• narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because enough people will then buy the game twice that it’s worth the very slight reputation loss for them.

    • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Also because they can rush the console port out quicker without having to drop a half-baked PC port.

      For what its worth, I remember GTA V looking good, being preformant, and having the same amount of bugs you’d expect to find in any other open world sandbox game. No more, no less. Also the options panel was reasonably detailed.

      That being said the ports for GTA III/VC/SA are clunky as shit, and the framerate dependency is a fucking joke that shouldn’t have been considered acceptable even back then. Even GTA IV had a lot of issues, but those are all like 15-20 years old at this point. It’s almost as irrelevant as complaining about Max Payne not working under Win XP, despite being less than a year old when the OS launched.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Their DRM or whatever they were doing with logging into rockstar was a giant pain in the dick. It meaningfully changed the amount I played it.

        • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          That’s true, I forgot about that. Their DRM was obnoxious. We already have to deal with Steam, at least that has features which improve gameplay to make up for it.