Sections

Visceral Games defend Dead Space 3 PC port

Tuesday, 29th January 2013 11:01 GMT By Nick Akerman

The revelation that Dead Space 3 is to receive a no-frills PC port angered many. Steve Papoutsis, executive producer at Visceral Games, has defended the decision in a recent interview with Shack News.

Papoutsis appears baffled at the backlash. He responded to questions asking why the PC version isn’t going to feature optimisation:

“It’s confusing to me that this question even comes up,” Papoutsis said. “It’s by no means any less important to us; it gets a lot of attention. The PC is a very different platform. As developers, you want to deliver an experience that’s as similar as possible on different platforms.

“At our studio, we’ve always made console games. The biggest thing is we want to make sure the quality of the experience is consistent across all platforms so we don’t have one userbase saying it’s better on their system (…) It’s a confusing question and I hope my answer brings a little bit of light to it. We seem a little bit discredited for the amount of effort that goes into it, quite honestly.”

“We want it to be great on all systems, that’s our approach.”

Will Dead Space 3 be a great game on the PC? Let us know your thoughts.

Breaking news

46 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. absolutezero

    So let me get this straight I think I understand this, so to make all versions great across all platforms you are intentionally gimping one.

    THANKS STEVE

    #1 2 years ago
  2. dex3108

    So Hi-Res textures and some other effects will make DS3 completely different game? Just be honest and say PC is our less profitable platform and we don’t want to waste our time on it.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. Edo

    Next we should be glad that it even has mouse & keyboard support…..

    #3 2 years ago
  4. Strawb

    The quality of the games won’t be consistent across the platforms, when one platform’s quality can smash the others’ to bits. They really should get used to one platform simply being superior in terms of graphical performance.

    And bugger off about it being a confusing question. It’s a completely simple, legit question, and the response is simply going to piss of Dead Space PC fans more.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Erthazus

    PC port of Dead Space was actually very good, but sad that it is without High res textures and other stuff because Console versions are just CRAP looking games.

    At least they have resolution inside it. I can play it easily with 2560×1440. Dead Space II was my first game with that resolution. It looked great.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. ps3fanboy

    after YOU already whoring and dumbed down dead space to the casual players and ruin dead space totally. YOU now also going to be whoring it out on all platforms in a half assed attempt. we will see how much longer YOU will defend it when money not coming into your bank account.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. absolutezero

    The Dead Space PC port was fucking shit. The v-sync was fucked and the controls were terrible.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. Hunam

    The response he gives is so short sighted. Giving a little bit if extra polish to the PC version makes sense because if stuff like steam and GOG it’s the only one that they will see any money from in three to twenty years time.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. roadkill

    Lol! What a f**king douchebag! He’s clueless.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. Erthazus

    @7, “The v-sync was fucked and the controls were terrible.”

    there was an option with “V-sync”. V-sync was fine.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. mobiugearskin

    How is it gimped?

    I mean FFS… PORT.

    Its the same across all platforms.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. Madlink

    @1 Wait, so you get a version of game that is graphically identical to others, that you can run at a higher resolution, has support for gamepads and mouse and keyboard, and costs £10 less than other versions?

    What the hell are you complaining about?

    #12 2 years ago
  13. TheWulf

    What a gallery of comments.

    Anyway, I can actually see where he’s coming from, here. Not completely, but to a degree. Do I think that Dead Space 3 is going to be a fairly terrible game? I have one thing to say about that: Cover-based shooting. Though that’s not the issue, here, and I just wanted to get that out of the way. I’m hardly a DS3 supporter, nor have I ever been.

    The fact of the matter is is that it’s entitlement to expect so much more than what a console owner gets. There’s a line to be drawn between what’s a practical inclusion, especially for those with disabilities, and what’s just straight-up avarice. Think about it.

    A FOV slider is a necessity, some people get motion sick without it. I’m not one of them, but I can sympathise with those that do.

    A high-resolution texture pack is avarice, it doesn’t actually serve any practical purpose other than for the PC Master Race to push the assertion that console owners are inferior people.

    The game generally looks good enough without them. Did the high resolution texture packs do anything for Skyrim? In my opinion: No. The game is damned ugly, anyway, and it’s even uglier with so much more detail crammed in there. I don’t know how Bethesda do that, but they do. They haven’t managed a truly good looking game since Morrowind. Now, there are some fan texture mods that look okay, but really? Higher res in Skyrim does nothing at all for it.

    Not to mention that the Master Race is shooting itself in the foot with this. If you have developers aim for higher specs, then those on lower-end computers become unable to play newly released games. If they aim at around the level of consoles, then everyone can enjoy those games. The constant hardware arms race is what made the PC such a reviled platform. How quickly we forget.

    The thing is is that a game is as it’s supposed to look. Doing things with it that go beyond that only make it look worse (Skyrim). I mean, what next? High resolution VVVVVV? Did Cave Story 3D really look better than Cave Story? In my opinion, Cave Story 3D completely lost all of the charm and any sense of what made CS a brilliant game. I got to play it on my 3DS and it’s just characterless, colourless, and clunky.

    And here’s another aspect: Would a high-res pack have made Darksiders II a better game?

    Now, I liked Darksiders II, but I’m fully aware that I’m of a tiny per centile minority, here. Perhaps somewhere under 10%. Most people seemed to dislike it, and it didn’t sell that well at all. Now, consider that you’re asking them to put money into texture packs and things that they might not get from sales on the PC, because I think that the PC sales for Darksiders II were the least of any platform.

    And do I even need to mention Sleeping Dogs? Square-Enix is bending over backwards to please PC users, and yet their games sell horribly on the PC.

    So, considering all I’ve said here, is a no-frills PC port really that surprising? No, no it isn’t. Is it hard to understand or sympathise with? No, not really. Stop being so damn greedy. So long as we get an FOV slider and the things that need to be there, practically speaking, then we should be happy.

    By acting like spoilt brats who’re never satisfied with anything, we cut down the amount of ports we’ll actually see to our chosen platform. :I

    #13 2 years ago
  14. TheWulf

    @12

    Exactly. It’s just avarice-laden entitled bullshit, really. The sad fact of the matter is that most people are wired for greed above all else. I’m starting to think that you have to be some kind of freaky, inhuman mutant to actually have emotions like empathy over greed.

    I mean, yes, going too far in the other direction means that people walk all over you. The Japanese philosophy of “Shikata ga nai” fits into this. Self-respect isn’t about greed, though, and people don’t seem to be able to manage that properly.

    We need to be consumers that respect ourselves, but aren’t irrationally greedy. That way, we can speak up about the things that really matter when they come up, rather than complaining about everything.

    Let me try and spell this out…

    Freemium: A horribly exploitative thing that we should avoid by voting with our wallets and telling other people to do the same.

    A lack of high-res texture packs: That’s us being greedy and demanding more than our fellow console-loving countrymen have.

    Day-one DLC: This often comes across as content separated from the game, often to corral second-hand sales. It’s a greedy, exploitative move.

    A lack of DirectX 11 features: See ‘a lack of high-res texture packs.’

    There’s a difference between being a greedy bugger and a consumer with self-respect.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. absolutezero

    Dead Space 2 was a fine release on the PC it had a variety of options that all worked well.

    Now the following game is going to look worse because less effort has been put into it. No one ever said anything about platform parity when Dead Space 2 was about to release.

    In fact no on gave a shit about platform parity one generation ago, the Xbox was significantly more powerful than the PS2 with the Gamecube sitting in the middle, developers took advantage of that to make more attractive Xbox games. That made no difference to anything, people still bought the games on the platform that they wanted to buy it on. Suddenly now all of the versions have to be the same? Suddenly now all the evidence of putting a little more effort into a PC version to take advantage of its capabilities increasing sales and creating a happy community is worth nothing?

    Please.

    EDIT and just to make sure I remembered correctly about the first Dead Space’s problems I did a search for Dead Space V-sync. Yeah it was fucked, turning it on generated a tonne of mouse lag and capped the framerate at 30fps. It was terrible.

    “TheWulf said opinions opinions opinions”

    #15 2 years ago
  16. deathm00n

    @13 http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C34OZ3td4w0/UNEf2j70_vI/AAAAAAAAAII/u-J2rZ4yw2M/s1600/kaneklapae4wf6.gif

    I won’t even say anything, you said all there is to say.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. Hunam

    @14

    About the High Res… the thing is when they make the game they make it all high res then adjust the quality based on optimisation. So drop it here etc. So they have all the textures in high res they just can’t be bothered to put the work in to just enable them (and to also put them on the disk with the regular textures).

    #17 2 years ago
  18. PC_PlayBoy

    Consoles are pish! They do nothing but hold tech back.

    Even though DS3 is just a port like DS1/2 it’ll still be better on the PC due to resolutions (native 1080p, none of that upscaled nonsense), 60fps and with tools like Radeon Pro or NV Inspector being used it’ll be better than the gimped consoles versions.

    Also those pissing ‘n moaning about mouse lag on DS1. Disable V-Sync within the game. Then run V-Sync through your driver i.e Nvidia control panel. Problem solved!

    #18 2 years ago
  19. Kabby

    The way they announced this shows signs of stupidity.

    What they should have said, “There won’t be any additional content for the PC version but we are aiming to make good use of the extra power available”

    #19 2 years ago
  20. deadstoned

    Charging the same price as everyone else, but not adding the same features everyone else does. Greedy, lazy Visceral and EA. Very disappointed in Visceral, thought they were professional than this.

    #20 2 years ago
  21. Maximum Payne

    Both DS1 and 2 were good port except v-sync problem.
    Sure, game didn’t have hi res textures option but that doesn’t mean game looked bad by any means.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. azmza

    I wonder if they will use Unreal engine 4 with DS4 and current consoles lol no way, they should optimize it well for Pc and for sure it will be for next generation consoles.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. Samoan Spider

    So long as I can still force proper AA and remove the jaggies then I don’t really care for the fact its not got the extra bells and whistles. He’s definitely para-phrased the statement ‘we didn’t feel the need to invest extra time and effort to please you’. But consistency is a valid reason and I’m ok with that. Ubi and EA subsidiaries are routinely taking this stance now which is a shame, but hopefully the PC based nature of the next gen will shift this viewpoint.

    #23 2 years ago
  24. Ge0force

    And there goes the last bit of respect I had left for Visceral games. They can keep their “Dead Gears of Space 3″ crap.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. Maximum Payne

    @24 Yea because you would totally bought the game if the support tessellation on 3 object per level and 3D support ?

    #25 2 years ago
  26. Bomba Luigi

    This is just Funny. First they talked all the Time about how this Game is so over Top that have to come up with the “AAAA” Thing, because its the Über-Game of the Industrie.

    And now they can’t handle DX11. Hilarious ^^

    #26 2 years ago
  27. GrimRita

    You cant defend a PC port. End of argument.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. freedoms_stain

    EA must provide some sort of “Justification For Low-effort PC Versions” Handbook or something. The justification here is almost identical to the shit Dice were shovelling to justify delaying PC patches for BF3.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. DSB

    It can’t possibly be worse than the original Dead Space. Talk about a shitty port.

    #29 2 years ago
  30. PEYJ

    “Pish”…???

    #30 2 years ago
  31. Ireland Michael

    @30 Annoying. Stupid. Obnoxious. Common word with English and Irish people.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. Cobra951

    @28: The justification is low profit, compared to the other platforms.

    @13, 14: Must agree with 16.

    #32 2 years ago
  33. hyperbaric

    That’s all very nice, but I bet it will still have mouse acceleration. So, no, they don’t care about pc.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. hyperbaric

    PC_PlayBoy, disabling vsync doesn’t solve the problem in aiming mode, that is still accelerated 10 times.

    #34 2 years ago
  35. hyperbaric

    DEAD SPACE:
    The camera sensitivity is tied to the fps. The more fps the slower the movement will be. You can solve this by disabling vsync ingame, and forcing it on your nvidia/ati drivers. That way the game will be locked at 60 fps and the camera speed will be constant.

    There is input lag/delay if you move the mouse fast.

    Vertical axis is slower than horizontal axis.

    Aiming mode is terrible, it doesn’t register slow movements at all. Your movement has to be accelerated. I guess it’s in “joystick mode” lol.

    DEAD SPACE 2:
    The camera sensitivity is no longer tied to the fps, but it seems the game doesn’t detect fast mouse movements very well, as some of the movement gets ignored (turn speed limit?). Also, there is some acceleration in aiming mode.

    In normal view: vertical axis is slower than horizontal axis
    In aiming mode: vertical axis = horizontal axis

    #35 2 years ago
  36. Vice

    #13 you’ve lost all credibility and sense after calling Skyrim modded with high res textures “an ugly game”. If you have your arms growing out of your ass and you couldn’t make Skyrim look good with but a simple tool and few mods, then you should never comment on PC games.
    I might agree that DX11 features might be, putting it in your own words, “avarice”. However high res textures are a MANDATORY. There’s NO excuse to not include them. They’re lazy. And they don’t give a damn because PC version won’t sell as good. And ofc it won’t, many ppl will just pirate it and they’ll have a damn fine excuse to do so.
    My personal view on this matter is simple: by not including at least some improvements into a PC version of a game, like same high res textures and good anti aliasing (working, unlike what we had in DS2) developers simply show disrespect to PC gamers and hence they give us all the moral rights to show disrespect in return by pirating it. Yes we f****ng ARE a master race, no matter if console gamers like it or not. We spend about 3+ times more money on our PC in probably even less time period. We DO deserve to have a better version of the game.

    #36 1 year ago
  37. Telepathic.Geometry

    @Erth: Just to make sure I get you, when you said “PC port of Dead Space was actually very good, but sad that it is without High res textures and other stuff because Console versions are just CRAP looking games.”, did you really mean that?

    #37 1 year ago
  38. The Auracle

    #13 & #14 nailed this one perfectly (barring my difference in opinion where Skyrim is concerned), really.

    The argument from the disgruntled PC gamers reeks of pretentious self-importance and is devoid of any logic and maturity whatsoever. To be honest, it’s this kind of behaviour that is giving PC gamers a bad name.

    “What?! No high-res textures?! “What?! No DX11 support?! Well, I’ll just pirate it, play it, moan about how gimped the PC version is, and continue to strut around with an over-inflated sense of superiority over other gamers that are inferior to me and my machine!”

    shakes head

    Elitism is a deadly disease, folks.

    #38 1 year ago
  39. peacefulduck

    Wulf is a complete idiot, master race? Really? It’s not that hard to make use of dx 11 or actually putting in a little more for the pc (saints row the 3rd) . They are using the same fucking engine they used on the last game. Was it entitlement when the ps3 first came out, and games were released for both ps2/ps3 with the ps3 version having updated graphics? The very least they could do is make it easy for people to mod the game if they are too damn lazy to do it themselves. Skyrim being a good example of that. Even though the base game looks horrible, the modded enbs and textures make the game look amazing. It seems like the ones who try and say pc gamers act like they are superior are trying to hold to their console fanboyism, or just have really shitty rigs. If your going to do a multi-platform release why not make it to the best of your ability? I’ll tell you why! Because EA and Visceral are going to try and milk every last dollar out of this while spending the least amount they have to. The proof? reusing the same engine from the last game, without updating the graphics even a little. Hell even left 4 dead had some minor graphical change in between 1 and 2.(valve).

    #39 1 year ago
  40. DSB

    I’m a PC gamer but I don’t sympathize with the butthurt and the anal. All I want from a port is performance. I think that’s the minimum you can expect from any product. It’s no skin off my back whether it’s cutting edge, as long as it plays well.

    But let’s not kid ourselves that some of the argumentation here isn’t bullshit.

    PC ports make less money than console releases? You think so?

    Let’s check with EA circa 2010:

    EA releases 22 titles on the Xbox 360, for 868 million in profit, 21 titles on the PS3 for 771 million in profit, and 16 titles on the PC for 687 million in profit.

    That means EA were making:

    39,5 million per 360 game
    36,7 million per PS3 game
    43 million per PC game

    #40 1 year ago
  41. Zakalwe

    I’m actually amazed by some of the comments here.

    PC games /absolutely should/ be optimised to take advantage of PC hardware. It’s not entitled to want that, it’s not “pretentious” (people need to start understanding how to use that word), and it’s not anything but a justified desire.

    We spend a lot of money on our hardware /because/ we want the improvements that go with it, why are console gamers actually happy that we’re not getting those improvements with DS3?

    The people here who seem glad that VG aren’t optimising the game for us simply seem bitter.

    VG’s press releases tells us one thing “we couldn’t be bothered with PC”.

    I just started playing DS3. Bought it legally. The game looks horrible considering I’ve recently been playing games such as Arkham City, Far Cry 3, Battlefield 3, etc…

    And especially as I just played through DS2 in anticipation of this game, and DS2 actually looks much better…

    Oh well, at least we have Bioshock Infinite which is going to be heavily optomised for PC and will look dozens of times better than the console counterparts, as it should.

    And this isn’t a dig at console gamers. I love my ps3. Some of you people need to realise that lazy development is just that, and PC gamers actually do deserve to have the money they spent made use of, just as console gamers deserve the same.

    When spending full retail price on an AAA title, the expectation that we get a game optimised for our hardware is not entitled. It’s absolutely justified.

    #41 1 year ago
  42. YoungZer0

    btw. from what I’ve seen the PC Port is solid. Probably their best work.

    #42 1 year ago
  43. Zakalwe

    The PC port does two things well

    Mouse Controls
    Splits all controls to single keys (no one button does all console port)

    However:

    It locks FPS to 30 if you use in game vsync
    It has no FOV slider
    The textures look WORSE than Dead Space 2

    -

    The game runs well IF you disable in game vsync and enable it in your GPU’s options, but it looks worse than a game released two years ago.

    This is /not/ a good PC port, it’s a serviceable one.

    #43 1 year ago
  44. Mike W

    @43

    I noticed that too, they dumb downed the graphics in DS3 for all platforms.

    #44 1 year ago
  45. YoungZer0

    They can probably fix the FPS.

    FOV Slider is stupid. There is a reason why the FOV is the way it is. The textures definitely look worse, but they do so on all platforms.

    Still a better Port than Arkham City.

    #45 1 year ago
  46. Zakalwe

    The FPS can be fixed. You disable Vsync in game. There was no reason to limit it to 30 though.

    FOV slider is mandatory for PC gaming. It doesn’t matter if the devs think the game should be played that way, due to the nature of PC set ups (the fact PC gamers sit closer to their screens), FOVs need to be wider.

    You can edit it in the game’s config file, and it looks MUCH better at 95 than it does at default 75 (although you are opened up to some horrid lazy animations such as the strafing while crouched… more proof they couldn’t be bothered).

    DS3 is not a better port than AC, it’s worse in some ways and better in others. At least AC looked like a modern PC game, though.

    And yes, textures are worse across the board, but that’s still no excuse for PC having the same textures as console.

    I have no idea why anyone would defend this as a good port…

    #46 1 year ago