Let's talk game ports

[Moonface]

I'd understand if something that could break in the game was hard to find and ends up being missed at launch, but there's no way that save file bug could be missed unless you didn't bother to do QA or you did but didn't listen to them. What @Maniakkid25 said makes me think they just didn't care when they have the audacity to port the game without the bug fixes in place that were already done for other versions.

Another game that's interesting to look at for ports is Rayman 2. It might be the only game out there where no two versions have the exact same content despite being ported over half a dozen times.

[Dragon Lord]

Bethesda definitely does not care. The fact that they gave up trying to even patch shit out of Skyrim, and lowkey said "We don't need to anymore, that's what the modding community is for" tells you all you need to know about them.

They'd rather release a broken game that they generate hype for by making good looking trailers, and then leave it to the PC community to actually fix the game up and make it playable.

We understand that Skyrim is huge, but if you can't make a game that big without it being broken and barely playable, then they shouldn't be making their games that big to begin with. The "Well, the game is so massive that it's bound to have all of these underlying problems" is the exact excuse Bethesda hopes that players make for them, so they can sidestep any accountability for their lack of quality.

[Maniakkid25]

I'm reminded of No Man's Sky and For Honor, which in turn reminds me of Final Fantasy 13. No Man's Sky and For Honor are nowadays considered to be good games after several YEARS of post-release content. But the cries of "but it's good now!" can be responded to with one simple point: "why couldn't it have been this good ON RELEASE?!" This then brings me to Final Fantasy 13, which defenders will say "But it gets good 25 HOURS in!" Well, why can't it be good NOW?!

These "defenses" are absolutely piss poor when you actually examine them for five seconds by just asking a single question: why? Why did you have to release it like this, Bethesda? It would take too much money? Considering the RIDICULOUS amounts of cash you made on games like Oblivion and Fallout 3, you could ride that for a while. Too much time? That's YOUR problem for not doing proper project management, and as the quote goes, "a delayed game will eventually be good". I've heard once before that when they build an Elder Scrolls game, they do it from the ground up. That's great from an artistic perspective, but they CLEARLY do not have the competence to back up their vision. When your jank is making Daikatana look competent (Fallout 76), you need to get out of the business. Especially now that we have devs like Obsidian who can do what you do without the bugs (The Outer Worlds).

[ShiraNoMai]

Yeah, that's one thing about ports that gets me sometimes: you have the opportunity to fix the jank/bugs that shipped with the original title. Why couldn't you be bothered to take the time to fix them? I have to imagine that it's down to whatever funding the publisher gives them to even do the port in the first place (sometimes, not even the original devs do the ports!) that makes them forced to turn the blindeye at them, but then when you think of games like Aliens: Colonial Marines that were broken by simply having a typo in the code , you start to wonder.

[Moonface]

I'm reminded of No Man's Sky and For Honor, which in turn reminds me of Final Fantasy 13. No Man's Sky and For Honor are nowadays considered to be good games after several YEARS of post-release content. But the cries of "but it's good now!" can be responded to with one simple point: "why couldn't it have been this good ON RELEASE?!" This then brings me to Final Fantasy 13, which defenders will say "But it gets good 25 HOURS in!" Well, why can't it be good NOW?!

No Man's Sky feels like the developers bit off more than they could chew due to their ambition, similar to the debacle with Cyberpunk 2077. I don't know about For Honor, but at least the developers of NMS had the decency to get the game to where it is without charging money for any of the new content.

@ShiraNoMai: And I bet that fix still isn't officially in the game files.  Which sucks because that means the game is only going to have reasonably good AI on PC.

[Moonface]

I shall now port this thread into 2021 kicking and screaming with this discovery I just made about Resident Evil 4. So we all know that game has been ported onto just about everything, but I bet no one here knew it had been ported onto a system that was basically a slightly more powerful PS1/N64 called the Zeebo, which was a home console exclusively sold in Brazil and Mexico. It's pretty crazy to look at:

I know this caught attention back when I posted it, and a video published today really dives into this interesting port, as well as the iOS port of RE4 as well:



A notable highlight about these ports (or at least the Zeebo version, I can't tell if this affected the iOS one) is that a lot of the game is missing. The game ends after the fight with Salazar in the castle; no island section, no Saddler fights, and there isn't even the barn fight at the end of the village.

[Maniakkid25]

That's not actually the first time I've heard of a game port cutting out content from another version. The example that immediately comes to mind is actually a translation, not a port, but Revelations: Persona was actually missing an entire dungeon in the non-japanese release, meaning an entire character and ending is locked off to the player with no way of getting it outside of cheats. There's also the blackface, but we don't talk about the blackface...

[Moonface]

Oh I've seen games cut content for ports, particularly Rayman 2 not having any version with the exact same content. But I've never seen a game cut out an entire act of a game before. XD
I wonder if the game ends differently to close off the story without Ashley being missing and whatnot.

[Nightingale]

The port of Daikatana on the N64 cuts about a quarter of the whole damn game (not that you are missing much).

[Moonface]

The port of Daikatana on the N64 cuts about a quarter of the whole damn game (not that you are missing much).

I assume it isn't any notable story content they cut out?

[Nightingale]

The port of Daikatana on the N64 cuts about a quarter of the whole damn game (not that you are missing much).

I assume it isn't any notable story content they cut out?

It shaves off a lot of content, but it actually makes it A BETTER GAME.

No dreaded AI companions and their endless rehash of "1000 Ways To Die" (bar on cutscenes). You only get story and gameplay, no pointless BS this time around.

Too bad the N64 makes it look even crappier than ever.

[WR91]

To me most of the Nintendo Switch ports have been good. For those that never had the Wii U and for those that want to play older games on a new(er) gen console.