235 réponses à ce sujet

[PaddlePop]

BobSmith101 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

Random Geth wrote...

I wonder why it is that PC players *always* sound like the most whiny, nasally-voiced gamers there are. And frankly, while they look good, it doesn't seem like that big of a change.

Probably because they are the ones dragged down by consoles, and as such are the ones actually HAVING A REASON to complain ?

As a side point, one of the other complaint about consoles is that they are often considered to be a "for dummies" medium, and as such games are "dumbed down" to cater to this kind of public.
You didn't exactly proved this idea wrong with your post...

Um... No.

Consoles have been on the go for what, 25-30 years? They are nothing to do with games being dumbed down.

... I'm surprised PC gamers havent blamed consolers for the ME3 endings by now... Since everything is our fault. <_<

If anything it's the westernisation of consoles that have lead to dumbing down.

QFT

[SalsaDMA]

PaddlePop wrote...

Mettyx wrote...

xkg wrote...

What do you expect from ancient hardware ?
256 MB (PS3) or 512 (x360) ? My PC already had 1 GB six yers ago.

And you don't need to look far just look at this graph, here is your answer
As you can see consoles were "outdated" already on release.

Holy shi*t!
It's even worse than I thought!

See what I mean about the  "C**ck size competition"?  If PC gamers were really serious about their gaming rather than being "mere graphic-fiends", the difference between consoles and PC wouldn't even be a feature.  Retro gamers and gaming enthusiasts will still enjoy Final Fantasy 4, Megaman, Baldur's Gate or even PacMan, yet with modern PC gamers,  it's all about how many FPS their eyes will never be able to see... 

If you're still surprised that consoles are outperformed by PCs then a short bus is needed to take you to school. If you base all your gaming decisions on this, then not only is the short bus required, but you also need to hand in your gamer card immediately. You can't call yourself a gamer. It's that simple.

Games are enhanced by graphics, but gameplay MUST > graphics (ALWAYS). Otherwise, our gaming will be as vacuous as a Michael Bay flick. Sure some retards love it, but they're the kind you don't want to associate with, rather then the curious kind who like to finger paint.  

But it's not just flashier graphics.

It's about stuff like loading screens and all the other workarounds game companies need to do to fit stuff into the tiny memory (compared to PC memory) in order to even make things work. Sounds? Can't take too much memory, lesser quality saves on memory. Animations? Same thing. Variations in story? uh oh.. The medium is limited as well, and we can't have too many disc swaps or people get frustrated with that as well. Intricate AI? Well... Again, it takes memory and what you donate to the AI you loose elsewhere, like levelsize, and what have you.

And while we're at the game consoles thingie: actual gaming controls.... Some games are better off being played with a gamepad, that I can agree, but every fragging kind of game? Nope. I prefer my mouse and pad/keyboard combo for a majority of my games, pulling out my gamepad for the simple platformers or fighting games.

[shootist70]

PaddlePop wrote...

shootist70 wrote...

PaddlePop wrote...

Mettyx wrote...

xkg wrote...

What do you expect from ancient hardware ?
256 MB (PS3) or 512 (x360) ? My PC already had 1 GB six yers ago.

And you don't need to look far just look at this graph, here is your answer
As you can see consoles were "outdated" already on release.

Holy shi*t!
It's even worse than I thought!

See what I mean about the  "C**ck size competition"?  If PC gamers were really serious about their gaming rather than being "mere graphic-fiends", the difference between consoles and PC wouldn't even be a feature.  Retro gamers and gaming enthusiasts will still enjoy Final Fantasy 4, Megaman, Baldur's Gate or even PacMan, yet with modern PC gamers,  it's all about how many FPS their eyes will never be able to see... 

If you're still surprised that consoles are outperformed by PCs then a short bus is needed to take you to school. If you base all your gaming decisions on this, then not only is the short bus required, but you also need to hand in your gamer card immediately. You can't call yourself a gamer. It's that simple.

Games are enhanced by graphics, but gameplay MUST > graphics (ALWAYS). Otherwise, our gaming will be as vacuous as a Michael Bay flick. Sure some retards love it, but they're the kind you don't want to associate with, rather then the curious kind who like to finger paint.  

To put it all down to graphics is a rampant oversimplification. I only have to load up Shogun 2: Total war and it's TWO expansions to see the difference in variety and choice of gameplay between console and PC.

But, apparently, console owners 'don't like that sort of thing', and that's what it's all about  - demographics, not graphics.

Different gameplay possibilities exist. No one is denying that, but you'd be crazy to want to play a full-fledged RTS on a console, similarly keyboards are dreadful for fighting games (and you could plug in a controller, but really now...).  The one isn't necesarily better than the other, just different. It's why I get so tired of the tablet vs Vita comparisons. Sure both can provide portable gaming, but the type of gaming will be different, but neither is "Better". I own both a vita and an ipad, and I play the relevant types of games on both.

The point that seems to be missed by most PC gamers is that "no, PC gaming is not the be all and end all of gaming", it's merely one way to game. Now stop your whining, and return to gaming.

Atm, PC gaming pretty much is the be all and end all. PC gaming as a platform currently allows far more independant and exploratory development, so in addition to RTS we have MMO+MMORPG to a whole raft of indy titles and smaller dev stuff that covers everything from the X series to Mount and Blade, and that offers a vast diversity of GAMEPLAY.

In comparison, console gaming is a market dominated by a much smaller number of huge publishers who are very conservative with their development, and who would rather push derivative titles at established markets and demographics, and who seem to have an extreme allergy to innovation. Hence the constant deluge of shooters, racing and sports games, with only a little diversity and innovation inbetween in comparison to PC gaming.

Modifié par shootist70, 06 avril 2012 - 12:03 .

[Sarah_SR2]

PaddlePop wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I used to be a PC gamer but then I got better.

I used to be a PC gamer but then I got married!

(True story, also PC gamers have to be the worst kind of gamer. They're not glad to be part of a greater gamer fraternity, and would rather show off their latest hardware, which incidentally is out of date the second they bought it, and then it's back onto the upgrade hamster wheel. Where the focus should be on the games, gameplay and actually having fun, with PC gamers it's really a "how big is my ****" competition.)

Uh, excuse me, I play on the PC and in no way do I go around bragging about the hardware. I play ME on a PC simply because I prefer to use the keyboard and mouse as my aim sucks with a controller. I have nothing at all against consoles or those who choose to play on them )

[PaddlePop]

shootist70 wrote...

PaddlePop wrote...

shootist70 wrote...

PaddlePop wrote...

Mettyx wrote...

xkg wrote...

What do you expect from ancient hardware ?
256 MB (PS3) or 512 (x360) ? My PC already had 1 GB six yers ago.

And you don't need to look far just look at this graph, here is your answer
As you can see consoles were "outdated" already on release.

Holy shi*t!
It's even worse than I thought!

See what I mean about the  "C**ck size competition"?  If PC gamers were really serious about their gaming rather than being "mere graphic-fiends", the difference between consoles and PC wouldn't even be a feature.  Retro gamers and gaming enthusiasts will still enjoy Final Fantasy 4, Megaman, Baldur's Gate or even PacMan, yet with modern PC gamers,  it's all about how many FPS their eyes will never be able to see... 

If you're still surprised that consoles are outperformed by PCs then a short bus is needed to take you to school. If you base all your gaming decisions on this, then not only is the short bus required, but you also need to hand in your gamer card immediately. You can't call yourself a gamer. It's that simple.

Games are enhanced by graphics, but gameplay MUST > graphics (ALWAYS). Otherwise, our gaming will be as vacuous as a Michael Bay flick. Sure some retards love it, but they're the kind you don't want to associate with, rather then the curious kind who like to finger paint.  

To put it all down to graphics is a rampant oversimplification. I only have to load up Shogun 2: Total war and it's TWO expansions to see the difference in variety and choice of gameplay between console and PC.

But, apparently, console owners 'don't like that sort of thing', and that's what it's all about  - demographics, not graphics.

Different gameplay possibilities exist. No one is denying that, but you'd be crazy to want to play a full-fledged RTS on a console, similarly keyboards are dreadful for fighting games (and you could plug in a controller, but really now...).  The one isn't necesarily better than the other, just different. It's why I get so tired of the tablet vs Vita comparisons. Sure both can provide portable gaming, but the type of gaming will be different, but neither is "Better". I own both a vita and an ipad, and I play the relevant types of games on both.

The point that seems to be missed by most PC gamers is that "no, PC gaming is not the be all and end all of gaming", it's merely one way to game. Now stop your whining, and return to gaming.

Atm, PC gaming pretty much is the be all and end all. PC gaming as a platform currently allows far more independant and exploratory development, so in addition to RTS we have MMO+MMORPG to a whole raft of indy titles and smaller dev stuff that covers everything from the X series to Mount and Blade, and that offers a vast diversity of GAMEPLAY.

In comparison, console gaming is a market dominated by a much smaller number of huge publishers who are very conservative with their development, and who would rather push derivative titles at established markets and demographics, and who seem to have an extreme allergy to innovation. Hence the constant deluge of shooters, racing and sports games, with only a little diversity inbetween in comparison to PC gaming.

PS PC gaming is actually dominated by Zynga and their facebook games. FYI 

[shootist70]

PaddlePop wrote...

shootist70 wrote...

PaddlePop wrote...

shootist70 wrote...

PaddlePop wrote...

Mettyx wrote...

xkg wrote...

What do you expect from ancient hardware ?
256 MB (PS3) or 512 (x360) ? My PC already had 1 GB six yers ago.

And you don't need to look far just look at this graph, here is your answer
As you can see consoles were "outdated" already on release.

Holy shi*t!
It's even worse than I thought!

See what I mean about the  "C**ck size competition"?  If PC gamers were really serious about their gaming rather than being "mere graphic-fiends", the difference between consoles and PC wouldn't even be a feature.  Retro gamers and gaming enthusiasts will still enjoy Final Fantasy 4, Megaman, Baldur's Gate or even PacMan, yet with modern PC gamers,  it's all about how many FPS their eyes will never be able to see... 

If you're still surprised that consoles are outperformed by PCs then a short bus is needed to take you to school. If you base all your gaming decisions on this, then not only is the short bus required, but you also need to hand in your gamer card immediately. You can't call yourself a gamer. It's that simple.

Games are enhanced by graphics, but gameplay MUST > graphics (ALWAYS). Otherwise, our gaming will be as vacuous as a Michael Bay flick. Sure some retards love it, but they're the kind you don't want to associate with, rather then the curious kind who like to finger paint.  

To put it all down to graphics is a rampant oversimplification. I only have to load up Shogun 2: Total war and it's TWO expansions to see the difference in variety and choice of gameplay between console and PC.

But, apparently, console owners 'don't like that sort of thing', and that's what it's all about  - demographics, not graphics.

Different gameplay possibilities exist. No one is denying that, but you'd be crazy to want to play a full-fledged RTS on a console, similarly keyboards are dreadful for fighting games (and you could plug in a controller, but really now...).  The one isn't necesarily better than the other, just different. It's why I get so tired of the tablet vs Vita comparisons. Sure both can provide portable gaming, but the type of gaming will be different, but neither is "Better". I own both a vita and an ipad, and I play the relevant types of games on both.

The point that seems to be missed by most PC gamers is that "no, PC gaming is not the be all and end all of gaming", it's merely one way to game. Now stop your whining, and return to gaming.

Atm, PC gaming pretty much is the be all and end all. PC gaming as a platform currently allows far more independant and exploratory development, so in addition to RTS we have MMO+MMORPG to a whole raft of indy titles and smaller dev stuff that covers everything from the X series to Mount and Blade, and that offers a vast diversity of GAMEPLAY.

In comparison, console gaming is a market dominated by a much smaller number of huge publishers who are very conservative with their development, and who would rather push derivative titles at established markets and demographics, and who seem to have an extreme allergy to innovation. Hence the constant deluge of shooters, racing and sports games, with only a little diversity inbetween in comparison to PC gaming.

PS PC gaming is actually dominated by Zynga and their facebook games. FYI 

They're only 'dominating' it if they're killing off everything else by swallowing up their markets - your average MMORPG or RTS fan isn't going to dump their favourite game for an FB game, and those sorts of titles are doing very well.

Modifié par shootist70, 06 avril 2012 - 12:08 .

[Aargh12]

Protip to Glorious PC Gaming Master Race:
Better graphics won't fix ending and won't fix bugs. If they decided to make high-res textures the bugdet would rise and we would get even worse ending than now.

Modifié par Aargh12, 06 avril 2012 - 12:08 .

[Akka le Vil]

abaris wrote...

But that's something the game developers introduced or at least insinuated by constantly dumbing down their games in the wake of the console hype. They were the first introducing the stereotype of the dribbling fool hammering the awsome button.

The players only went along with that kind of picture. So, blame the developers for also catering to the lowest common intelligence denominator.

Oh, don't worry, I heavily blame the developpers about how they dumb down their games, just like I blame them about intrusive DRM or milking consumers with greedy DLC.
But the sad fact is, all this wouldn't happen if people really disliked all this and didn't buy it.

Consoles have always been about instant fun. Not necessarily "dumb", but more direct and simple.
It wasn't a problem when there was two rather distinct markets, and people could have both computer and consoles, each one having its strong points.
But that's not the case anymore, and now games are mainly made for consoles, with the very limited controls (hence atrocious interfaces) and the very limited hardware (hence the ugly textures on Skyrim and the small and linear levels and removal of many animations in ME3 and the like).
Add to this a game design tailored for the "casual" player (read : easier and more simplified), which is most prevalent in the console market, and you would wonder why PC players are mad ?

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 06 avril 2012 - 12:11 .

[Azjurai]

Aargh12 wrote...

Protip to Glorious PC Gaming Master Race:
Better graphics won't fix ending and won't fix bugs. If they decided to make high-res textures the bugdet would rise and we would get even worse ending than now.

They already have high-res textures. You don't think they design them blurry do you? They're designed, cut way, WAY down in quality, then jammed into the doorstops. consoles. Sadly, they also get jammed into the holy PC.

[AIR MOORE]

Ahhh yes, this again... I remember this debate it goes something like this:

-PC's are exponentially more powerful than consoles. (Especially if you keep up to date with the latest and greatest to keep it that much more powerful).

-Consoles are exponentially cheaper than PC's. (Especially if PC's keep up to date with the latest and greatest to keep it the most powerful it can be).


Flame war ensues.


Never seen this before.

Modifié par AIR MOORE, 06 avril 2012 - 12:13 .

[AkiKishi]

Sarah_SR2 wrote...
Uh, excuse me, I play on the PC and in no way do I go around bragging about the hardware. I play ME on a PC simply because I prefer to use the keyboard and mouse as my aim sucks with a controller. I have nothing at all against consoles or those who choose to play on them )

It takes a lot of unlearning to be able to use a pad as well as KB/Mouse.

[MICHELLE7]

OP those pics look great...at least we got mods to make them look better.

[Akka le Vil]

Aargh12 wrote...

Protip to Glorious PC Gaming Master Race:
Better graphics won't fix ending and won't fix bugs. If they decided to make high-res textures the bugdet would rise and we would get even worse ending than now.

Protip to simpletons :
The difference between a PC and a console isn't just about texture. It's also about controls, about memory and about interface. Just try to have something like Supreme Commander on console.
Such games are disappearing because of the console-oriented market, and we get crappy 6-hours long FPS clone instead. Oh yeah, I'm sure that the famed gameplay over graphics is going to gain from losing such varied titles in order to have some more dumbed-down FPS. Yeah.

And another free pro-tip :
If you're dumb enough to believe that making high-res textures is going to have an impact in the overall budget of a game, you are yet another example of why people tend to equate "console" with "idiot".

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 06 avril 2012 - 12:16 .

[Aargh12]

Azjurai wrote...
They already have high-res textures. You don't think they design them blurry do you? They're designed, cut way, WAY down in quality, then jammed into the doorstops. consoles. Sadly, they also get jammed into the holy PC.

Played ME3 on my rig. Didn't care about textures. I never care about graphics. I wouldn't be able to play old games like Fallout or P:T or even look at them. 

And I laugh at ppl who say consoles are responsible for holding gaming back. Are consoles or developers responsible for the situation? Developers who, for some magic reason, don't make PC games way better than console versions.
Or maybe it's gamers fault? Those who don't buy gaming rigs because they can't afford it?

[abaris]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Add to this a game design tailored for the "casual" player (read : easier and more simplified), which is most prevalent in the console market, and you would wonder why PC players are mad ?

No, I don't wonder, since as a PC player I'm on the receiving end.

But I don't blame the players, I blame a market that tailors its products to fit the idiot.

And I don't have that much of a problem if Skyrim turned out to be bad in many aspects, since they at least offered the modding community the possibility to get things back on track.

Aargh12 wrote...

Or maybe it's gamers fault? Those who don't buy gaming rigs because they can't afford it?

If you can afford a console, you can afford a decent rig. It's an urban legend that console playing is that much cheaper.

Modifié par abaris, 06 avril 2012 - 12:18 .

[Akka le Vil]

abaris wrote...

No, I don't wonder, since as a PC player I'm on the receiving end.

But I don't blame the players, I blame a market that tailors its products to fit the idiot.

Err...
And WHO is this market, if not the players ?

From the very post you quoted :

"But the sad fact is, all this wouldn't happen if people really disliked all this and didn't buy it."

If the market for dumbed down games geared toward retarded players is dominant, it means it's the one selling the most. I'll let you draw the conclusions from these facts...

[Lazengan]

I actually laugh at the poor idiots who bought Skyrim on Console

[shootist70]

AIR MOORE wrote...

Ahhh yes, this again... I remember this debate it goes something like this:

-PC's are exponentially more powerful than consoles. (Especially if you keep up to date with the latest and greatest to keep it that much more powerful).

-Consoles are exponentially cheaper than PC's. (Especially if PC's keep up to date with the latest and greatest to keep it the most powerful it can be).


Flame war ensues.


Never seen this before.

Tbh, the real debate has nothing to do with that. It's more to do with the sheer diversity of gameplay on the PC platform because of the amount of innovative and exploratory development going on. The debate compares that to consoles, where a much smaller number of big players are happy to push the same old stuff at their markets, and refuse to innovate while they're still making money. If the PC market dries up, then so does that diversity and innovation - swallowed up into corporate design-by-committee garbage (just as Bioware has been).

Think of it like going out to eat in your local town and finding a huge diversity of restaurants that represent all manner of cultural cuisines, so you could eat out for months without eating the same thing twice. Now compare that to console town where you go out and find only Mcdonald's, KFC and Pizza Hut - and there's the problem.

Modifié par shootist70, 06 avril 2012 - 12:25 .

[abaris]

Akka le Vil wrote...

If the market for dumbed down games geared toward retarded players is dominant, it means it's the one selling the most. I'll let you draw the conclusions from these facts...

The majority of the market probably doesn't care one way or the other.

But we're dealing with a created hype here. Selling consoles as THE playing medium has something to do with the Kewlness factor. The industry creates that and as sure as some teens need the newest iphone to compete with their peers, they need the console.

So, I don't blame the players, since they would fall for every other given hype. I blame the industry for creating hypes to sell substandard products.

[shootist70]

double post

Modifié par shootist70, 06 avril 2012 - 12:26 .

[Cainne Chapel]

ah this timeless debate eh?

Reminds me of my old anime forums and the whole dub vs sub debate.


That takes me back...

Anyway. To me it doesn't matter, I game on my consoles and I game on my PC, haven't upgraded my rig in...dang near 5 years but then i haven't needed too as my SLI set up has kept me running fine.

[Dylanger]

Mettyx wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

zzz

Maybe
I'll care once my rig is complete, but until then, cry more. You have
your community mods, so why are you complaining about it?

Because
they will be random and might not even work with Origin?? And 90% of
people don't scavange the internet for improvements for their games?

Erm,
whats that got to do with consoles? Shouldnt you be looking at EA about
that one. I'm finding it hard that your competent enough to even use a
PC let alone try and brag about how splendid they are over a console.

Seriously. Some people.