Big fat rumour...but I think it's plausible. The game scored 7's and 8's at best, opposing the possible 9's and 10's they were aiming for. I suppose a PC version would at least sell them some more copies then the cold hard review numbers did. A misunderstanding it is, so no PC version on the way. Oh well, the game's scores aren't that good anyway.

If they did do it for the PC I wonder could they use DMM technolgy?

Probably, Medal Of Honor: Airborne had a couple physics engines running in the game, like Ragdoll Physics, the other engine's very cool, you ever see a game where there's a puddle on the ground and it doesn't look "wet" this engine makes it where it does, it's a killer on the video card though..

If you break a tree in Crysis, it just splits into two pre-fabricated parts. If you break a tree in The Force Unleashed, it actually calculates how these parts would look and behave in real-time. It is dynamically generated.


Is that why whenever I throw my lightsaber at a crate, it always splits down the middle into the same halves, no matter where my lightsaber hit it? Is that why only the prefabricated **** glued to the walls was interactive, and even a simple railing was utterly invincible to my onslaught?

:rolleyes:

There was nothing in the PS3 demo that revealed anything even remotely close to what you described. Furthermore, this still doesn't justify the '$4000 PC' BS. What exactly is in this fictional PC they're describing? Nvidia already has its physics front covered, and quad-core processors are a dime a dozen, yet few games come close to utilizing them.

What was 'DMM' used for in the demo? Using force push on doors, throwing stormtroopers, and the 3 different styles of boxes that littered the place. Sometimes they were glued to walls, but mostly they were just lying around.

Finally, who cares if it's cheating if it's unnoticeable? It's also cheating when I don't render things that the player can't see. Does that mean there's something to be gained by rendering the entire level at the same time, irrespective of the player's position?


Why would a PC be able to handle better gameplay? Why is there gameplay that only a PC could handle?

Maybe you never noticed, but console games are by and large made to appeal to morons. You could get away with a niche 'intelligent' game on the PC and sell well, whereas you couldn't do that on consoles.

Since the game is designed around the use of these technologies to the extent they are used, any watering down would be easily spotted. Just imagine if force pushing open the doors would look exactly the same no matter what direction you push from. Anyone who has read about the game would notice that it had been removed.
Same with Euphoria. If they were to remove it, it'd be clear as day that they had as soon as you'd start using Force Grip.
If they only were to remove certain things from these technologies, they would probably appear unfinished or glitchy at times and that would, again, make people complain.

This was so profoundly stupid I don't even know how to respond to it. Let's not make a game because pointless visual flair might have to be reduced optionally, and people might notice, and complain that higher spec machines can enable these optional features?

When has that ever occurred in the history of gaming, ever?

What, you don't think Xbox tards are going to cry because the PS3 version looks better too?

If anything, that speaks of how moronic the developers are, that they seemed to have plans to utterly exclude an 'OPTIONS' screen from the PC version.

Is that why whenever I throw my lightsaber at a crate, it always splits down the middle into the same halves, no matter where my lightsaber hit it? Is that why only the prefabricated **** glued to the walls was interactive, and even a simple railing was utterly invincible to my onslaught?

:rolleyes:Yet if you look at any video showing the Kashyyk level, you'll see that all levels aren't like that. In fact, I'd wager the Kashyyk levels in the game are the heaviest ones.

There was nothing in the PS3 demo that revealed anything even remotely close to what you described. Furthermore, this still doesn't justify the '$4000 PC' BS. What exactly is in this fictional PC they're describing? Nvidia already has its physics front covered, and quad-core processors are a dime a dozen, yet few games come close to utilizing them.

What was 'DMM' used for in the demo? Using force push on doors, throwing stormtroopers, and the 3 different styles of boxes that littered the place. Sometimes they were glued to walls, but mostly they were just lying around.
Yes, it was only used at doors. Again, not all levels are like that. The Felucia levels, for example, are full of organic life that DMM helps behave realistically.

Finally, who cares if it's cheating if it's unnoticeable? It's also cheating when I don't render things that the player can't see. Does that mean there's something to be gained by rendering the entire level at the same time, irrespective of the player's position?Oh but you completely miss my point.
I'm not saying this cheating is bad. The problem is that cheating yet still making it look believable is hard. DMM is new technology so I can guarantee that it isn't perfected, neither is Euphoria.

Maybe you never noticed, but console games are by and large made to appeal to morons. You could get away with a niche 'intelligent' game on the PC and sell well, whereas you couldn't do that on consoles.Ouch! What made console gamers the target of such elitist outbursts? :rolleyes:



This was so profoundly stupid I don't even know how to respond to it. Let's not make a game because pointless visual flair might have to be reduced optionally, and people might notice, and complain that higher spec machines can enable these optional features?

When has that ever occurred in the history of gaming, ever?

What, you don't think Xbox tards are going to cry because the PS3 version looks better too?
Again you miss the point. Do you seriously think it would help sales if the game they deliver looks worse than its console counterparts? The truth of the matter is that there are a lot of people who assume the PC version should always be superior in all technical aspects.

As a developer, making a game that only appeals to a more limited audience (in this case owners of high-end systems) instead of a wide audience is a bad choice and is more likely to alienate potential buyers. That would be a big risk factor, as you don't exactly want to waste money.
They said the reason was that they wouldn't be able to appeal to a wide audience and it's a very valid reason.

In case you didn't notice, the extreme force powers is the whole friggin' point of this game. The main features.

If anything, that speaks of how moronic the developers are, that they seemed to have plans to utterly exclude an 'OPTIONS' screen from the PC version.TONS and TONS of work to give you that options screen.
How do you imagine Euphoria and DMM settings could just be "lowered"?
It's not like they automatically have a variable they can just change that makes it "weaker" or anything.
If you think they do, then perhaps you should go learn anything about serious programming =)

OF COURSE YES!!
This game is awsome and deserves to be in the pc! don't care if it is a PORT OR NOT!!!!

CAN SOMEONE MAIL MICROSOFT TO MAKE THEM AN OFFER FOR GAMESFORWINDOWS ?

do i want it for pc Yes
But only if they lock it so good that it cant be pirated
i saw how much money spore lost to torrents and i dont want the force unleashed to go through that but lets face it it would be nice

do i want it for pc Yes
But only if they lock it so good that it cant be pirated

Three installs lock? Monthly internet checks? Thanks but no thanks.

Three installs lock? Monthly internet checks? Thanks but no thanks.

Don't forget the insidious programs publishers tend to include nowadays.

It'd be better to just burn the money and wipe the hard drive yourself in that case. :lol:

I voted yes. To be technical, they wouldn't have to worry about support for "every PC". They could just give certain spec requirements for it on the box, such as they did for KotOR I & II.

Singleplayer games don't have that luxury as creating new levels is really hard if you're not the actual creators of the game.
Really? Ever heard of the "Rise of the Sith" WIP for KotOR II before? :duros:

I don't care because I have the game for Xbox 360 and I wouldn't get it for PC. :confused::confused::confused: If I didn't have a console I would want it to be for PC.

I voted yes. I think that all games should be PC games, and if you can't afford a decent PC, well, honestly you can't afford to play video games. Spend your money elsewhere. Just my opinion. ;)