PC gamers can't stop complaining

owenhehe said:
I second you on this.

PC gamers don't realise THEY are the cause of bad console ports, not the developers'!
Click to expand...

Bull Shit. You are going to have a hard time getting any one to really believe that people complaining about: missing features, or crappy consolized game play mechanics, or poor KB/M support, or over the top DRM is the reason the devs/pubs like Ubi Soft decide to release crappy ports? How do you even figure that?
Piracy I could almost believe, if it were not for the fact that Gabe has license to print money over at Steam. That alone pretty much proves there is a great deal of profit to be made in PC gaming. That is if a dev/pub can pull the 360/PS3 controllers out of their ass long enough to actually port a game over to PC in a more than half assed fashion. Good games make money, bad ones do not.

Crap ports come from a willingness to try and make a quick buck with the least amount of cash and effort. It also requires that a dev/pub does not mind trading their reputations for it. Next time around, they get angry and scream piracy because they no longer have a reputation that allows them to make as much money off their latest crap port. This is Ubi right now. They made some great games and still do. However, they have trained the PC gamer to either wait and see on every game they release or just pass on it without a second thought. Ubi did this themselves. It was not piracy or picky gamers that did this. It was Ubi calling us all thieves, using some pretty ridiculous over the top DRM, and releasing half baked ports of what would be fair to pretty good games on the PC if they had given a damn.
 
Last edited:
I just find it funny that there aren't more people saying good riddance in this thread, considering the amount of people that routinely say they'd rather no port than bad ports around here. I know nothing about the game but someone mentioned that it's very much a console game, so why does it matter.

I hate these threads in general though. Too many people expressing their feelings, not enough rational thought going around.
 
nobody_here said:
and average joe is the one who determines the future of gaming on all platforms, if there is not enough sales to continue pc development, there wont be pc games. you can call it casual if it makes you feel better, but casual = majority = $$$$
Click to expand...

This. Software devs go where the money is.
 
Crash250f said:
I hate these threads in general though. Too many people expressing their feelings, not enough rational thought going around.
Click to expand...

it all comes down to money, how much you pc gamers are willing to spend, the less people buy, whether it is because they grew up and moved to casual console gaming or because they would rather pirate the game than pay for it......it all comes down to the dollar and it doesn't get any more rational than that. the almighty dollar is all that matters. there is no "respect for pc gamers" or some imaginary white knight in the form of Gabe Newell.

at the end of the day, the dollar drives it all, and most of the dollars are going into big screen tv's, couches, and xbox 360's. 99% of people have never even considered a pc as a viable gaming platform. They see it as junior, expensive, difficult to maintain, geeky and unnecessary and to be quite frank they are right.
 
nobody_here said:
unnecessary and to be quite frank they are right.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Where do you think all the engines that run your popular console games such as MW were created? Not on a console I can assure you. Without development of hardware and cutting edge graphics engines the console market would stagnate. Consoles are basically PC's nowdays anyways, the only thing preventing them is the inability to upgrade internal components at will. When that happends, they will become "Personal Computers".
 
Last edited:
Your assessment was right 5-10 years ago but it is not now.

Yes most development is done on a PC but you know what? Visual Studio would be kind of hard to load on an Xbox. The development is done on a computer that runs the same hardware as the console. Xbox games are not developed on a cutting edge PC.
 
Staples said:
Your assessment was right 5-10 years ago but it is not now.

Xbox games are not developed on a cutting edge PC.
Click to expand...

Not developed sure, but they use the engines made first on PC's. Modern Warfare uses a heavily modified version of the Quake 3 engine. It has since its conception.
 
That is just stupid. And for him to throw the piracy in there is even more retarded. I would say most people that pirate games and like them end up actually buying them.
 
KarsusTG said:
That is just stupid. And for him to throw the piracy in there is even more retarded. I would say most people that pirate games and like them end up actually buying them.
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm guessing you're one of them? Only they seem to think like that.:rolleyes:
 
Krenum said:
Wrong. Where do you think all the engines that run your popular console games such as MW were created? Not on a console I can assure you. Without development of hardware and cutting edge graphics engines the console market would stagnate. Consoles are basically PC's nowdays anyways, the only thing preventing them is the inability to upgrade internal components at will. When that happends, they will become "Personal Computers".
Click to expand...

They can use computers to develop the console games without actually producing a pc version of the game bro. Of course they need cutting edge computer hardware (in the form of a development kit). That was never the issue at hand. I said they could get rid of "pc gaming". That is the development and money spent developing a pc version of the game that is nothing in profits compared to the console version. High end pc hardware is necessary in some regards. "PC Gaming" as an industry however could be eliminated completely.
 
KarsusTG said:
That is just stupid. And for him to throw the piracy in there is even more retarded. I would say most people that pirate games and like them end up actually buying them.
Click to expand...

that is completely ridiculous and goes against all common sense and against human nature itself.

If you give anyone something for free, they will not go out and buy a second one just because they liked the first one so much.....because there will be the next better version of it within 6 months most likely.....which they will want, because the first one they got for free was so nice, so they will go back to their source of the free one and get the new one....rinse and repeat. People do not go out and spend money they don't have to. People are cheap asses. There is no morality involved. No sense of responsibility. Once you get older you realize that. Nobody gives a damn. They want what they want, and if they can get it for free they will and they don't give a damn who they shit on to get it. That's life bro.
 
nobody_here said:
They can use computers to develop the console games without actually producing a pc version of the game bro. Of course they need cutting edge computer hardware (in the form of a development kit). That was never the issue at hand. I said they could get rid of "pc gaming". That is the development and money spent developing a pc version of the game that is nothing in profits compared to the console version. High end pc hardware is necessary in some regards. "PC Gaming" as an industry however could be eliminated completely.
Click to expand...

And we have just come full circle. You can't have high end PC hardware without having games to run on it. PC gaming has staying power , even more so than console gaming, new technology breeds new software. Like I said before the only reason consoles exist is because of PC's and PC gaming. Personal Computers have been the forefront of gaming since digital gaming was invented, Some people call them Arcades, others call them Consoles but if you really look at it, there all the same, just with different accessibility and function.

PS

I'm not your "bro".
 
Krenum said:
And we have just come full circle. You can't have high end PC hardware without having games to run on it. PC gaming has staying power , even more so than console gaming, new technology breeds new software. Its only a matter of time before consoles become full fledged personal computers.
Click to expand...

They already ARE full fledged computers, just very crappy ones. But they'll never be open platforms like a PC, that's kind of the point.
 
Krenum said:
And we have just come full circle. You can't have high end PC hardware without having games to run on it.

Um, yes, you can, the hardware manufacturers are moving their bread and butter to mobile devices as we speak. Discreet high end gaming hardware is not their core from what I can tell or will not be very soon. But they most certainly could produce hardware for dev kits exclusively. There is nothing that says high end hardware and pc gaming are coupled at the hip. That's a perception, not reality.

PC gaming has staying power , even more so than console gaming, new technology breeds new software. Like I said before the only reason consoles exist is because of PC's and PC gaming. Personal Computers have been the forefront of gaming since digital gaming was invented, Some people call them Arcades, others call them Consoles but if you really look at it, there all the same, just with different accessibility and function.

Yeah, and the vast majority of people are putting their money into consoles, not into pc gaming. That was my point. We can have personal computers and game development and they can develop next gen console games, all without PC gaming.

PS

I'm not your "bro".

see, you're going down the wrong path there brah
Click to expand...

we can be bros
 
I guess it all comes down to how you want to entertain yourself I guess. I personally love tweaking PC hardware. I don't get that same feeling when I buy a console, I just sit there and look at it, there aren't any improvements to be made, it is what it is. In my opinion PC and PC gaming gives you more freedom and lets you personalize your gaming experience.
 
Krenum said:
I guess it all comes down to how you want to entertain yourself I guess. I personally love tweaking PC hardware. I don't get that same feeling when I buy a console, I just sit there and look at it, there aren't any improvements to be made, it is what it is. In my opinion PC and PC gaming gives you more freedom and lets you personalize your gaming experience.
Click to expand...

you're absolutely correct. I used to be into that tweaking and stuff myself. That was when I was in my twenties. Fast forward 10 years later, lots of life lessons, marriage, kids, life in general......when I do get the chance to game, I certainly don't want to sit in a corner hunched over a keyboard and mouse. I don't have the budget or time to build and maintain a nice quiet high end home theater grade gaming pc with multiple wireless controllers. I want to mash my ass to the couch in front of the 55' HDTV, hit a button on the controller, and be in the game in under two minutes and have great graphics and sound to go along with it. Then be able to hit that same button again 20 minutes later and it all goes off with no fuss, until a few days later when I might get 20 minutes to play again.

i also want my kids to be able to play with me or me to be able to jump in with them occasionally, something that the 360 with Kinect or even the Wii do very very well that the pc just isn't going to do

most of the answers here will be very proportionate to age and personal level of responsibility, and the demographics of this site's readership is early to middle twenty something single/engaged/newly married guys so your viewpoint is appropriate.

there's no right or wrong, but as the generations like myself, that were like you are, very much hardcore pc gamers start to get older, they start to turn to todays console, because when we were 20 the consoles sucked. There was a much larger disparity between consoles and pc gaming at that time. Today we can have a console that is pretty impressive to the vast majority of people. Even people like me who know full well how good pc gaming graphics are. Todays console is still good enough for most of us.

Then what happens is you have a generational shift. My kids will not associate nice graphics and good multiplayer gaming with a computer like I did. They will see the console as the only real platform to consider. Their exposure to computers is mostly our laptops which we use to do school work. They have their own netbook they use to surf the web some with supervision. As time goes on, computers are becoming more what they were originally intended to be. A tool for work. We are replacing computers with phones and tablets quickly. The touchscreen casual gamer is now the norm. This is the slow decline of hardcore pc gaming>
 
As long as there has been PC's, there has been games for them. that is not going to change. there will always be PC gaming, no matter how gloomy it seems now. what is changing is the quality difference between PC and console. there used to be a vast delta between the two, but not so much anymore. unless your willing to drop a few grand for a high end computer and an eyefinity setup, a 300$ console and a 500$ 42" LCD gets you an equal or better experience. additionally no console gamer wonders if they need new hardware to run a new game, or if it will work out of the box. Like it or not, that is an issue on the PC side. you can not discount the fact that a new 360 game works with a 6 year old 360 as easily as a 1 day old 360. it may not look as good as a top end PC, but it looks good enough for most.

personally i let my wallet do my talking. if i think it will play better on the console, i'll buy that version. if i think it will be better on the PC i'll go that route. given the spread in pc hardware over the last 4 years, i can't blame a publisher for concentrating on the more consistent platform. it would be nice if more games took advantage of the PC's inherent advantages, but all you can do is support the ones that do and shun the ones that do not.
 
Nimisys said:
As long as there has been PC's, there has been games for them. that is not going to change. there will always be PC gaming, no matter how gloomy it seems now. what is changing is the quality difference between PC and console. there used to be a vast delta between the two, but not so much anymore. unless your willing to drop a few grand for a high end computer and an eyefinity setup, a 300$ console and a 500$ 42" LCD gets you an equal or better experience. additionally no console gamer wonders if they need new hardware to run a new game, or if it will work out of the box. Like it or not, that is an issue on the PC side. you can not discount the fact that a new 360 game works with a 6 year old 360 as easily as a 1 day old 360. it may not look as good as a top end PC, but it looks good enough for most.

personally i let my wallet do my talking. if i think it will play better on the console, i'll buy that version. if i think it will be better on the PC i'll go that route. given the spread in pc hardware over the last 4 years, i can't blame a publisher for concentrating on the more consistent platform. it would be nice if more games took advantage of the PC's inherent advantages, but all you can do is support the ones that do and shun the ones that do not.
Click to expand...

well said. i had a couple years where I went back and forth, and got tired of the perpetual chase in the pc realm, i settled for good enough and am very happy
 
nobody_here said:
as much as i hate to say it, this is simply one tiny part of the slow decline of pc gaming.....and it was bound to happen. The number of people who A. give a damn to have anything better than a console, and then on top of that they B. are willing to spend the time and money to get it......well.....you get a pretty small group of people in the big picture and his comments reflect that fact.

pc gaming is only important to pc gamers. those developers can feed you all the bullshit you can eat about how they are developing for pc.....but take a look around at the latest games guys....essentially all ports, obvious ports, and it's nobody's fault, they have to follow the money trail

it even goes further within the console crowd. for instance i am a huge fan of racing games. i gave up pc gaming and went to a xbox 360 for some 1080p 55" couch controller button mashing love and honestly have never looked back. But the Forza franchise has started spending dev time and money adding idiotic shit like car bowling and tag........shit that has nothing to do with being a serious racing game. They do it because they have to in order to attract a broader audience. It's simple economics.
Click to expand...


1. watch top gear UK..

2. all the sub games added to forza 4 (excluding soccer which is a top gear thing) were all things we use to do back in forza 1 2 and 3. they are user created games we use to do and turn10 just made it easier for us by adding them into the game so we can still get stats and making it more organized.

sorry if some of us like doing other shit in forza then just racing around in circles all day long.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
1. watch top gear UK..

2. all the sub games added to forza 4 (excluding soccer which is a top gear thing) were all things we use to do back in forza 1 2 and 3. they are user created games we use to do and turn10 just made it easier for us by adding them into the game so we can still get stats and making it more organized.

sorry if some of us like doing other shit in forza then just racing around in circles all day long.
Click to expand...

That was my point, they spent time and money developing shit for the mass market, to attract more people to the game, to the mass appeal. In the end it is all about the $$$

I watch Top Gear UK. I think the bowling and all that stuff is amazingly boring and a waste of time. I was glad they were not part of the game in Forza2 and 3 and was very dissapointed they spent development cycles adding it to FM4. Especially when they couldn't even give us better tuning options or more aftermarket wheel options, how about giving us per wheel camber/caster, cross-weighting, individual tire pressure control, something resembling motor tuning. Why do I have all the same options basically as FM3?

If you look at FM3 vs. FM4 they really did not add anything at all from a real racing enthusiasts point of view.

They added these "games", they added Kinect head tracking which is a gimmick, they spent arguably a LOT of time making detailed graphics for the other mode....the one you get to look around at a detailed car...i forget the name, I tried it once to confirm it is also a gimmick.

Everything that counts to someone who wants to really fine tune cars and race either competitively in a group of friends or solo doing Spec Hot Laps or Time Attack they didn't change at all. One caveat, they changed the tire physics and in that all they did was accentuate the understeer in a rather unrealistic way.....
 
nobody_here said:
That was my point, they spent time and money developing shit for the mass market, to attract more people to the game, to the mass appeal. In the end it is all about the $$$

I watch Top Gear UK. I think the bowling and all that stuff is amazingly boring and a waste of time. I was glad they were not part of the game in Forza2 and 3 and was very dissapointed they spent development cycles adding it to FM4. Especially when they couldn't even give us better tuning options or more aftermarket wheel options, how about giving us per wheel camber/caster, cross-weighting, individual tire pressure control, something resembling motor tuning. Why do I have all the same options basically as FM3?

If you look at FM3 vs. FM4 they really did not add anything at all from a real racing enthusiasts point of view.

They added these "games", they added Kinect head tracking which is a gimmick, they spent arguably a LOT of time making detailed graphics for the other mode....the one you get to look around at a detailed car...i forget the name, I tried it once to confirm it is also a gimmick.

Everything that counts to someone who wants to really fine tune cars and race either competitively in a group of friends or solo doing Spec Hot Laps or Time Attack they didn't change at all. One caveat, they changed the tire physics and in that all they did was accentuate the understeer in a rather unrealistic way.....
Click to expand...


theres a crap load of stuff i'd like to see in forza that should of been there a long time ago. but this in lies the real problem, the game is developed by a bunch of people that don't know shit about cars. if you ever talk to them on their forums you would completely see why none of the important stuff gets added. performance numbers on certain cars are insanely off(more then likely payed to be that way by the manufacture), adding parts that should do something but don't or adding parts that drop PI instead of increasing it or adding parts that don't do crap to the PI but obviously make the car insanely better. most of the understeer problem isn't even the tire physics, its the actual car its self. most of the cars physics wise are smaller then what you actually see. good example, drive the plymoth cuda, you can flip that thing like its a friggin lotus elise even though the real car is almost 5 ft wide. also with muscle cars if you go off the road in one spot with say a BMW you get penalized, cut the same spot with say the AMX javeline and you don't get crap, why? because you see the tire there but its not really there in the collision model thus you didn't actually run off the track. there are all kinds of stupid crap like that. in the end its about as much of a sim as dirt 3 is but either way its a hell of a lot more fun then GTR5.


in the end this comes back to the same argument i had with another game, supreme commander, everyone bitched about how complex the learning curve was for the game and thus they neutered the hell out of it in supreme commander 2. this is exactly what would happen with Forza if they were to create a more realistic tuning option in the game. people would bitch and whine about how its to damn hard to setup a car and the next version would go right back to what it was before. the only way i could see it working is if they had the basic tuning which we have now, then the ability to go to a sub menu for advanced tuning but i think we'll have to wait for the next xbox to come out to see things like that implimented, i'm just not sure how well the 360 could handle the excessive calculations that would be needed.
 
Staples said:
Your assessment was right 5-10 years ago but it is not now.

Yes most development is done on a PC but you know what? Visual Studio would be kind of hard to load on an Xbox. The development is done on a computer that runs the same hardware as the console. Xbox games are not developed on a cutting edge PC.
Click to expand...

you're almost right...game is developed on a PC and then once it is compiled it is tested on consoles that can run unsigned code, changes are made on PC if needed...etc.......
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
theres a crap load of stuff i'd like to see in forza that should of been there a long time ago. but this in lies the real problem, the game is developed by a bunch of people that don't know shit about cars. if you ever talk to them on their forums you would completely see why none of the important stuff gets added. performance numbers on certain cars are insanely off(more then likely payed to be that way by the manufacture), adding parts that should do something but don't or adding parts that drop PI instead of increasing it or adding parts that don't do crap to the PI but obviously make the car insanely better. most of the understeer problem isn't even the tire physics, its the actual car its self. most of the cars physics wise are smaller then what you actually see. good example, drive the plymoth cuda, you can flip that thing like its a friggin lotus elise even though the real car is almost 5 ft wide. also with muscle cars if you go off the road in one spot with say a BMW you get penalized, cut the same spot with say the AMX javeline and you don't get crap, why? because you see the tire there but its not really there in the collision model thus you didn't actually run off the track. there are all kinds of stupid crap like that. in the end its about as much of a sim as dirt 3 is but either way its a hell of a lot more fun then GTR5.


in the end this comes back to the same argument i had with another game, supreme commander, everyone bitched about how complex the learning curve was for the game and thus they neutered the hell out of it in supreme commander 2. this is exactly what would happen with Forza if they were to create a more realistic tuning option in the game. people would bitch and whine about how its to damn hard to setup a car and the next version would go right back to what it was before. the only way i could see it working is if they had the basic tuning which we have now, then the ability to go to a sub menu for advanced tuning but i think we'll have to wait for the next xbox to come out to see things like that implimented, i'm just not sure how well the 360 could handle the excessive calculations that would be needed.
Click to expand...


good assessment. Yeah, I thought thought, I hoped anyways, that we would be getting that level of tuning with FM4. Give people the "upgrade and auto tune it for me by hitting X" option for those who dont want to go there, but give the tuning shop tons of granularity. We didn't even get a new set of wheels for christs sake. Not that it matters that much, but after that long you would think they would put a good 10-20 new wheels in there. Boyd Coddington really only ever made one wheel design? Hrm.....

In the months leading to release of FM4 I began to lose hope because all they wanted to talk about was Autovista and Kinect head tracking and steering. Then all the focus on Top Gear influence and car bowling and tag......by that time I was pretty convinced, they really had not done anything for the core racing experience.

The demo was extremely underwhelming. The extra game modes like the bowling, tag, and then the ones where you have ignorant slow AI wandering around the track blocking your line....it all stacked up to essentially nothing they added is of any value except to those who are casual arcade, PGR style casual fanboys. It pisses me off because I rarely get to play, and when I do this is the only game I play, and every time I go to tune a car I think......really? We couldn't even get per wheel air pressure and suspension tuning after three generations of the game? That is not a coincidence. I think they probably looked into it and found out how complex it was going to make the physics calculations and backed off. Could be a system limitation also, that there is not enough hardware to do all of that on a per wheel basis. It exponentially makes things more complex I realize that.

Here's to hoping with the release of the next gen console, they will have what they need to concentrate on the parts of the game that mean anything to the more hardcore racing type.
 
I wish I was so incredibly filthy rich that I could shrug off an opportunity to make an easy ~$820,000 by doing minimal conversion/porting work and say that isn't worth my time.

I mean, if I can shrug off close to a million bucks, I've gotta be worth a fuck ton more, right?

That being said, I do buy my games for PC, and my 360. But I refuse to buy either at full retail price unless I absolutely, positively must have the game NOW. I'm not going to put 100% of it's suggested retail price into a game I'm not going to be 100% satisfied with. I'll be willing to be about 85-90% worst case scenario, but if you start dipping below 80, I will be pissed and you can consider yourself lucky if I even consider getting the sequel I know you're going to shove down everyone's throats.
 
50,000 in total game sales on one platform is a failure in today's gaming market , I'm pretty sure you all know that or at least should by now. However its a total bullshit figure as digital distro has pretty much taken over and is increasing overall sales compared to retail and is in fact thriving , much like the PC gaming industry which is also doing better than ever. If your game only sells 50,000 copies on the PC than I've got a news flash Walter Cronkite , it fucking sucks. Crysis was one of the most pirated games in history but guess what ..it sold 3+ million copies :

By May 2010 the game has sold over 3 million units (and its standalone expansion about 1.5 million units)making it one of the best selling PC games of all time.
Click to expand...

Wait ..that can't be right , piracy made that game a total failure... right? MIND BLOWN :rolleyes: Oh but Crysis 2 which was built from the ground up to be multi-platform and it out sold Crysis ...right???!??? :

As of June 30, 2011 over 3 million copies of the game have been sold across all platforms
Click to expand...

Right.

If some lousy , piece of shit developer wants to come up with his own rubber stamped reasoning on how PC gaming is "too hard" and "all PC gamers pirate so its pointless" than frankly that developer can take his game and shove into the deepest recesses of his asshole. Anyone with half a brain will tell you PC gaming is doing extremely well , listening to lazy developers come up with there canned responses as to why PC gaming is quote "failing" is seriously getting very old.

Digital distro is a god send to PC gaming , I love being to purchase games at the click of a button. And with all the deals going on you really don't have a reason not to at some point buy the game you want. Now you might not like what developers are doing in the sense that many of them are extremely lazy and just console port everything since they only wish to turn a quick buck instead of actually putting the time into a proper PC port , that angers me to no end more than these dumb quotes from interviews.
 
I love how some PC gamers like to dispute facts.

Whether PC games are pirated or not has zero affect on the argument below.

We are concentrating on consoles because they outsell PC games 10/1. (the stat is random but who cares why games are not selling. The bottom line is they are not selling on PCs and they do on consoles.) Game developers go where the money is and so does everyone who has half a brain.
 
Staples said:
I love how some PC gamers like to dispute facts.

Whether PC games are pirated or not has zero affect on the argument below.

We are concentrating on consoles because they outsell PC games 10/1. (the stat is random but who cares why games are not selling. The bottom line is they are not selling on PCs and they do on consoles.) Game developers go where the money is and so does everyone who has half a brain.
Click to expand...


10/1 :confused: , pulling figures out of your ass doesn't make any kind of point. Again , if your PC game sales are shit and you solely blame piracy , you fail.

Another counter argument with no actual facts to back it up and more conjecture. Point well made :rolleyes:
 
Godmachine said:
10/1 :confused: , pulling figures out of your ass doesn't make any kind of point. Again , if your PC game sales are shit and you solely blame piracy , you fail.

Another counter argument with no actual facts to back it up and more conjecture. Point well made :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

My example was a random number but is your argument that PC versions outsell their console ports because if it is, you are certainly delusional.
 
Staples said:
My example was a random number but is your argument that PC versions outsell their console ports because if it is, you are certainly delusional.
Click to expand...

How did I imply that PC games out sell console games? I never once mentioned that in my post so I would say that you are in fact pushing forth your own argument where one didn't even exist. Who exactly is the delusional one in this discussion?

The point I was attempting to illustrate is that listening to whiny developers complain that PC gaming isn't worth the effort is about as useful as listening to PC gamers who feel entitled having everything better than any other platform. While Console gaming is wildly successful , PC gaming remains extremely successful as well .. saying either of them is "failing" or "doomed" is just complete bullshit as it always has been.

I know I'm not alone when I say that I'm sick of whining on both ends , millions of gamers are ready to spend hard earned cash on great games. Very few good PC games get ignored to the point where they completely tank , same goes for console games. In today's world where getting games is as easy as a push of the button the ability for developers to get there game out into the world is better than it ever was. You don't have to rely on gigantic publishers to back your game any more and it puts the focus where it always should be , the quality of the game on its own based on its content.
 
Serious development will always be profit driven. If consoles make tons more money than PCs, then common sense says maybe you should evaluate if PC development is even worth it. You could better invest your resources into more profit on console development only.

I don't know why this concept is so hard to understand. Hell, I am happy we even get as many ports as we do still. If I was a game developer, I probably would overlook the PC as much as I like PC gaming.
 
how did sales compare in the late 90s, early 2000s when great pc shooters were flying out?
 
As others have said, the focus of development is on consoles now.

Back in the good ol' days PC games were made largely by gamers and when development teams were small, we had developers making decisions on game play elements. The gaming crowd was much smaller but it was more of a dedicated group of gamers with higher expectations for games because gaming was their hobby.

Now it's the polar opposite, the ubiquity of cheap console gaming hardware has created a mass market around this previously more niche segment, the boom in console gamers in recent years is huge, it's gone from a typically introverted/geeky pass-time which was frowned upon, to a "cool" mainstream appeal where you're not in with the cool kids unless you're playing the latest modern warfare online. Kind of like back when browsing the internet was first introduced and all the nerds would love it but basically everyone else saw this as nerdy and geeky, now you're an outcast if you don't have a facebook account and visit it 20 times a day.

Gaming went mainstream and with that comes a massive influx of sales and money, you can make a living of making good games for gaming hobbyists, but you can make an absolute fortune on pandering to the millions of casual gamers.

Piracy is more or less irrelevant, it's been around since the early days of the internet, back when there was no such thing as P2P networks, the scene used hacked FTP servers to transfer releases about and you had to be "in" to get access to any of it, P2P networking is just the natural response to massive increased interest by the casual crowd.

PC gamers complain because what we had was something special, gamers made the sort of games they wanted to play and they made thoroughly good games (for their time) with deep and complex gameplay mechanics, which constantly innovated and constantly pushed gamers to be better at games.

Modern games are designed by committees of managers who know what is best only by studying the graphs of what sold the best in the last iteration, the investment in games is massive so returns need to be all but guaranteed, that means little or no innovation any more, and the extreme repetition of franchises because they are known to be "safe". The mass market of casual gamers respond more to advertising than they do actual gameplay so it means more money is spent on marketing the games than actually developing the game itself. Average game length has dropped because the average casual gamer doesn't even complete their games, leading to 4 hour singleplayers like CoDMW3.

So yes, PC gamers whine, those of you not old enough to remember what gaming was like back when it was a hobby and not mainstream will understand why.
 
I'll give my standard rants.

PC gamers bitch because they remember the golden era which is about 10 years old now.

They were actually supported too by Microsoft. Look at the pace of DirectX updates until about 2002/2003 versus since that time. Microsoft doesn't want to compete with itself. Microsoft doesn't want to improve DirectX against Hacks or push the PC feature envelope. The thing about no hacking in consoles (which I don't believe is a purely true as some like to think) is one of the big marketing tool for consoles vs. PCs. Basically Microsoft wants to sell you (Windows 7 + an Xbox) instead of just Windows 7. Whether you buy a gaming PC or low end laptop is inconsequential to Microsoft.

I've been hoping for a schism. Let PC gaming go its own way and break the trend of letting PCs be lucky to get a half-hearted port.
 
jpm100 said:
I'll give my standard rants.

PC gamers bitch because they remember the golden era which is about 10 years old now.

They were actually supported too by Microsoft. Look at the pace of DirectX updates until about 2002/2003 versus since that time. Microsoft doesn't want to compete with itself. Microsoft doesn't want to improve DirectX against Hacks or push the PC feature envelope. The thing about no hacking in consoles (which I don't believe is a purely true as some like to think) is one of the big marketing tool for consoles vs. PCs. Basically Microsoft wants to sell you (Windows 7 + an Xbox) instead of just Windows 7. Whether you buy a gaming PC or low end laptop is inconsequential to Microsoft.

I've been hoping for a schism. Let PC gaming go its own way and break the trend of letting PCs be lucky to get a half-hearted port.
Click to expand...

great assessment
 
I miss the days of old school community support & dedicated development teams. If we have more of this with modern day graphics & gameplay, we'd have a winning formula for the PC gaming community to buy into entirely.

There aren't enough CD Projekt REDs & Stardocks in the world. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top