48 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

I think it goes in peaks and troughs. The console expenditure this generation has been so high on the part of the companies this console generation, it's forcing them to keep supporting the consoles for longer... which, in turn, leads to the tech being forced to compete on an ever more advancing playing field with the PC. The two types of platforms keep each other fresh.

The idea 'PC gaming is dying' is a load of doss. It's been 'dying' for over a decade now, and yet great games that use the hardware still get released. All that's happened is that PC gamers are now purchasing their games online, where they cost less. In the end, the only people losing out are the retail shops.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 20 juillet 2010 - 05:59 .

[Tlazolteotl]

There was a time when developers wrote games that makes use of the latest hardware.

Remember transform and lighting? Amazing new stuff, offering a significantly improved experience for those with brand new video cards vs. those who didn't.

Well, we have, right now, something even better. Hardware tessellation.

You won't hear anything about it, there won't be anything written for it, for at least 2 more years. Seriously.

Games on PC are not as good as they could be, 'cos they just have to be good enough on the console. That's where all the sales are at.

Sure, the PC versions of those games are often superior, Mass Effect 2 included, but 'superior to console' is not synonymous with 'good enough.'

[Bozorgmehr]

There are two problems, first there's the copy right protection - its harder to use cracked versions on the consoles, so the gaming industry focus on those platforms to maximize profit (at least thats what they believe). Some of the best selling games in recent years are pc games (WoW & Sims) so there still is a market for pc games. But even the guys from Crysis (designed for pc) are working on the sequel using Xbox and PS3 and they'll probably port it to pc. Crysis was an amazing game (graphics & physics) and its a shame that most games are vastly inferior released the last 3 years.

Secondly and more frightning is the huge control the marketing morons have in the gaming (entertainment) industry. Not that long ago games were made by gamers for gamers. Today games are only about marketing. They have to look cool and every fool - capable of pressing one or two buttons - should be able to breeze through. This shouldn't be a real issue because a good game is easy to play but difficult to master. Today they're just (extremely) easy to play.

Its a good thing grandma can play games too, but I like a challenge instead of just hitting some buttons wihout a clue what they're for and quess what you won

[Cra5y Pineapple]

I'm fine with it seeing I have alot of experience with these sort of shooter gameplays. I don't really see anything wrong with the power system.

[ezrafetch]

At least for me, ME2 gameplay is only harder on the XBox because the aim assist is atrocious and actually puts my aim off rather than on. Granted, I come from playing a lot of Modern Warfare 2 where there's less (but still a little) aim assist, but ME2 has no option to turn off or reduce the aim assist...which is frustrating. On numerous occasions, when trying to line up a Widow shot, if I scope in and the enemy is not centered, and the enemy starts strafing, the right thing to do is to just wait until the enemy centers in your scope, then fire for the kill. The aim assist actually tracks and follows the enemy's movement and keeps the scope off-center, meaning I have to fight the aim assist to line up the kill, which is not exactly the easiest thing to do.

The whole issue with the Power Wheel is a double-edged sword on the XBox with the lack of hotkeys. Sometimes it's a pain because to access skills it slows down the flow of combat, but in other instances I've abused the Power Wheel to either check my surroundings for flankers or close enemies or to even just line up a shotty headshot, which is always amusing.

Modifié par ezrafetch, 22 juillet 2010 - 06:44 .

[Tlazolteotl]

Ah, I get what you're trying to say, but the auto aim in MW2 is actually quite heavy.

Where you think there's "less" of it, is probably because it doesn't take effect while you're immobile. I think this is brilliant, actually, to allow the player to better translate what they want to do into what happens in game.

However, at the end of the day, you're still trying to play a shooter with a console's analog stick. Ewwww. I mean, I can feel the difference between a 400 DPI optical mouse and a 2000 DPI gaming mouse in games such as counterstrike. 'cos when there's no aim assist, precision actually matters. I can't tell the difference between a 2000 DPI mouse and a 4000+ DPI mouse, though. But the day a PC shooter is able to zoom in on someone at range of 4 miles, with no aim assistance, while keeping thousands of objects onscreen looking good and without framerate drops thanks to hardware tessellation, a 5600 DPI mouse may help.

But if all you're trying to do are moving target headshots at the ranges current shooters are able to display, 2000 DPI is plenty good enough.

[NICKjnp]

it is good to see that the console vs pc fanwars are still alive and kicking.

[Tlazolteotl]

It's not a war because console shooters are rubbish.

There are plenty of games consoles are good at. Fighting games, rhythm games, turn-based RPGs.

I mean there's no question, in a million years, that console RTSs are total rubbish ... and it takes a fanboy to claim console shooters are good.

[Pacifien]

I bet Atari 2600 owners thought pc games were the suck. Console vs. PC. Star Trek vs. Star Wars. Some debates never die.

[ShadowPlay 14]

Tlazolteotl wrote...

It's not a war because console shooters are rubbish.

Thought you said it wasn't a war:whistle:

[Tlazolteotl]

Exactly. It's a fact, so there's no fight.

[ShadowPlay 14]

Whoa, fight? What it basically comes down too is there seems to be a large number of people who enjoy playing 'casually' (console owners) and a large number of people who enjoy playing, what's the word, properly? I don't know, we'll call them the hardcore fanbase. Basically, everyone plays the game for different things. Some people play to kill time, others for fun and so on. IMO, the casual group are much better served with a console. As it turns out, many people are part of the casual group. I'm not going to say PC players are a minority, but you know, seeing as consoles seem to be on top in terms of the market, more people seem to want to just sit down and play for fun. Or, if your anything like me, you simply feel better with a joypad rather that a mouse and keyboard My mouse skills are terrible. It all comes down to choice, I don't understand why people get so hostile about it.

[Pacifien]

My reasons for playing Mass Effect on the console are pretty basic. It came out in November 2007 on the console. The PC version came out in May of 2008. If I wanted my saved games to transfer, it was simpler to continue with the console version. I'd probably prefer to play it on the PC, but I'm not picky.

[Tlazolteotl]

No no .. I don't begrudge console players for playing their games at all. The more games the better.

Heck, I don't even mind that game devs are coding for consoles 'cos that's where the money is at. The problem is, right now, console technology is lagging.

Something as basic as the analog stick being crap .. it doesn't have to be. Seriously. If the signal coming from the analog stick is sufficiently precise, you could just put a longer stick on top of it, and ZOMG you have much more precise controller.

Is that asking too much? Really?!

[Haley31]

The only games I like on consoles are racing games with a good wheel, 3rd person action games(e.g. GTA series), fighting games, and sports games. RTS and shooters don't belong on the console unless they give you better controlling devices like a mouse and keybd. It's not fun dying all the time because you can't precisely aim your gun at the enemy. You're basically jerking the gun into the general direction and firing wildly on a console shooter, whether it's a 1st or 3rd person shooter.

I rented ME2 on the 360 and when I liked the game I bought on PC and the difference is night and day. Every element of the game was better on the PC. Graphics, load times, playability, load times lol. God the 360 took forever to load. My PC loaded the games almost instantaneously. Especially going from one level of the Normandy to the next.

[JaegerBane]

Haley31 wrote...

The only games I like on consoles are racing games with a good wheel, 3rd person action games(e.g. GTA series), fighting games, and sports games. RTS and shooters don't belong on the console unless they give you better controlling devices like a mouse and keybd. It's not fun dying all the time because you can't precisely aim your gun at the enemy. You're basically jerking the gun into the general direction and firing wildly on a console shooter, whether it's a 1st or 3rd person shooter.
I rented ME2 on the 360 and when I liked the game I bought on PC and the difference is night and day. Every element of the game was better on the PC. Graphics, load times, playability, load times lol. God the 360 took forever to load. My PC loaded the games almost instantaneously. Especially going from one level of the Normandy to the next.

This. No matter how much Sony and Microsoft want it to happen, the obsession with gamepads will always blunt the popularity of shooters and RTS on consoles. Modern games demand too much precision - either you provide the tools to do give this precision (M+K) or you add in a whole load of software aids which make up for the lack of it - but in doing so, defeat the purpose of the game in the first place.

[Bozorgmehr]

JaegerBane wrote...

Haley31 wrote...

The only games I like on consoles are racing games with a good wheel, 3rd person action games(e.g. GTA series), fighting games, and sports games. RTS and shooters don't belong on the console unless they give you better controlling devices like a mouse and keybd. It's not fun dying all the time because you can't precisely aim your gun at the enemy. You're basically jerking the gun into the general direction and firing wildly on a console shooter, whether it's a 1st or 3rd person shooter.
I rented ME2 on the 360 and when I liked the game I bought on PC and the difference is night and day. Every element of the game was better on the PC. Graphics, load times, playability, load times lol. God the 360 took forever to load. My PC loaded the games almost instantaneously. Especially going from one level of the Normandy to the next.

This. No matter how much Sony and Microsoft want it to happen, the obsession with gamepads will always blunt the popularity of shooters and RTS on consoles. Modern games demand too much precision - either you provide the tools to do give this precision (M+K) or you add in a whole load of software aids which make up for the lack of it - but in doing so, defeat the purpose of the game in the first place.

It's about to get even worse. I'm affraid within a couple of years you'll only need to wave your kinetic motion controlled piece of grap the way Harry Potter swings his wand - and guess what, you just cleared the most difficult part of the game:blink:

I don't mind and can even understand why they are doing this, but please add decent controls too.

[Tlazolteotl]

As if we actually need science.

http://www.rahulsood...against-pc.html

The biggest problem is the controller.

Ok, I admit there's probably some truth to the "better tools train better players" thing, but frankly, with more precise controllers, the skill gap will catch up.
'cos PC gamers may have more money than console gamers, but that does not mean they're more talented.

[Haley31]

Tlazolteotl wrote...

As if we actually need science.

http://www.rahulsood...against-pc.html

The biggest problem is the controller.

Ok, I admit there's probably some truth to the "better tools train better players" thing, but frankly, with more precise controllers, the skill gap will catch up.
'cos PC gamers may have more money than console gamers, but that does not mean they're more talented.

It doesn't mean we have more money.  We're just willing to spend more on the PC.  But some PC builds by some are about as cheap as an elite 360.  Plus playing on the pc vs 360 can't really be compared skill wise because of the different controller types.  It's like anybody can drive, but the guy with a corvette can drive faster than the guy with a mustang.  But if both drivers have the same corvette than it comes down to skill.

[Bozorgmehr]

Haley31 wrote...

Tlazolteotl wrote...

As if we actually need science.

http://www.rahulsood...against-pc.html

The biggest problem is the controller.

Ok, I admit there's probably some truth to the "better tools train better players" thing, but frankly, with more precise controllers, the skill gap will catch up.
'cos PC gamers may have more money than console gamers, but that does not mean they're more talented.

It doesn't mean we have more money.  We're just willing to spend more on the PC.  But some PC builds by some are about as cheap as an elite 360.  Plus playing on the pc vs 360 can't really be compared skill wise because of the different controller types.  It's like anybody can drive, but the guy with a corvette can drive faster than the guy with a mustang.  But if both drivers have the same corvette than it comes down to skill.

You don't need more money. You can get a decent pc (without monitor / tv) if you spend around $ 500. Add a decent GPU ($ 100+) and your ready to go. You can get a 360 or PS3 at 1/2 - 1/3 that price, but they're inferior in every way plus (correct me if I'm wrong) all the people out here playing on Xbox who are also posting - use a pc for that (and to do homework, communicate with friends etc). In the end it all comes down to: 

Money - consoles are an easier platform for game-development (games are designed to run on one hardware setup, much easier compared to all the different hardware that's being used in the pc world) and copyright protection - pcs offer freedom or you might say it's opensource (everyone can chose his/her OS and additional software, consoles are a closed system - you can only do stuff the manufacturers allow (like not being able to use a mouse and keyboard setup

And there's the copyright issue - it's harder to crack consoles. Luckily Bioware (EA) have stopped using DRM and other crap to screw with pcgamers (though companies like UbiSoft are going the other way). It will take some time before those companies realize that rewarding those who actually buy their products is a better strategy than sabotaging the honest.

I for example bought ME1, but installed a cracked version because I hated the DRM - I never even used the dvd, but purchased ME1 nevertheless. It's a great game and I don't mind paying for quality products (as long as they don't interfere with my liberties) plus in the end it all comes down to money, without money Bioware can't make suchs awesome games so in my book it's only fair to reward them and to make it possible to develop new games. Can't wait to play ME3

[Tlazolteotl]

Well, if you've read earlier in the thread, the only reason a half-baked PC can run new games is due to games being made for consoles.

'cos even if the textures, framerates, and load times are all twice as good, it still barely scratches the surface of PC hardware's capabilities.

And that's part of the problem.

Ok, let me illustrate this with a couple of examples.
On the software side, Crackdown 2. On the hardware side, Hardware Tessellation.

The devs of crackdown 2 wanted to have fights with hundreds of foes. That was part of their vision.
Get to those fights, and what happens?
The same models are used repeatedly. They behave really stupidly. And still, the framerates drop so low it's unplayable.

Now, allow me to explain the benefits of hardware tessellation.
Objects can be created with low polygon counts, and as you get closer to them, the video card increases the complexity of the object.

That means, at a distance, objects use low amounts of processing power.
You can therefore reserve the detailed textures for the models that matter, such as your personal character or vehicle.
There's more CPU power available for stuff like pathing and tactical assessment.
There's more GPU power available for rendering those hundreds of enemies.

But, even if there was a Crackdown 2 version for PC, it will still have the same issues, though obviously less of it.
'cos in order to utilise technology like hardware tessellation, you have to assume everyone has it, and have an engine that's designed around that fact.

See, that's the core of the issue here.
It's exactly like the gap between Wii games and PS3 games .. if you design an engine around the Wii's capabilities, and then port the game to PS3, it will still never be a "good enough PS3 game."

And the power gap between Wii and PS3 is less than the gap between PS3 and PC.

Now, in order for new technology to be incorporated into PC games, new hardware must become the norm.
In order for new hardware to become the norm, games must be made that will underperform without it.

So long as games are being written for the current generation of consoles, they are not going to bridge the uncanny valley.
You won't have environments that are indistinguishable from reality.
You won't have NPC behaviour that's able to pass the Turing test.
Heck, you won't even have good lip synching.

Consoles are holding PC gaming back.
Ok, sure, the phenomenon is also keeping "good gaming PC" prices low, but that is a bad thing.
Having to keep up with the tech (or be cheap by being a year behind) used to be an expensive endeavour, but it was driving progress forwards at a phenomenal rate.

See, that's the important thing here. Progress.

It's exactly the same deal with blu-rays and HDTVs.
That stuff is amazing compared to DVDs and SDTVs. But you go to a store, and they are selling so many DVDs it's likely to be a mainstay of domestic movie purchases for a decade to come.
But you have the next generation of technology on the way.
3D is pathetic right now, compared to the technology's potential.
But it needs to get better, and it needs to get cheaper.
Neither of those things are going to happen so long as the industry is being held back by DVDs.

[CroGamer002]

Tlazolteotl wrote...

But, on the point of the reason why .. it's very simple.
Consoles are meant to be played in front of your TV, while sitting on your couch. I.e. not at a desk.
Therefore, by definition, console = casual.

News dude, you can attach your PC on TV.

[Bozorgmehr]

Amen,



I totally agree Tlazolteotl. It's really frustrating that people who spend their hard earned money on the latest hardware are still being hold back by some outdated consoles. Seems weird that devs are not using the pc's full potential - maybe its being forced on them by Sony and MS - they want to sell their consoles for years to come and wouldn't like to see consumers switching to pc if that platform proved to be superior in every way (it already is, but isn't used properly)

[javierabegazo]

That's enough, no longer ME2 related