Anyways: strictly under the assumption that Revengeance runs smoothly (since we have no way of telling now), 15 dollars for 1080p/60 fps plus all of its DLC plus much requested bonus features exclusive to the port is a decent total package (with room for improvement no doubt given that it's PG's first attempt) and far from "shit", even if it doesn't live up to the lofty pie-in-the-sky standards of PC gaming that not even a lot of Western developers (big or small) can consistently adhere to across the board.
As super shit games? Or are all their troubles that rendered them literally unplayable suddenly close to acceptable due to 120Hz? How about The Walking Dead's saving issues A-OK because it supports resolutions higher than 1080p? ARMA III's broken promises despite Bohemia's best intentions? As someone who also thoroughly enjoys this hobby, there are far worse faults that'd be truly problematic (to put it lightly) than the omission of features that primarily cater to a very select group of the PC target audience. Makes me wonder how random 2013 EA game (aimed at the PC demographic) or Diablo III are viewed like. Tell me otherwise with choice screenshot A: Like most console games that make it to PC.
METAL GEAR RISING REVENGEANCE PC WONT START 720P
The game isn't even a looker visually, so hypothetically speaking you wouldn't be getting the aforementioned "clear picture" either with 720p textures (or 1080p if we're lucky) made to scale accordingly for 4K monitors or televisions. Provided Revengeance's port doesn't have game-breaking issues of its own when released. i get what you're trying to say, but you don't have to walk this notion back very far for it to become ridiculous.Ĭlick to expand.Wanting those features to make the most out of your hardware is perfectly understandable, but proclaiming it's a shit game / port wholesale because it didn't tick a metaphorical checkbox or two is the definition of knee-jerk hyperbole.
If people want to play videogames so badly, we should all just look for ways to make our own games instead of waiting for somebody else to. if he charged money for his patches, thereby essentially creating a business entity like the studios creating these ports, would you have a different opinion? would it be okay for people to rely on him more so long as he's charging money? should PC gamers all have a basic understanding of DLLs, shaders, and run-time functions in order to be able to enjoy gaming on their PC? the problem isn't people's reliance on the generosity of others, the problem is traditionally console developers/publishers pushing half-assed ports out the door that completely negate two of the foundational pillars of PC gaming (those being customization and scalability). i get what you're trying to say, but you don't have to walk this notion back very far for it to become ridiculous.ĭurante is not some kind of panacea for console ports on the PC, but has HAS proven more than once that he is willing and interested in correcting these kinds of arbitrary limitations placed on them. Click to expand.if people want to play videogames so badly, we should all just look for ways to make our own games instead of waiting for somebody else to.