aiming to make games that sell to lots and lots of people so they aim at the average PC used for gaming which in their beleif, a few years ago, wasent capable of the physics involved in the Force Unleashed (though computers made for gaming probably were) but now its more likely a PC used for gaming is capable of running the Force Unleashed."
Euphoria was used in GTA IV, which was something also used in Force Unleashed. I don't see where the excuse of "can't run the physics" fits in...since Force Unleashed was released AFTER GTA IV on the consoles...and only a handful of months before GTA IV came out on PC. Hell, Force Unleashed isn't even a year old!
Just a reminder to folks to stay ontopic and not derail this into a Consoles vs PC debate. Take it to PMs or start a fresh topic on the matter, just keep it civil.
As for this new announcement I have to say I'm unsure how to feel about this. I for one was disappointed to see TFU was originally released on nearly every platfrom except the PC, pretty sure the iPhone got a release of it, and sort of nerd raged a little as I am a Star Wars fan and have always been a fan of the Jedi Knight series which this seems similar too.
However after TFU was released I was sort of glad to hear the game wasn't anything special and thus my feeling of being neglected and left out subsided so much so that I lost all interest in the game. But hearing it will see life on the PC has me once again begining to gain interest in the game.
One question though, what is with the Freddy Krueger glove?
" Just a reminder to folks to stay ontopic and not derail this into a Consoles vs PC debate. Take it to PMs or start a fresh topic on the matter, just keep it civil. As for this new announcement I have to say I'm unsure how to feel about this. I for one was disappointed to see TFU was originally released on nearly every platfrom except the PC, pretty sure the iPhone got a release of it, and sort of nerd raged a little as I am a Star Wars fan and have always been a fan of the Jedi Knight series which this seems similar too. However after TFU was released I was sort of glad to hear the game wasn't anything special and thus my feeling of being neglected and left out subsided so much so that I lost all interest in the game. But hearing it will see life on the PC has me once again begining to gain interest in the game. One question though, what is with the Freddy Krueger glove? "
Sorry for the derailing, Hamz. As you point out in the best way without any nerd rage, Force Unleashed came out on nearly EVERY platform in one way or another except the PC. It makes little to no sense at all.
As for whether the game wasn't anything special or not...I loved the game. I found the gameplay to work just fine, and the story was K-I-L-L-E-R! The fact that LucasArts is expanding that story by offering an alternate universe take on things with Starkiller makes me all super giddy.
The Krueger glove comment? Dood, I don't know about you...but his Sith gear is BAD-ASS!!! lol
Again I'm going to say it, take the PC vs Console argument to PMs or start an all new topic on the debate. Further discussion of it in here will only result in posts being deleted and if needed a warning to remind folks about the simple rules we have on the forums. Come on guys, lets discuss the subject of the topic and not derail it with debate of an entirely new one :)
@jakob187: I don't like the pointy blades on the fingers of the gloves. Otherwise I do conede his outfit is rather smashing and I am prone to being pro-darkside most of the time even though half of them have a ridiculous dress sense :P
And yes it was weird to see that TFU got a release on everything but the PC and with little explanation as to why. But this does seem like a nice enough piece of compensation since it comes with all the DLC previously released. Can't complain about that I guess.
"And yes it was weird to see that TFU got a release on everything but the PC and with little explanation as to why. But this does seem like a nice enough piece of compensation since it comes with all the DLC previously released. Can't complain about that I guess. "
From what I'm to understand, the price tag for the package will be just as smashing as Starkiller's new threads. Rumor mill is circulating a $30.00 price tag to match the current retail price of TFU. = D It they seriously do that, it'll become the second best deal of the year, right behind Fallout 3: GOTY.
Also, since you mentioned the Krueger glove - NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET REMAKE IMAGE FROM COMIC-CON = AWESOME!!!
It's not weird at all to see PC releases held back until after the console releases, it's just that publishers can't/won't come out and say "We actually feel like selling some copies". You should all know by now that - whatever the replacement-excuse is - it should be taken with a pinch of salt.
I actually found this game to be a ton of fun and I'm glad a new crowd of people will get the chance to play it. Unless they screw it up completely, running this on any half-way decent PC should not prove problematic. It wasn't that physics intense.
@Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber?
" @Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber? "
Because time went forward clearly. It would seem that Starkiller and Luke are on Hoth, and Luke had a lightsaber on Hoth.
" @Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber? "
Because time went forward clearly. It would seem that Starkiller and Luke are on Hoth, and Luke had a lightsaber on Hoth. "
As far as I'm to understand, the stuff in TFU was taking place...like...closer to after Episode III than closer to before Episode IV. Hamz is the expert here. I'm sure he can clear it up.
" @Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber? "
Because time went forward clearly. It would seem that Starkiller and Luke are on Hoth, and Luke had a lightsaber on Hoth. "
As far as I'm to understand, the stuff in TFU was taking place...like...closer to after Episode III than closer to before Episode IV. Hamz is the expert here. I'm sure he can clear it up. "
Yeah, time went forward then. The events in TFU happened after Episode 3, so Luke was probably only 2 years old or less then that maybe a little bit more I dunno. So time went forward with Starkiller as the emperors apprentice. Now it is at Episode IV I'm assuming.
" @Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber? "
Because time went forward clearly. It would seem that Starkiller and Luke are on Hoth, and Luke had a lightsaber on Hoth. "
As far as I'm to understand, the stuff in TFU was taking place...like...closer to after Episode III than closer to before Episode IV. Hamz is the expert here. I'm sure he can clear it up. "
Yeah, time went forward then. The events in TFU happened after Episode 3, so Luke was probably only 2 years old or less then that maybe a little bit more I dunno. So time went forward with Starkiller as the emperors apprentice. Now it is at Episode IV I'm assuming. "
Hope there is an explanation for the leap forward, then. I mean, come on...Starkiller had to be doing some CRAZY FUCKING SHIT from then to now...and I want to play THAT as well!!! lol
From what I'm to understand, the price tag for the package will be just as smashing as Starkiller's new threads. Rumor mill is circulating a $30.00 price tag to match the current retail price of TFU. = D It they seriously do that, it'll become the second best deal of the year, right behind Fallout 3: GOTY.
" I haven't seen anyone mention the fact that the third part they're adding to the story is exclusive to the sith edition disc. that basically effs whoever bought the game and two pieces of dlc. I bought the game, thoroughly enjoyed it, bought the first dlc, and then heard about this bs...If I want all the story I have to buy the game, and first dlc again. That's just shit. Even if it's "only" $30 dollars it's basically a $30 nerd tax.Not only that, why even buy the second DLC if it's gonna be on the disc this fall?? Anyone else feeling a little bitter about this whole thing??@Hamz: Jedi Knight is an old and dear homey of mine. Just wish I could play it on my 360 cause my original Xbox is toast.@Jacob187: If the GOTYE of Fallout 3 is $60, it's mine. "
People can be sore about buying the DLC if they want...but when you are buying add-on material, you should KNOW there is a chance of reduced price or even a special edition down the line. For instance, you mentioned Fallout 3's GOTY. It WILL be $60 with ALL FIVE DLC packages. Now, if you look at Fallout 3 + the DLC packages right now, you are talking about spending almost $110 total for all of it. Is that fair to all the people who bought the DLC BEFORE the GOTY edition announcement...as well as its eventual release? Maybe not, but they KNEW the chances of it. How did they know? Oblivion GOTY had Knights of the Nine and Shivering Isles. Same company.
So it happens. For people to get angry about it is stupid. They know the chances. They pay for the ability to have it before everyone else.
Hell, at least you aren't an Everquest player. Imagine how much it must burn to have bought the game when it first launched, plus every expansion after that for $40 A PIECE...only to see the release of the Titanium Edition of EQ with the base game plus 10+ expansions for $20. -_- Things could be a LOT worse.
The problem isn't the retail version, but the fact that the second parth of the Infinities (the Hoth level) will only be made available thru the new retail version. So who want's to play the two new level and has the game and the dlc, has to acquire the whole package again.
That is the problem.
Saying that I dunno if i will get it...
The two new "dlcs" would be awesome if they could be downloaded thru XBL and PS3, because downloading one and/or getting this and the other from the retail version that contains the original game that i already got and the expansion that i got too, seems kind of needless, and, as i don't think it will have a 30 dollars tag (perhaps $50), it seems a ripoff.
But as probably later on the last level will be available for downloading, it can become worthwhile to wait a bit.
But as a fan of the game, for now i don't see a good reason to get it.
The problem isn't the retail version, but the fact that the second parth of the Infinities (the Hoth level) will only be made available thru the new retail version. So who want's to play the two new level and has the game and the dlc, has to acquire the whole package again.
That is the problem.
Saying that I dunno if i will get it...
The two new "dlcs" would be awesome if they could be downloaded thru XBL and PS3, because downloading one and/or getting this and the other from the retail version that contains the original game that i already got and the expansion that i got too, seems kind of needless, and, as i don't think it will have a 30 dollars tag (perhaps $50), it seems a ripoff.
But as probably later on the last level will be available for downloading, it can become worthwhile to wait a bit.
But as a fan of the game, for now i don't see a good reason to get it."
Well, if they do it like Bethesda did with Shivering Isles...and put it all on a disc...then you could just borrow the disc from a friend, rip it onto your Xbox, and play it. lol Sooooo...PROBLEM SOLVED...maybe. lol
" @Radar: Well, if you wanna get REALLY technical...isn't this Force Unleashed business SUPPOSED to be taking place a while before Episode IV? In turn...why the FUCK does Luke have a light saber? "
Because time went forward clearly. It would seem that Starkiller and Luke are on Hoth, and Luke had a lightsaber on Hoth. "
As far as I'm to understand, the stuff in TFU was taking place...like...closer to after Episode III than closer to before Episode IV. Hamz is the expert here. I'm sure he can clear it up. "
Yeah, time went forward then. The events in TFU happened after Episode 3, so Luke was probably only 2 years old or less then that maybe a little bit more I dunno. So time went forward with Starkiller as the emperors apprentice. Now it is at Episode IV I'm assuming. "
WHOA WHOA WHOA!!! I just realized something that I forgot about:
Leia is in the game already.
Therefore, how long after the events of Episode III does the game that already exists take place?!?! If Leia is a young adult already, then that means Luke could be as well?
MY BRAIN IS FRYING, FOLKS!!! EVERYBODY BACK UP!!! I MUST DO RESEARCH!!! Hamz...save me.
@jakob187: I think Jeust was clearer than I...I don't mind DLC being made available at retail. The point is having to buy the retail disc AGAIN just to get the final add-on. I'm pretty sure Lucas Arts isn't going to price the sith edition at $20, which is probably what 2 more DLC packs would have been. ...So fans have to either bend over and take it, or miss out on the story. Pretty lame.
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.
Log in to comment