107 réponses à ce sujet

[AlkanineMS]

That's fine, but we are talking months here.

[Ekardt]

Slimcharles wrote...

Sure, if you never want to use Live.  That's pretty stupid.

Why do you keep saying this as if you believe it?

Getting banned from Live barely happens. Microsoft just says they will ban you because they hope it deters people, but in reality MW2 was leaked 3 weeks ago and everyone is already playing it while MS can't do **** about it.

This is what I was thinking.

Most of Microsofts permabans are on people who are on their third offense of the Terms of Use, not people playing pirated games. Microsoft is as effective at stopping 360 pirates as they are PC pirates.

[Ravenshrike]

flem1 wrote...

Ekardt wrote...

If the pirating stopped they would see a rather small increase in sales. The thing about Pirates is, if they cant get it for free theyre not getting it at all, with a few exceptions.

Utter bull.

Assassin's Creed was pirated several million times and sold, what, ~10K copies on PC (before the recent $5 Steam sale anyway) vs millions on console.  If you look out there, ATI and Nvidia are selling a heck of a lot more gaming cards than ever buy any game -- and they're not all going to play WoW.

Every single person who has access to the numbers thinks your suggestion is fantasy -- and you can tell, because they are leaving the PC market as fast as they possibly can.  Games that *are* released on PC get delayed on this platform for a very obvious reason.  If EA's gamble on DA (this site+DLC) works, that would be something, but make no mistake -- it's pretty much the last hope for real PC development.

That's because the AC port sucked major ass with a rather large amount of glitches on the PC and the control scheme is complete crap on a KB/M. As for your assertions of sales, Stardock and all those selling through Steam would tend to disagree with you.

Modifié par Ravenshrike, 02 novembre 2009 - 04:31 .

[flem1]

Ekardt wrote...

The attitude of 90% of pirates is that if they cant get a game for free they certainly arent about to pay for it if for some reason its not piratable, unless its a title theyre really really wanting.

And they are encouraged like fools like you who treat this as an eternal fact of life and not a recently-exploded plague.

Your indifference is the sea in which the pirates swim.  Much like al Qaeda and the average urban Muslim population -- fortunately, actual people aren't getting blown up in this case.  But I'd rather PC gaming survive.

[digitalforceq]

There are way too many factors in piracy to sum it up in this thread and especially console vs PC.



Consoles are cheaper. You can trade in the games for money after playing them. You can get HD graphics for $299 dollars. Many people can't keep up on upgrading their PCs. Etc etc. The only reason why I put any argument out at all is because I think it is a HUGE scapegoat for some PC publishers. They want to blame everything on piracy. Even if the game is crap, they blame low sales on piracy. Also, Assassin's Creed for the PC is a poor examples. That game's controls alone make it horrible unless you have a gamepad and it required a very expensive video card to run smoothly even though the 360 could run it smooth, etc etc etc.



ANYWAY, here's hoping that the PC version is awesome. I think I saw a DEV posted that it has built in anti aliasing unlike Mass Effect...

[Ekardt]

DeathFrogg wrote...

You misquoted, i wasnt the one who said that stuff 

[GT-500]

flem1 wrote...

Ekardt wrote...

If the pirating stopped they would see a rather small increase in sales. The thing about Pirates is, if they cant get it for free theyre not getting it at all, with a few exceptions.

Utter bull.

Assassin's Creed was pirated several million times and sold, what, ~10K copies on PC (before the recent $5 Steam sale anyway) vs millions on console.  If you look out there, ATI and Nvidia are selling a heck of a lot more gaming cards than ever buy any game -- and they're not all going to play WoW.

Every single person who has access to the numbers thinks your suggestion is fantasy -- and you can tell, because they are leaving the PC market as fast as they possibly can.  Games that *are* released on PC get delayed on this platform for a very obvious reason.  If EA's gamble on DA (this site+DLC) works, that would be something, but make no mistake -- it's pretty much the last hope for real PC development.

Nice story... but I am sure there will be more then 10k copies of DA:O sold (compared to AC).  Do you know why AC was not a great PC game, very consolish.

Your logic holds true if DA:O only sells ~10k copies on the PC.....  If a company makes a good game it will sell, it is as simple as that.

[Slimcharles]

Modifié par Slimcharles, 02 novembre 2009 - 04:34 .

[Ekardt]

flem1 wrote...
And they are encouraged like fools like you who treat this as an eternal fact of life and not a recently-exploded plague.

Your indifference is the sea in which the pirates swim.  Much like al Qaeda and the average urban Muslim population -- fortunately, actual people aren't getting blown up in this case.  But I'd rather PC gaming survive.

Youre putting a lot of words in my mouth. You dont know my thoughts or opinions on the matter, so stop assuming. And ease up on the hostility will you? What have I done to you?

[flem1]

Ravenshrike wrote...

flem1 wrote...

Ekardt wrote...

If the pirating stopped they would see a rather small increase in sales. The thing about Pirates is, if they cant get it for free theyre not getting it at all, with a few exceptions.

Utter bull.

Assassin's Creed was pirated several million times and sold, what, ~10K copies on PC (before the recent $5 Steam sale anyway) vs millions on console.  If you look out there, ATI and Nvidia are selling a heck of a lot more gaming cards than ever buy any game -- and they're not all going to play WoW.

Every single person who has access to the numbers thinks your suggestion is fantasy -- and you can tell, because they are leaving the PC market as fast as they possibly can.  Games that *are* released on PC get delayed on this platform for a very obvious reason.  If EA's gamble on DA (this site+DLC) works, that would be something, but make no mistake -- it's pretty much the last hope for real PC development.

That's because the AC port sucked major ass with a rather large amount of glitches on the PC and the control scheme is complete crap on a KB/M.

Actually, quite a few of the reported "glitches" were caused by the crack.  Hence the utterly absurd situation where the pirates not only cannibalize sales but are able to crap on the product with fake bug reports/complaints.

This isn't unique, of course.  A huge (well over 1/2) fraction of complaints on official forums, help lines, etc. are submitted by people without authentic registration keys -- pirates, in other words.  They want to steal, and have the company pay to fix their problems when they steal.  Great.

[digitalforceq]

PC gaming needs a miracle to return to it's glory days. The fact that I can pay $299 and get a PS3 that plays Blu-Rays, music, DVDs, surf the net and play High Def games, why would you spend $500+ every year just to keep up on upgrading your PC??



Me personally, I love gaming too much and I have a PSP, 360, PS3 and a high end PC but not many people I know have that luxury.



I spent $500 on my video card early this year.. the average gamer can't afford that. Why do PC publishers insist on pirates killing the industry when there are so many other factors involved?

[Craig McDermott]

flem1 wrote...
Actually, quite a few of the reported "glitches" were caused by the crack.  Hence the utterly absurd situation where the pirates not only cannibalize sales but are able to crap on the product with fake bug reports/complaints.

This is just some crap that Ubisoft made up to save face.  The real version of their game was also buggy as hell on all systems.  To this day it's the only game that has ever locked up on my PS3.

[druinz]

well if assasins creed was so bad on the pc. they could of bought it on a different platform. the truth is they prefer a crappier verison for free.

[druinz]

well if assasins creed was so bad on the pc. they could of bought it on a different platform. the truth is they prefer a crappier verison for free.

[Slimcharles]

digitalforceq wrote...

PC gaming needs a miracle to return to it's glory days. The fact that I can pay $299 and get a PS3 that plays Blu-Rays, music, DVDs, surf the net and play High Def games, why would you spend $500+ every year just to keep up on upgrading your PC??

Me personally, I love gaming too much and I have a PSP, 360, PS3 and a high end PC but not many people I know have that luxury.

I spent $500 on my video card early this year.. the average gamer can't afford that. Why do PC publishers insist on pirates killing the industry when there are so many other factors involved?

Who spends $500 on a graphic card?

I spend 200-300 every year. The last time I upgraded anything other HDD's was 2 years ago. With the $250 I spent on an HD5850 I can easily max any game with full AA and AF. Plus I don't have to use a **** controller.

I think $300 a year for the best gaming experience is worth it. Also enjoy surfing the net on PS3.

[Ekardt]

Some people prefer Joypads for gaming, Charles I do, and I was a PC gamer for ~6 years before I bought a PS2.

[GT-500]

Slimcharles wrote...

Who spends $500 on a graphic card?

I spend 200-300 every year. The last time I upgraded anything other HDD's was 2 years ago. With the $250 I spent on an HD5850 I can easily max any game with full AA and AF. Plus I don't have to use a **** controller.

I think $300 a year for the best gaming experience is worth it. Also enjoy surfing the net on PS3.

Quick answer is Power/Hardcore Gamers.

A couple of years ago with the GTX 280 released, I preorded 3 of them for my rig (Almost $2000 just for the vid cards).   When Nvidia releases their next generation cards in a few months I will do the same thing an buy three GTX 380's for a new TRI-SLI Rig.

To some this is overkill, but playing games a MAX settings at 2650x1600 on a 30" monitor is what gaming is all about

Modifié par GT-500, 02 novembre 2009 - 04:47 .

[Godkarl]

Listen Guys, they are both gaming entertainment systems; the computer has more options available, as per custimization, and will almost always,there are exceptions, have superior graphics to its console counterpart; however, consoles are cheaper and more affordable. Computers though, have the ability to be infinitely upgraded and the consoles do not. They are limited to the hardware that the manufacturer put into them. If money is no problem, PC is always the way to go:greater graphics, custimization; but for those who cannot afford it on PC, consoles are luckily optimized to play the game already. Then its a debate between the PS3 and the XBOX 360

[bodines1]

You can buy a 600 gaming PC every 2-3 years and play most games maxed (minus AA, probably only be able to put that on 2x)



Its really not that big a deal. When new consoles come out the price is around 500 and they are definitely obsolete in 2-3 years. So whatevs. PC gaming has a better community and options

[Craig McDermott]

GT-500 wrote...

Quick answer is Power/Hardcore Gamers.

A couple of years ago with the GTX 280 released, I preorded 3 of them for my rig (Almost $2000 just for the vid cards).   When Nvidia releases their next generation cards in a few months I will do the same thing an buy three GTX 380's for a new TRI-SLI Rig.

To some this is overkill, but playing games a MAX settings at 2650x1600 on a 30" monitor is what gaming is all about

I guess you can do that if you want to waste huge amounts of money.  It's totally pointless though since no game requires that kind of setup to max fully.

[Ekardt]

The next generation of consoles are probably gonna be closer to PCs than they will be to current consoles. Here's to hoping.

[GT-500]

Craig McDermott wrote...

I guess you can do that if you want to waste huge amounts of money.  It's totally pointless though since no game requires that kind of setup to max fully.

Not true,  Do you personally game at 2650x1600 with 4xAA+ .... Trust me it is needed to push that may pixals at a rock solid 60FPS.

So true in fact I need to upgrade to carry me another 18 months.  As for a waste... to each their own as I consider smoking and drinking a waste of money as you have nothing at the end of the day.

When you have a TRI-SLI system you can get about 240% the porformance of a single card.  Games like Crisis, the extra frames make the game more enjoyable.

[Craig McDermott]

GT-500 wrote...

Craig McDermott wrote...

I guess you can do that if you want to waste huge amounts of money.  It's totally pointless though since no game requires that kind of setup to max fully.

Not true,  Do you personally game at 2650x1600 with 4xAA+ .... Trust me it is needed to push that may pixals at a rock solid 60FPS.

So true in fact I need to upgrade to carry me another 18 months.  As for a waste... to each their own as I consider smoking and drinking a waste of money as you have nothing at the end of the day.

When you have a TRI-SLI system you can get about 240% the porformance of a single card.  Games like Crisis, the extra frames make the game more enjoyable.

You don't need constant 60fps.  2650x1600 with 4x AA is easily achievable without tri SLI.

I mean are you serious about Crysis?  Not only is the game crap but I can easily crush it with a single video card.  Back in the days of 8800GTX being king, yeah you prolly need SLI to max it.  But not today.

[Vantharas]

I'd figure its only a matter of time before upgradeable consoles start to exsist.

[AlkanineMS]

Eventually consoles will just be PCs with brand names. So Mac can make commercials about how XboxPsixty isn't youthful enough for gamers.