4 ms·
Because games back in the 90s weren't developed the same way they are today. The consoles were so different that you had to make significant changes to the game
by scott_w 3y ago
Because games back in the 90s weren't developed the same way they are today. The consoles were so different that you had to make significant changes to the games to fit within the limitations of different consoles. This usually meant the game was better on the original than the port (since they'd deliberately designed around that console).
There's plenty of stuff on YouTube showing the differences for different games. Avalanche Reviews did a good video of Resident Evil 2 ports across different consoles and generations.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoNo, most AAA studios had their own engine which was designed to port to the different consoles. The only real difference between something like Unreal Engine and what they used back then is that UE won and is the de factor standard whereas back then most were rolling their own still.
- scott_w 3y agoI've flagged two MAJOR games studios that were the exact opposite of what you claim: Capcom and Squaresoft. One ported games (PORTED, not designed cross-platform) with some major issues doing so. The other outright didn't. All you've posted in response is a small number of games that were obviously ported AFTER released (in one case 10 years after). Unreal Engine has nothing to do with this. It was first released in 1998 as a PC engine, not appearing on consoles until the Playstation 2 era in the 2000s. The 2000s happened after the 1990s.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoas stated in another response to you, stop being dishonest in your replies. This distinction of ported vs planned is one that doesn't exist when discussing exclusivity to a console. It's also not relevant when discussing studio's adding support for multiple consoles to their in-house game engines.
- scott_w 3y agoThe distinction is relevant when YOU YOURSELF call console exclusivity a “scam.” Your words.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoMy actual statement with added emphasis. > exclusives are generally a _lock-in scam_ for the companies and say absolutely nothing about the games on a system. stop being dishonest. But even if you weren't mischaracterizing my statement, console exclusivity means only that console has the game. Whether it was planned ahead of time or done after the fact is irrelevant, the game is not exclusive when it becomes available for multiple platforms. It's a distinction that does not matter.
- scott_w 3y agoYou’re obsessed with deceit and dishonesty. First you accuse game developers of a scam (deceit), which I’ve demonstrated it’s not. When I do, you accuse me of dishonesty. Nothing you provided is substantiated with any evidence. On the contrary, everything you did provide brought your argument crashing down. The only one arguing with bad faith here is you.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoThe ad hominem is a strong indicator that you don't have a leg to stand on.
- scott_w 3y agoI see you subscribe to the “accuse others of what you are guilty” school of debate.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoI don't find it surprising you don't know what an ad hominem is. hint: it doesn't mean someone said something to you that you don't like.