Shots fired. EA says PC owners don't upgrade enough.

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,080
EA was discussing the reasons why they didn't bring the new Ignite engine over to the PC for FIFA 14. Number one reason for Ignite staying console only is that the people who play FIFA own low end PCs. Until they upgrade to something more up to date then it's pointless to bring them next generation graphics as they can't run the game. They also mentioned that the PC has lots of different hardware to optimize for as a reason, but didn't seem to mind spending time fixing those issues if there was a market for them to sell to.

So have you upgraded your PC lately? :)

http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/17/4439532/ea-sports-ignite-pc-support-andrew-wilson-interview-e3-2013
 
Last edited:
EA is known to make up excuses. I dont trust anything they say. Especially since you buy a console and it doesnt upgrade for over 5 years!
 
LOL, whatever. I'll upgrade more often when you make me games that compel me to want to or "have to" do it.

Pretty simple.
 
I sort of see their point. If 90% of their customers are playing on an i5 with integrated graphics (in contrast to something like BF3, where I'd guess that most people are running a quad core with a discreet GPU), why would they bother releasing it if said engine required a high end CPU/GPU?

I'm actually pretty surprised that they still offer it on PC considering sports games generally don't do very well on it.
 
dr.stevil said:
I sort of see their point. If 90% of their customers are playing on an i5 with integrated graphics (in contrast to something like BF3, where I'd guess that most people are running a quad core with a discreet GPU), why would they bother releasing it if said engine required a high end CPU/GPU?

I'm actually pretty surprised that they still offer it on PC considering sports games generally don't do very well on it.
Click to expand...

Yup look at the Steam survey to really find out how much low end crap people play on. Quite surprising...
 
cageymaru said:
EA was discussing the reasons why they didn't bring the new Ignite engine over to the PC for FIFA 14. Number one reason for Ignite staying console only is that the people who play FIFA own low end PCs. Until they upgrade to something more up to date then it's pointless to bring them next generation graphics as they can't run the game. They also mentioned that the PC has lots of different hardware to optimize for as a reason, but didn't seem to mind spending time fixing those issues if there was a market for them to sell to.

So have you upgraded your PC lately? :)
Click to expand...

You mean to tell me I won't be able to play an EA sports game on my computer?

What a tremendous loss :p
 
I honestly didn't even need to get a 670, there just aren't really any REALLY demanding games out there. Maybe next year. We'll see.
 
a lower end PC is still better then or at least equal to a current gen console...console owners can't upgrade so I don't see EA's point
 
*Make crappy console ports for years*
*Complain that people don't upgrade often enough*

Oh EA!
 
TheResidentEvil said:
EA is known to make up excuses. I dont trust anything they say. Especially since you buy a console and it doesnt upgrade for over 5 years!
Click to expand...

QFT.

Also , this is why I am not buying that Battlefield 5 dollar deal, EA is fucking dumb. That and the whole Westwood fiasco. :<
 
dr.stevil said:
I sort of see their point. If 90% of their customers are playing on an i5 with integrated graphics (in contrast to something like BF3, where I'd guess that most people are running a quad core with a discreet GPU), why would they bother releasing it if said engine required a high end CPU/GPU?

I'm actually pretty surprised that they still offer it on PC considering sports games generally don't do very well on it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The sports game market is not very big at all on the PC. As a FIFA player, the engine was always like 4-5 years behind the console versions. But the vast majority of their EA Sports market plays on consoles. This is not surprising at all. He isn't talking about all PC gamers, he's talking about the market that plays sports games. It's just that PC enthusiasts tend to let their elitism blind them to the context of articles like these.

In essence, said Wilson, the primary audience for the PC version of FIFA &#8212; a video game that is played around the world &#8212; didn't have PCs that could handle the engine until 2010. With console development, users are guaranteed to be able to play a game as long as they have the console in question. The same isn't true on PC, and according to Wilson, much of the people who were playing FIFA on PC wouldn't have been able to play a game that was on par with the console versions. That, in turn, meant it didn't make sense for EA to expend resources on developing an up-to-date version of the game for PC.
Click to expand...
 
polonyc2 said:
a lower end PC is still better then or at least equal to a current gen console...console owners can't upgrade so I don't see EA's point
Click to expand...

What do you consider a low end PC though? It wasn't until recently that integrated graphics got somewhat decent (HD4000)... and even then, it still doesn't perform very well even compared to the current generation consoles. I've tried running Skyrim on my i5/HD4000 and it was like a slideshow on the lowest settings. The 360, on the other hand, can handle it just fine. If you go back to the HD3000 GPUs, that most people are still likely using... forget about it.

I'd be curious to see what their usage stats are.
 
How about they take the "Arts" out of their name and shut the fuck up
 
dr.stevil said:
What do you consider a low end PC though? It wasn't until recently that integrated graphics got somewhat decent (HD4000)... and even then, it still doesn't perform very well even compared to the current generation consoles. I've tried running Skyrim on my i5/HD4000 and it was like a slideshow on the lowest settings. The 360, on the other hand, can handle it just fine. If you go back to the HD3000 GPUs, that most people are still likely using... forget about it.

I'd be curious to see what their usage stats are.
Click to expand...

I don't consider integrated graphics even low end...they are their own separate entity...when talking lower end PC's I was referring to graphics cards/CPU's from a few years back...a lot of them are still better then or at worst equal to a current gen console
 
polonyc2 said:
I don't consider integrated graphics even low end...they are their own separate entity...when talking lower end PC's I was referring to graphics cards/CPU's from a few years back...a lot of them are still better then or at worst equal to a current gen console
Click to expand...

Why not? It is what it is...

If the majority of people playing Fifa, are playing it on a C2D/HD3000 laptop... then that's what they're playing with. I think a lot of people are taking this out of context. They're not talking about all PC gamers or owners... just those that are actually buying/playing Fifa.
 
polonyc2 said:
a lower end PC is still better then or at least equal to a current gen console...console owners can't upgrade so I don't see EA's point
Click to expand...

The engine is made for consoles in DX11 so it doesn't need to upgrade.
Many PC gamers are still using DX9/10 cards. They need to upgrade.

The funny thing is that if the game was DX11 only for s "Sports" title, how many international futbol fans would rage about that.
For DX11 to shine, DX9/10 can't be mixed in or the feature would just be a patch.

This is not BF4 folks, a sports game shouldn't be as demanding to run.
 
I'm pretty sure through its online service and hardware survey EA has a much better idea than anyone on this forum of what the average FIFA player is using for a PC.
 
console owners don't upgrade HOWEVER it is a closed system with given specs that are rated higher then the parts they are made of(easier to get the power out of)

I can understand EA point, but at the same time EA are fools overall, very few things their customer/player base say is an issue ever gets fixed, instead they are more a mindset of "screw fixing it and making it look/play right, just release the next one and drop support asap"
 
sports game shouldn`t be s demanding to run, however they have a ton of stuff running in the background and foreground so I suppose it depends on the total of all things happening and when, maybe they do compare to BF if the AI say for the players, crowd, vendors etc is complex it becomes a lot of code running all at once.
 
most likely the DX11 PC numbers will increase once the new consoles are released...DX11 games were few and far between during the early years of DX11...it's only recently that most new games seem to be DX11...so people did not feel the need to upgrade

or if a PC gamer is still using a DX9 card then he obviously doesn't care about graphics too much (which is the whole point/advantage of gaming on a PC)...you can get a decent DX11 card for cheap nowadays...so they must be casual gamers combined with console gamers...so EA wants casual gamers to become hard core gamers to play FIFA 14???...is the series that popular to warrant a video card upgrade?...EA is only saying this now because they know that the new consoles will be using DX11 and are using it as an excuse to promote it over PC
 
demingo said:
I'm pretty sure through its online service and hardware survey EA has a much better idea than anyone on this forum of what the average FIFA player is using for a PC.
Click to expand...

They are probably doing it to promote the new xbone (or next gen consoles, if it's available on ps4 as well) by giving it an advantage in terms of the new engine over the other platforms. It's not the first time a publisher do stuff like this. The same reason why some publishers chose to sacrifice potential customers by going a certain console exclusive.
 
The reason publishers make exclusivity details is because they're getting paid to do so. You're suggesting that both Microsoft and Sony are paying EA to cripple the PC version?
 
most people are using onboard, not discrete class gpu, 1/3 very old underpowered GPU(money issue usually) 1/3 decent but older, 1/3 modern and good enough to very high end, at least that is what I think IMHO.

DX11 is used in quite a few games tbh however, very few use it from the base design most are tacking it onto the DX9 base, so they can run both if need be. Problem is that it does not run its features the way it could if fully built with all DX11 will offer(and dx11.1 and beyond according to PS4 specs)

Either way EA just wants the almighty dollar however they get to it, they will do it, and it seems that using the newest fanciest engine they can sell more games cause it "looks pretty" even if it plays like crud and simple things like lighting is cruddy if you look close enough.
 
I thought everyone knew people don't upgrade enough?

Though, perhaps now that something like the PS4 is a 7850+ equivalent (above the GPU level of the average PC user) they might be more inclined to as games will have a much higher base level. Though if they don't, and people still don't upgrade that might make PC ports less attractive as it will be targeting a much much smaller audience! :eek:
 
Raudulfr said:
*Make crappy console ports for years*
*Complain that people don't upgrade often enough*

Oh EA!
Click to expand...

was thinking this very same thing. People hardly have a reason to upgrade their hardware when companies like EA do everything in their power to not push the limits anymore.

Best thing to happen to pc gaming in years is going to be the release of these new consoles so the ports we get can be more with the times then they have been of late.
 
Way to endear yourself to your customers EA. Just another reason to not give a shit about Origin.

I say EA is creatively stagnant.
 
By all means, I better order that SLI Titan setup I was reading about so that I can play EA's games because Sim City was so much fun...................
 
Steam hardware stats back up there claim. And Valve is a reliable source of info right? Another hate EA thread.
 
GTX Titan/780 over 680-> 25% increase in performance for a premium around $250-$400
Haswell over IB -> a mere 5%-10% increase in general performance

Why is the point of upgrading again?
 
I'm sorry that my m18x is apparently too slow for EA's crazy graphics. So, how many DirectX 11 games have they released lately?
 
Sorry guys, I'm all for the hate EA circlejerk, but this time they are right. Firstly, they aren't talking about us, so getting all angry and offended is fucking retarded. These types of sports games on PC appeal overwhelmingly to a very casual crowd probably rocking a laptop with Intel 3000 or 4000 series video.

Even if you expand out and look at a broader section of gamers (Steam hardware survey) there are a ton of people still using shitty integrated video cards to play the occasional PC game while they game primarily on their consoles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top