DLC thing in free roam

The devs said they had to cut some things out of the memory in the missions of the GiS DLC, just so they can preload the laserguns and their projectiles.
 
Gondar said:
It's very possible they had issues with cramming all the data into memory on a poor console. Do you know how much ram a 360 has? Sure you can say "Oh but they don't have windows overhead and they're dedicated to games and it's not the processor and.." but at some point you have to stop and go "wait, 512 megs? You mean 5.12 gigs, right? No? Oh, damn."
The PS3 is apparently far worse, cutting access to the memory it has so games are in tiny tiny memory spaces. That's presumably why Skyrim kept barfing all over itself on that system.
Click to expand...

If those two little consoles are that bad, then why are all developers still making games for them? Well, most the times, for them first and then for the PC.

Anyway, I don't get why they had to "cut" so much, the textures themselves look horrible, it doesn't even beat Grand Theft Auto IV in any way. I said GTAIV because it is a similar game. And the dynamic day and night cycle? This is all silly, but I only find it silly because I understand nothing about PS3 or Xbox 360, only that they were better at racing games than PC.
 
Because lots of people play on the consoles, because they'd use a PS3 or xbox controller, rather than a keyboard and mouse for games like these. It makes more money for the devs, which is lately more important than quality.
 
Miku Hatsune said:
Because lots of people play on the consoles, because they'd use a PS3 or xbox controller, rather than a keyboard and mouse for games like these. It makes more money for the devs, which is lately more important than quality.
Click to expand...

And it seems that making an unstable game with lots of adverts (and horrible DLCs) does work, as seen on SR3, yet SR2 and SR1 are completely abandoned, hardly anyone who played SR3 first wants to know what/how SR2/SR1 is.
 
Still, for THQ, and the devs it's important that they make money.
That's the game industry present-day, and also the music industry, and so on...
They don't care about quality, or the past of the series. Just about the money.
 
Strogglet said:
And it seems that making an unstable game with lots of adverts (and horrible DLCs) does work, as seen on SR3, yet SR2 and SR1 are completely abandoned, hardly anyone who played SR3 first wants to know what/how SR2/SR1 is.
Click to expand...
I started with SR3 and then went back to play SR2 for the story. However, I do like SR3 better. For me, it just plays better.
 
Arglaar said:
I started with SR3 and then went back to play SR2 for the story. However, I do like SR3 better. For me, it just plays better.
Click to expand...

You mean in terms of stability or gameplay?

Because in terms of stability, SR3 is somehow more stable than SR2, while SR2 is a lot better in gameplay than SR3.
 
I think the gameplay of SRTT is far better than SR2; the driving and gunplay especially. Everything else though I give the nod to SR2. i.e. customization, world locations, weapons, story, characters, etc.
 
The thing that partly gave SR2 a great atmosphere was, and still is for me, that you can make your protagonist the same as any npc. All npcs wear clothes you can wear, and have haircuts you can get. too bad it wasn't like that in SR3...
 
Pretty much everything about SR3 was better for me. I didn't mod SR2 at all so Vanilla v Vanilla, SR3 has better customization options for characters at least.

Vehicles are definitely better in SR3, helicopters especially.
(As I've said before, my go-to vehicles of choice :) )

I did enjoy playing SR2 when I played it... I just like SR3 better :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top