189 réponses à ce sujet

[born2beagator]

AsheraII wrote...

It's funny. Every time a new console comes to the market, the owners like to brag how superior their $300 machine is to a standard PC. But the funny part is, that the technology to make a PC on par with that new console is ALREADY available, and becomes standard the next year, and bargain bin another two years down the road. The first XBox was actually built using outdated parts that had been standard to the computer industry for years already!

All that hurts them, since two years down the road, a PC user can build a PC with the same or even better specs for just a little bit more, and use it for way more purposes, and get the vastly superior mouse/KB controls with it.

And the PC gamer can keep upgrading it easily and relatively cheap, to stay ahead of them, allowing better games, better visuals, more sound effects. While the console stays completely stiff in quality. Oh, they can buy a newer model and scrap the old model. So that's another $300 wasted. While the PC player still has other options by the time he buys a completely new system: hand down or sell the old computer to his father or a nephew (your nephew might want your old Xbox, but would your father be even remotely interrested?), or repurpose it into a server for his network. It's even viable to re-designate that old computer as your "work computer". It can run word and everything, and all the important programs and documents probably ended up on it by now, so hell, why not? You can even use it to play some older LAN capable games with visiting friends, since the two are mostly compatible.

So the console players get a grudge, untill a new generation of consoles comes out. Then they think they are king of the hill again for a year or two, untill the price tag of PC systems with comparable or better stats comes down again to a similar level. and the whole thing just repeats itself.

Truth is, consoles are a thing of the past, eversince the Atari 2600 had to make way for personal computers systems like the Commodore 64. It's just the perceived convenience advertised by the console industry that keeps fooling people into buying them. But they're holding back technological advancement instead of supporting it. Whatever the next generation of consoles can do, PC's can already do it, do it better, and do more. But the console game industry is really starting to hold back the PC game industry.

This isn't elitist or whiny at all<_<

IMO its the PC players that are holding a grudge.  I don't have anything against them except they think they are better than everyone on consoles just because they have the money for a gaming computer.

For me, its just too expensive, and there are too many extra factors that can go wrong with PCs.  I'll stick with my consoles, thank you very much.

Modifié par born2beagator, 26 juillet 2012 - 02:48 .

[d1st4nt]

count_4 wrote...

theillusiveman11 wrote...
Just something I've noticed on forums, there seems to be some contempt for console players. I'm just wondering why.

Two reasons.

1) Console players are regarded as more casual and therefore less skilled. PC players kinda go out of their way to play a game, sitting in a chair, with complex controls (the machine, not the chair) and an overall rather pricey gaming rig. They neither need nor have aim assist (be it helpful on a console or not, it is still called aim assist) and generally seem to be a little more serious about gaming.
Not saying this is true, but it is a rather common perception. 
And you guys are playing shooters with f*cking gamepads, so there's that. 

2) The impact of consoles on PC games. Now this I do mean deadly serious. Because of consoles PC games are worse than they would be without, ME3 being the perfect example for this one. 
The reason we have messed up controls (the omni-button) is consoles, low texture quality is due to consoles, horrible menu control is due to consoles and, above all, that (pardon my french) f*cking ridiculous FOV of 70 is due to consoles. 
I know I tend to repeate myself on this one but adjustable FOV is not subject to personal preference, it's a physical necessity, especially with the vastly different setups of consoles and PCs. It's not nice of the devs to include FOV control in a game, it's a major messup if they don't. And constantly having developers (yes, I'm looking at you BioWare) ignore this is infuriating. And since the devs don't really give a crap about our complaints, the backlash of this tends to hit the console players instead.
Plus a lot of games (series) get noticably dumbed down since the focus went more to the console market. Ever wondered why Portal 1 had flings and Portal 2 didn't? Yeah, you guessed it - because it doesn't really work with gamepads.

To make things clear: The first reason is not my opinion, just shining a light on how people think. The second part I do not blame on the players. It's the devs and the publishers fault and my animosity is solely projected onto them.

Although, you guys do play shooters with a gamepad...just kidding. 

Point 2 is interesting.  The reason you have as many games as you do is because the publishers were able to expand to a casual market.  It's the reason AAA sequenced titles now have 1-2 year release cycles, the money coming in from console gaming (and now, mobile gaming) allows for larger projects in less time.

So there's a caveat... PC gaming, as a business model, is self defeating.  The parts necessary are a niche market (e.g. high end GPUs, moreso prior to CUDA crunching NVIDIA cores, but still true), increasing demand with a falsely deflated supply (b/c hardware manufacturers like making money, and b/c the tech has such a high turnover rate that manufacturing costs are consistently flat-lined for the top tier hardware), allowing the hardware manufacturers to charge a lot of money.  Due to the high end cost of a top notch machine, game developers are unable to convince publishers to back as many projects due to fear of financial loss since the user base is smaller (low demand).

So yes, console games have likely dumbed down some of the features of your cross-platform PC games... but the fact that a $2,000 rig has 10-30 games to play on it per year, comes down to the reserve cash generated from the, far more affordable, $300 rig that remains a viable platform for 3-5 years.

[Hellfire257]

Stop digging yourself a hole, GallowsPole. There's a good reason why the indie market on PC is thriving.

[rmccowen]

Mandalore313 wrote...

Apart from that, the audiences are entirely different, since computers are harder to use/require more knowledge it means that console users are (let's put it kindly) "less knowing" and mostly of a smaller age. Not only that, but console players are a lot more in numbers than pc players.

So they need to cater to the needs of console players most.

Which is what people call "dumbing down" a game.

Speaking as a 30-year-old Ph.D. student with a work laptop and an XBox, I think your assumptions might be a little off.

Consoles are slowing down the evolution of pcs and personally that's where my disdain comes from.
Nothing personal, I just consider you dead weight.

"Console users are utterly worthless, and are preventing me from playing the really awesome games we'd get if only they would all just die in a fire.

Nothing personal."

I guess we needed a type specimen for the attitude the OP was talking about...

Personally I think--for those people that do look down on console users--it's because there's a psychological need to assign a higher value to things that cost more. However, PC users do have some very real advantages in control: a mouse and WASD makes for faster, more flexible, and more precise movement and aiming than the dual-joystick layout the Xbox and PS3 controllers use.

They can also record and analyze gameplay much more easily, of which I'm definitely jealous.

[Mystical_Gaming]

I really don't pc game much. I enjoy consoles because they are much easier to play on when relaxing. I can sit back in my chair instead of hunch over with a keyboard and mouse.

I have a really good pc, but I don't game on it much. I live stream and do graphics with it mostly. I've never cared for graphics in games that much. I play older pc games like KOTOR and would rather play games like battlefield 3 on my console than pc because all my friends are on console. Graphics in a game don't mean much to me. I'm more about the experience and gameplay and consoles offer me more of that for most multiplatform games.

[Dokteur Kill]

rmccowen wrote...
Speaking as a 30-year-old Ph.D. student

As a 34 year old PhD, ABD*, I wish you good luck and hope you have a supervisor who actually takes the time to read your thesis and fix the formalities in anything that can be considered a reasonable timeframe 

*"All But the Dissertation"

[GallowsPole]

Hellfire257 wrote...

Stop digging yourself a hole, GallowsPole. There's a good reason why the indie market on PC is thriving.

You mean like the makers of Kingdom of Amalur? Or the ones that you can play on my iPad like Angry Birds.

Yes there are indie games that don't have anyone to answer to. Well except everything that it takes to get it on a platform.

[Meatiershower]

Anyone who says console gamers are immature is a doodoo head.

[megawug]

No disdain personally. I just like to play with better controls (Logitech G13 + Trackman), better chair, better screen (1920x1200) and higher frame rates.

Yeah, the fault lies with Microsoft. They pushed aside PC games to promote the original Xbox. I remember that some games on PC were intentionally delayed to encourage Xbox sales way back when.

[Mgamerz]

Si7ent Sigh wrote...

I would get a PC, but would rather play on my couch.

Bonus: Most PC dudes on here are kind of douchey. (Not that the crybabies on Xbox or PS3 are any better).

...get a laptop.

[Tzarakiel]

You guys should be thankful your not living in Norway. A good gaming rig here costs a minimum of 2500 -3000 dollars, and a decent one cost 1500+.

Modifié par Tzarakiel, 26 juillet 2012 - 03:05 .

[GallowsPole]

Dokteur Kill wrote...

GallowsPole wrote...
Because MS take their share? And pray tell who owns Windows? You think it's free?

Erm. Yes? You do realize that, unlike for the consoles, Windows developers don't have to pay Microsoft a percentage of the price of each sold copy of a Windows application, right?

MP games requires resources. Developers don't own their own servers, they are leased out from companies like IBM.

Yes, but those costs are there for console titles as well.  

Then the single process of implementing a change on these servers aren't just a matter of updating them.

Again, this is just as expensive for a console title as for a PC title.

Everyone seems to forget you actually have to pay people.

...no matter which platform you develop for

Profits may be slimmer on consoles, but your selling a ton of them.

And at the same time, a lot of the costs you mention scale with the number of copies sold. So even if we accept the premise that a console title sells more than a PC title (which isn't necessarily true, but exact sales numbers are hard to aquire and compare, because publishers don't like to be too open about those things), the total profit may be similar or even lower.

While developers do not pay for every Windows application, there is a cost involved in getting it on Windows. And if you dont think so, ask yourself what happened to Netscape browser when MS decided that Internet Explorer was going to be the end all and be all of browsing. MS is a difficult company to work with and it costs.


Other than that, your cost analysis is accurate, however, when you have to code for an unchanged platform for 8 years as opposed to an ever changing platform like the PC, which in the end do you think is cheaper without Developers releasing info?

[Dokteur Kill]

GallowsPole wrote...
Other than that, your cost analysis is accurate, however, when you have to code for an unchanged platform for 8 years as opposed to an ever changing platform like the PC, which in the end do you think is cheaper without Developers releasing info?

PC. By a wide margin. For one thing, with APIs like DirectX, the PC as a development platform is actually becoming quite standardized. A lot of the complicated work of optimizing towards specific hardware is handled by the hardware manufacturers, not the game developers.

Console developers are pushed into a market where they (feel they) have to keep improving the visuals while the hardware stays the same. At the same time, they have to work within very constrained memory budgets. That requires a lot of complicated optimization. The PC is so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power that it's possible to provide a better experience with less efficient code.

The best-case scenario is probably for someone who licenses an engine such as UnrealEngine, in which case the cost of development on the different platforms is pretty similar.

[SGsunny]

What kind of disdain? If it's about skills then I must say that it's easier to aim for headshot on PC than it is on console. However, moving avatar around on console using the thumb-stick should be easier than on PC using keys.

[Titus Thongger]

Because text chat for pc still hasn't been implemented

[HowlingSiren]

Korjyan wrote...

Because consoles are holding back the technical evolution of gaming in general. The current generation of consoles is outdated for so long now and games could be much better (not just look better) if the hardware was up to date with PC hardware. We often have to deal with ****ty console ports because consoles are where most of the money is made unfortunately.

So in Mass Effect for example we don't have high resolution textures. We have one button that does 31237123012 things in the game when we could actually have just several keys for that on PC. We have a stupid FOV of 70 which we have to change manually. We don't have proper mouse settings like any good PC or well-ported FPS or TPS game has. We can't have a difficulty mode in MP that let's us fight 30 trash mobs at the same time because the consoles could not handle it so instead we get boss mode in Platinum. Damn, they even cut the weapon holster animation to save some memory space (not that I really care about weapon holstering in SP, I just say this because it shows how much these old consoles limit game development). I can continue this list but I guess everyone gets my point.

My freaking smartphone has 4x the RAM of a Playstation and still they MS and Sony refuse to update their consoles and we probably won't see a new generation until late 2013 or early 2014 and when they finally launch the hardware will already be outdated again because they can't sell consoles at 1000$ a piece. Well technically they could but they won't.

Aside from that (being the main reason for some console hating) no veteran gamer who has been playing games for decades would switch a mouse and keyboard for a gamepad for a lot of the games, especially FPS, TPS, RTS, RPG, MMO... Why is this a problem? Well... see above. ****ty ports, double, triple and quadruple use of a single key because of limits from the console/gamepad side of things. I play some games with a gamepad on PC as well but those games are a minority.

This.

[masoidthedroid]

Pitznik wrote...

8 Bears wrote...

PC players just don't understand how tough it is in the slums.. But we do what we can to make it nice for everyone..

I personally don't have anything against the console players, they are just the same people as we are. But would you like your sister to hang out with a console player? Would you like to have a console player as your neighbour?

I agree, do we really want our children walking home from the bus stop, when we know they will pass by the haunt of a console player?

[loungeshep]

Beelzebubs wrote...

loungeshep wrote...

They're just jealous because we only spent upwards of 300 bucks on our consoles (sometimes less!) whereas they blew several thousand on a PC just to play a game.

Now if I were to blow several thousand it'd be for a professional editing system at home i.e. Avid. Or...Avid. Just Avid. I've grown to hate Final Cut.

Several thousand just to play games? Hell I could frankenstein some parts from old machines worth about £200 that could play ME3.

You don't need to spend thousands to have a gaming rig, you can build a perfectly good one for £600 that will still be able to run "next gen" games. Also it's not just about playing games, you can use it for other things as well.

You have to understand that most high end gamers will only end up spending big money every 10 or so years, every few years maybe, they'll upgrade their RAM/CPU/Motherboard/GPU but you won't need to replace a lot of the parts, the case/cooling system will be fine, the PSU, the older hard drives (unless you want to buy an SSD) are still all "viable".

My biggest gaming expense a year on my PC is buying new mice/keyboards due to accidents with beer/coffee.

Well, okay then.  I can admit to being wrong and misinformed.

[Teddy_Toker]

Here's my reason, I prefer controller over mouse and keyboard.

[Manuel La Bor]

I have the money saved up for a gaming rig, but I'll probably never get one. It's not just the cost of the rig, but the cost of all that power consumption on top of all the other power hungry electronics in my house. An extra 50-75 bucks a month is just too much for me to pay.

OTOH, I'll probably just spend the money on recording hardware instead of a 500$ gtx 680

[SGsunny]

Teddy_Toker wrote...

Here's my reason, I prefer controller over mouse and keyboard.

Agree, I can be a real couch potato when gaming on console.

But I do miss those accuracy aim on PC.

[Sabbatine]

theillusiveman11 wrote...

Just something I've noticed on forums, there seems to be some contempt for console players. I'm just wondering why.

Mostly because playing using a console controller creates the illusion that console players are terrible at the game.

[GallowsPole]

As much as I have gamed on PC, I too prefer a gamepad. That and I worked with my laptop forever and the last thing I want to look at is another keyboard.

[born2beagator]

Teddy_Toker wrote...

Here's my reason, I prefer controller over mouse and keyboard.

and this is all the reason that should be needed.  Blame the developers not the gamers.

[VRtheTrooper]

i play PC games on my Mac Pro.....just to ****** people off.

but seriously, i only play PC games if its exclusive to it. otherwise, i'd rather chill on my couch or bed and play on one of my consoles.