235 réponses à ce sujet

[Rache123]

So on top of having to apologise for wanting a happy ending, I now have to feel bad for playing on a console? jeez where's the love?

[the almighty moo]

Zorziban the Great wrote...

Mass Effect was originally an Xbox 360 exclusive until they ported it to PC. Those graphics do look nice though, but some of us just don't have the knowledge, or the money to build a gaming rig.

yeh this.

Some people with more money than sense need to get over themselves.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

the worst is the console controller

using a joystick to look around is just sadomasochism

[abaris]

the almighty moo wrote...

yeh this.

Some people with more money than sense need to get over themselves.

Bull, since it isn't any more expensive to play on PC. It's just about preferences - if you own a PC that is.

Rache123 wrote...

So on top of having to apologise for
wanting a happy ending, I now have to feel bad for playing on a console?
jeez where's the love?

Why should you feel the need to apologise?

It's not about the players but about the developers taking the cheapest option.

Modifié par abaris, 06 avril 2012 - 06:53 .

[SalsaDMA]

Rache123 wrote...

So on top of having to apologise for wanting a happy ending, I now have to feel bad for playing on a console? jeez where's the love?

Narh. Not your fault that corporations want to get as much money for as little as possible.

If anything it should be us PC gamers that feel bad for not protesting hard enough when the developers continually treat the pc-market as a second-class industry.

[Lmaoboat]

On the other hand, thanks to consoles, games still work on my crappy old computer.

[Celeblhachon]

Consoles don't limit graphical progress, they just change the focus.

By working with a console for 8 years, people learn valuable things about optimization. Unreal Engine 3 and CryEngine 3 would be nowhere near as smooth running if they were not built with that knowledge. And they still look incredible.

Also, realize that new consoles are coming out soon. Does no one remember when the Xbox 360 first came out? There was a literal explosion of graphical quality in all games. Xbox 360 was the first machine to have half the features of DX10, and DX10 for PCs didn't come until a few years later.

The industry rumors (which are usually fairly reliable) are saying right now that the next Xbox is going to have two Radeon 7000 series GPUs (not working in Crossfire, but some other method Microsoft is coming up with), and either 4 or 6 CPU cores. Memory is so cheap now it will probably have 8 GB of DDR3.

Imagine the surge of quality that will happen when that is your baseline rig in 2014.

Sure, old tech is most likely stifling the quality - by how much is impossible to know - but the upcoming start of the next cycle will more than make up for it.

[PixelMurder]

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

the worst is the console controller

using a joystick to look around is just sadomasochism

No at all. I have bought ME3 for PC, because i thought, there is controller support.
Now, i'm playing it on my XBox because i don't want to play games with a contrroller made for Excel.
And sorry,  you have to play Fallout 3 on PC(with controller), because you can have a grafic, that is better than ME3 and i can fix all that WTF's myself. ME3 for me  isn't worth to play on PC, when i want Spectre difficulty, i just don't use Nova.
(Fallout 3: today i have added a Reaper Dreadnought  from radroach, Marauder Shields(that change name to Marauder Health, when he looses the shields), husks and Morinth
http://www.globalgam...47&d=1333716087
http://www.globalgam...44&d=1333704424
http://www.globalgam...40&d=1333704411
)

[tbb033]

The series started on console. Maybe you should just consider yourself lucky they even bothered to port it to PC.

[Kandid001]

PC is awesome, consoles are awesome. Lock this thread already.

[Tangster]

Dreadcall wrote...

Tangster wrote...

Graphics like that are not possible. That's based on ray-trace technology and there's a reason why it's pre-rendered.
If it was possible, then companies like Crytek/Epic/CDProjekt would probably have done it.

As it stands, Crysis(original and warhead), Metro 2033, Witcher 2, BF3(on a PC) are the abosolute cream of what can be achieved with current PC hardware.

 

Epic's GDC 2011 tech demo disagrees with you

 

Tech demo. Using 3x GTX580's. That barely looks better than Witcher 2 or some of the mods available for Crysis.

Also not Ray-Trace tech. Real-time ray tracing currently crawls along at 1fps or so, even on 4x top end Quadro cards with 12 core workstations.

Modifié par Tangster, 06 avril 2012 - 07:49 .

[ohnoyoudidnt]

PixelMurder wrote...

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

the worst is the console controller

using a joystick to look around is just sadomasochism

No at all. I have bought ME3 for PC, because i thought, there is controller support.
Now, i'm playing it on my XBox because i don't want to play games with a contrroller made for Excel.
And sorry,  you have to play Fallout 3 on PC(with controller), because you can have a grafic, that is better than ME3 and i can fix all that WTF's myself. ME3 for me  isn't worth to play on PC, when i want Spectre difficulty, i just don't use Nova.
(Fallout 3: today i have added a Reaper Dreadnought  from radroach, Marauder Shields(that change name to Marauder Health, when he looses the shields), husks and Morinth
http://www.globalgam...47&d=1333716087
http://www.globalgam...44&d=1333704424
http://www.globalgam...40&d=1333704411
)

i can objectively say you are wrong

the best way to look around in any game is with a mouse

the joystick is like attaching heavy weights to the barrel of your gun with chains, it's slow unprecise and annoying
the stick will always be bad for aiming, looking around

Tangster wrote...

Dreadcall wrote...

Tangster wrote...

Graphics like that are not possible. That's based on ray-trace technology and there's a reason why it's pre-rendered.
If it was possible, then companies like Crytek/Epic/CDProjekt would probably have done it.

As
it stands, Crysis(original and warhead), Metro 2033, Witcher 2, BF3(on a
PC) are the abosolute cream of what can be achieved with current PC
hardware.

 

Epic's GDC 2011 tech demo disagrees with you

 

Tech demo. Using 3x GTX580's. That barely looks better than Witcher 2 or some of the mods available for Crysis.

Also
not Ray-Trace tech. Real-time ray tracing currently crawls along at
1fps or so, even on 4x top end Quadro cards with 12 core workstations.

just to note, the demo required 3 580 because of the resolution they had to output the demo

the screen was huge, so was the resolution

Modifié par ohnoyoudidnt, 06 avril 2012 - 07:51 .

[DadeLeviathan]

Oh look. This thread again.

In all seriousness, yes consoles have less performance, but you also have to remember that PCs come in many shapes and sizes. To demand that developers make games exclusively for high performance rigs is nothing short of arrogance.

[xkg]

PixelMurder wrote...

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

the worst is the console controller

using a joystick to look around is just sadomasochism

No at all. I have bought ME3 for PC, because i thought, there is controller support.
Now, i'm playing it on my XBox because i don't want to play games with a contrroller made for Excel.

Seriously ? lol
Is there any cross platform PvP FPP/TPP game to test that ?
Just turn off your aim-aid/auto-aim or whatever crap have you there on consoles and let's play.

Then we can see which controller is better.
You would have your ass handed to you in a matter of seconds.

Modifié par xkg, 06 avril 2012 - 07:54 .

[ohnoyoudidnt]

i can understand that people prefer the controller for comfortable reasons (you don't need a hard surface to put the controller on) but in no way you can prefer a controller for aiming, because for aiming it's not comfortable at all

i'd love to see how a trackballs feels like for aiming instead of a stick

Modifié par ohnoyoudidnt, 06 avril 2012 - 07:56 .

[SalsaDMA]

DadeLeviathan wrote...

Oh look. This thread again.

In all seriousness, yes consoles have less performance, but you also have to remember that PCs come in many shapes and sizes. To demand that developers make games exclusively for high performance rigs is nothing short of arrogance.

Nobody is demanding exclusivity. They just would prefer that the options and hardware that is there actually be used.

Tbh, I'm surprised the hardware companies haven't pushed more to software developers about incorporating stuff in pc versions that could utilize all their fancy tech. After all, what's the point of it if it rarely gets used?

[Tangster]

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

just to note, the demo required 3 580 because of the resolution they had to output the demo

the screen was huge, so was the resolution

Large screen =/= uber high res. a 1080p 50" TV has the same resolution as my 23" monitor and a lower res than the new 2048x1536 apple ipad 3.

While it's nice too see tech demos for such things, they're still tech demos. Nothing even approaching the power of the rig running that will be in the next gen consoles, regardless of rumors.

DadeLeviathan wrote...

Oh look. This thread again. 

In all seriousness, yes consoles have less performance, but you also have to remember that PCs come in many shapes and sizes. To demand that developers make games exclusively for high performance rigs is nothing short of arrogance.

 
As I'm sure people have said, it'd be nice to have scaleability so top end users don't get what amounts to a bad looking product.

There should be the option to improve graphical fidelity, if you have the power to do so.

Modifié par Tangster, 06 avril 2012 - 07:58 .

[SynheKatze]

Mettyx wrote...

We could have had a game that looks like this cinematic by now if it weren't for consoles.

dl link

Keep dreaming.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

Tangster wrote...

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

just to note, the demo required 3 580 because of the resolution they had to output the demo

the screen was huge, so was the resolution

Large screen =/= uber high res. a 1080p 50" TV has the same resolution as my 23" monitor and a lower res than the new 2048x1536 apple ipad 3.

i don't think it's fair to compare small monitors and tvs to huge (and probably custom) demonstration screens

[natie]

Celeblhachon wrote...

Consoles don't limit graphical progress, they just change the focus.

By working with a console for 8 years, people learn valuable things about optimization. Unreal Engine 3 and CryEngine 3 would be nowhere near as smooth running if they were not built with that knowledge. And they still look incredible.

Cutting corners by replacing 3D models with sprites, using crappy low-res textures and backgrounds, cutting out animations, physics, for the sake of "important stuff" looking pretty is not optimisation. It's just that - cutting corners.

[Tangster]

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

Tangster wrote...

ohnoyoudidnt wrote...

just to note, the demo required 3 580 because of the resolution they had to output the demo

the screen was huge, so was the resolution

Large screen =/= uber high res. a 1080p 50" TV has the same resolution as my 23" monitor and a lower res than the new 2048x1536 apple ipad 3.

i don't think it's fair to compare small monitors and tvs to huge (and probably custom) demonstration screens

Screens used in tech demos are normally varients on projector tech, either standard portable projectors or large rear projection units.

They're normally 1920 x 1080 or 1920 x 1200.

In that tech demo you can tell from the video it's a projector.

When companies want to demo ultra high resolution gameplay, they mention it and/or use an obvious ultra high setup(ie, Eyefinity or 30" 2560x1600 display.

Modifié par Tangster, 06 avril 2012 - 08:08 .

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

Mettyx wrote...

Take a look at what 8-year old consoles took from gaming standards-








These are all user created mods doubling the resolutions.

Instead of making the game for PC and then downgrading it for decrepit consoles, like Witcher 2...Bioware lost all credibility with me, on top of degraded animations.



P.S.
mods

I facepalm every time some PC elitist uses this as the chief reason why the gaming industry is so homegenous. We all get that PC are way more powerful than consoles but they are far less affordable in some caes for people. It's why I stopped gaming until I bought a 360 and a PS3. Some of the games that were up my alley would require a high end rig that at that time (and even today) I couldn't afford.

The Homogenized Industry we have today can be attributed to numerous other factors. The Limits of Console tech is one out of many and it could be argued that it is the least of the issues.

 

[Hogge87]

Mettyx wrote...

We could have had a game that looks like this cinematic by now if it weren't for consoles.

dl link

Hi.
I'm a game developer and these are my few cents in this matter.

First of all, todays consoles are not eight years old (although I'm suspecting that you are). The Xbox 360 was launched in November 2005, making it six years old. The PS3 is a year newer. New, more powerful consoles are scheduled to be unveiled at this years E3.
And even if game developers wouldn't care about consoles, there wouldn't be games that look that good. Why? Well, how many people own gaming rigs capable of that? It's a simple matter of: should we make cheaper, lower end graphics which work on all computers, or expensive, high end graphics which only work on core gamers' (which ironically are the most avid pirates) gaming rigs?
And still lots of game developers don't really want this change, because they don't really seem a point. I know lots of hugely talented artists who look at Uncharted 3 and ask "what the heck are we supposed to do with more power".

We have already reached a point where graphics swallow a disproportionately large part of a games budget. We have reached a point where graphics swallow so much  resources that game designers are forced by publishers to build super-linear levels just to force players to see all the eye-candy.

You're whining over day one DLC and singleplayer campaigns being too short. Why the f**k do you think that is? You don't think it has anything to do with the development costs of games skyrocketing over the last 10 years? When Shenmue was released, everyone thought it had an astronomic development cost and that the game wouldn't be able to break even regardless of on which format it'd sell. Nowadays, that budget is no big deal.

Also, both from my personal experience and from other game developers experience, developing PC games is a pain in the ass nowadays. You have to program everything so it'll be compatible with all kinds of stupid combinations of software and hardware. On a console, you have ONE combination of stuff for the PS3, one for the Xbox and that's it. If it works, it works and will allways work. If MS bring out a new version of the 360 on which my games turn out to be uncompatible, it's up to MS to patch the console to be compatible with my game.

Finally, there's one really good reason for prioritizing consoles: PC gamers are notorious for "borrwing" games. I talked with a worker on Massive Entertainment whom claimed that they at one point in time checked how many people were playing World in Conflict on their servers at a given time. There were more players online, playing their game at that particular moment than had bought the game. When EA did the same thing for FIFA, they found out that there was TEN TIMES more people playing the game at that very second than had actually bought it. I've heard that perhaps just one percent of PC FIFA-players own a legal copy.
So essentially: PIRACY IS WHY PC GAMERS CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS!

[chimpdaddy121]

i would like to point something out, thats cost + game cost om the long run.

consoles in the UK 3 years ago, about £200 + of you need a good big screen hd tv £400-500

total £700

pc Mine cost £1500

however heres the kicker, pc games pre order £25, console games pre-order £45

see the difference. yeah its double up front however in the long run its cheaper but because younger people dont have the thinking ability of someone older they dont see the long term effects and only live in the here and now.

Also for people who get there parents to buy the console, whats more appealing, the small cost of the big one. this is the thing, people who say pc gaming is expensive have done no research and live of hear say. also consoles are holding gaming back and it isnt just graphics, with more powerful hardware comes better AI, better immersion, a more realistic world, and for those lovers out there a more malleable canvas for those artists lol.

[Justin2k]

The problem is PC gamers tend to pirate. And more people play on consoles than PC's anyway.

Basically you are lucky you get ports even, and people are free to make games for powerful PC's but they choose to go where the money is, which is console gaming.