Support NeoGAF

[flaxknuckles]

New OS? Check (Windows 10)
New Hardware? Check (Surface Pro, and Valve doesn't seem to actually make any of the Steamboxes)
New API? Check (DirectX 12)
New Controller? Check (I don't see how it being shared with a console matters here tbh)


I don't know what you're referring to in regards to new engine, maybe you could clue me in?

On top of directly matching most of what Valve main pushes have been (which actually having created stuff like DirectX, rather than just supporting it) they've also actually been releasing and funding games for the platform.... I think even limited to Steam, MS has published significantly more games than Valve has recently. That's without taking into consideration other side efforts for stuff like the Windows Store.

A Surface Pro? Really? The heck does that do for PC gaming? And Valve isn't just supporting Vulkan, they have a team dedicated to making tools and drivers for it. And yay a new controller that is not much different than a 360 controller and cannot be used to play ALL PC games like the Steam controller. And so what Microsoft published more games on PC? Valve created the platform for those games to sell as well as they did.

 

[VolticArchangel]

Much of the reason why people care is because a) MS is also pushing DirectX; b) MS is also pushing the Windows 10 store; c) MS is repeatedly apologizing for past treatment of Steam. If MS, like Sony, had never been in the PC gaming market, there'd be a lot less pressure on them now.

We're amidst the launch of yet another successor for MSFT's flagship product pipeline and we need to ask ourselves whether Xbox game ports to Windows, pushes the OS install base ? A 61% market share for Windows 7 on the desktop/laptop OS front wasn't achieved by Xbox games (hardly any TBH) nor was it overnight. Windows 7 was an incredibly well designed operating system that pushed the XP demographic to upgrade/buy the product.

Despite rumors of "spinoff", Nadella was firm on the brand of Xbox being here to stay. Their vision of "ONE DEVICE" at the center of the living room contradicts what people believe that they'll do in the longrun for Xbox IP's - "every one of them on the Xbox Store app on Win10, though in a long span of time."

MSFT has their vision very clear. Promote WIn10 to the consumer who plays games during the launch timeframe, just like Vista with Halo 2, now for Win10 with a couple of high profile first party releases soon like KI and Gears UE but continue later with F2P titles, indie (first on Xbox One / console exclusive), and lastly invest in PC-centric genre like RTS, Flight Sim etc eventually and have them crossplay with Xbox.

Besides, let's be honest. If MSFT were genuinely sorry for the treatment of steam and the PC demographic as a whole, their next generation graphics API (let alone games) wouldn't be exclusive to their new OS. I wonder where's the freedom Phil Spencer talked about playing games "wherever" we want to.

That all said, I believe MSFT are going beyond their ways to support the PC demographic with high profile first party titles like KI and Gears UE when they could have just taken the backseat with DX12 being Win10 exclusive. They're in absolutely no way obligated to bring their Xbox IP's to Windows, lessening the reasons to buy their home console today (in 2015) where the PC gaming market is on the rise, double time.

 

[Crayon]

Okay. I just don't see how Valve's attempts are, while legitimate, fruitful. What is SteamOS and Vulkan going to achieve if everyone will be using Windows 10 and DirectX 12?

Steamos and Vulkan make it so everyone doesnt have to be on win10 and dx12.

What could be a greater contribution than a choice where there was none before?

 

[etta]

Steamos and Vulkan make it so everyone doesnt have to be on win10 and dx12.

What could be a greater contribution than a choice where there was none before?

But this rests on the majority of people switching, which won't happen because of Windows 10. It doesn't matter if Valve can streamline the SteamOS, Windows 10 will always be better for the majority of the PC gamers, as it stands right now. No developer will switch to SteamOS support when the majority will be on Windows 10 still.

 

[Crayon]

But this rests on the majority of people switching, which won't happen because of Windows 10. It doesn't matter if Valve can streamline the SteamOS, Windows 10 will always be better for the majority of the PC gamers, as it stands right now. No developer will switch to SteamOS support when the majority will be on Windows 10 still.

It has nothing to do with the majority of people switching. Think.

 

[Synth]

A Surface Pro? Really? The heck does that do for PC gaming? And Valve isn't just supporting Vulkan, they have a team dedicated to making tools and drivers for it. And yay a new controller that is not much different than a 360 controller and cannot be used to play ALL PC games like the Steam controller. And so what Microsoft published more games on PC? Valve created the platform for those games to sell as well as they did.

Actually, MS created the platform for those to sell as well as they did. There's a reason there's such a disparity between what Steam offers on Windows, in comparison to OSX and Linux. Microsoft created the platform for Steam.

Why would you count a fully portable PC as doing nothing for gaming, but simply installing Steam onto small form-factor PCs built by other manufacturers as apparently being a noteworthy contribution?... Basically every Windows PC (including mine, that's hooked up to my TV right now) would be MS' equivalent to that.

I don't get your contention with the controller tbh... even if it were still only the 360 pad, it'd still have been responsible for standardizing joypad support in PC games, which has honestly been key to getting many of the games we have over the years.

Anyway, we could go back and forth on this for ages really, arguing about the contributions of each... but that's basically my point... it is arguable. Which you wouldn't think is the case at all when people constantly chime in with "if you say you're going to support the PC, then support it!". They have been, and it's a large reason why you're currently complaining about them and not Apple instead. Valve is standing on their shoulders.

 

[etta]

It has nothing to do with the majority of people switching. Think.

You mean how Vulkan will still be used on Windows 10, and not requiring SteamOS? Is it better than DX12?

 

[KR_remix]

When did they promise bringing Xbox staple franchises to PC?

I never said that, I just said that they haven't been backing up their words about committing to pc gaming.

I mean let's be honest here, DX12 only exists because of Mantle/Vulkan. Microsoft wouldn't have done jack shit otherwise. They are only porting over f2p/old games/as well as a console rts to pc, when they own huge pc franchises and actually used to be a good pc publisher.

AoE or RoN is almost certainly still coming, though. That's probably what they've got Decisive Games working on.

Whatever strategy game they are working on is just gonna be another xbox port. Microsoft isn't gonna do anything for pc unless it is for xbox first. It would be nice to get a pc ass pc game instead.

 

[SturokBGD]

Is this not the first time that DX was tied to a specific version of the OS (at least 'modern' OS, not including 95/98/NT/etc.);

DX 9 = Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP.

DX 10 = Windows 10, Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista.

DX 11 = Windows 10, Windows 8 and Windows 7, Windows Vista.

DX 12 = Windows 10 only.

I sat here scratching my head for a good 10 minutes before I realised that this post says exactly what I thought it said. Well played.

 

[Crayon]

You mean how Vulkan will still be used on Windows 10, and not requiring SteamOS? Is it better than DX12?

I mean that we benefit from having open alternatives. We. Like all of us.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Whatever strategy game they are working on is just gonna be another xbox port. Microsoft isn't gonna do anything for pc unless it is for xbox first. It would be nice to get a pc ass pc game instead.

This is a weird objection to me. Halo Wars 2 isn't a port, it's releasing on both platforms, probably on the same day. Insisting that it not come out on Xbox just seems mean-spirited. If it works, it works.

 

[etta]

I never said that, I just said that they haven't been backing up their words about committing to pc gaming.

Okay, so Halo Wars 2, Fable Legends, Gears of War 1 are not backing up their promises. What games would do it in your opinion?

I mean that we benefit from having open alternatives. We. Like all of us.

Oh, well I am not arguing against that. More choice is better, but I just think the alternative won't get much use given Windows 10's reception.

 

[Outrun]

I never said that, I just said that they haven't been backing up their words about committing to pc gaming.

I mean let's be honest here, DX12 only exists because of Mantle/Vulkan. Microsoft wouldn't have done jack shit otherwise. They are only porting over f2p/old games/as well as a console rts to pc, when they own huge pc franchises and actually used to be a good pc publisher.



Whatever strategy game they are working on is just gonna be another xbox port. Microsoft isn't gonna do anything for pc unless it is for xbox first. It would be nice to get a pc ass pc game instead.

Not quite sure why you are trying to explain away MS's creation of DX12. Enough of the conjecture please. The fact is that they created DX12 which is sort of a big deal for the PC space.

 

[PhantomVash808]

Of these 3 games I can see Quantum Break heading over to PC just like Alan Wake.

 

[Crayon]

Oh, well I am not arguing against that. More choice is better, but I just think the alternative won't get much use given Windows 10's reception.

Only enough people have to use it to sustain it. Then the choice remains. As long as the choice remains, it's a lasting contribution. It is a hugely important contribution either way. The only question is will it be lasting.

 

[KR_remix]

Okay, so Halo Wars 2, Fable Legends, Gears of War 1 are not backing up their promises. What games would do it?

Not an xbox game. Something that is actually made for pc and not for their console. They used to do this, now their pc game releases are sadder in comparision(imo obviously). If they want to show commitment for the platform, then they should release a game for it that is made for it and not for their console. That could be a new Mechwarrior, AoE, RoN, Freelancer, The Movies, etc.

I don't understand why anyone asks Microsoft about what their plans are for pc releases when it is always gonna be the same answer, and they are just gonna release less important games from their xbox portfolio. I mean how many times this year has Phil Spencer talked about their renewed commitment.

This is a weird objection to me. Halo Wars 2 isn't a port, it's releasing on both platforms, probably on the same day. Insisting that it not come out on Xbox just seems mean-spirited. If it works, it works.

There were a ton of console/pc rts games last gen, usually someone was getting a subpar experience. Whether it was console or pc. Why would I insist that Halo Wars doesn't come out on consoles? It started there, of course it should be there. RoN, and AoE were pc franchises, if something doesn't make sense to be on pc for Phil from their console games then why should a more classic pc franchise be made to "work" on xbox. When he says that some franchises might come back purely on pc, I just don't believe him.

Not quite sure why you are trying to explain away MS's creation of DX12. Enough of the conjecture please. The fact is that they created DX12 which is sort of a big deal for the PC space.

Because Microsoft is only going to do something for pc gaming if they absolutely have to.

 

[shoreu]

Okay, so Halo Wars 2, Fable Legends, Gears of War 1 are not backing up their promises. What games would do it in your opinion?


Oh, well I am not arguing against that. More choice is better, but I just think the alternative won't get much use given Windows 10's reception.

They want Halo 5 and MCC and Gears of War so they feel justified in not purchasing an X1.
Hope that never happens it'd be like spitting in the early adopters face.

I don't mind a few but all is just ridiculous

 

[Crayon]

Synth, I applaud you for going so far out on such thin ice to prove that "it could be argued. And I concede you point that it could be argued. But I cannot help but take a look at the argument you put forth for the sake of arguing.

Actually, MS created the platform for those to sell as well as they did. There's a reason there's such a disparity between what Steam offers on Windows, in comparison to OSX and Linux. Microsoft created the platform for Steam.

First off, steam is cross-platform. Microsoft did not create "the platform for steam". You are for some reason trumpeting the de facto dominance of windows here. Maybe you forgot your own premise? MS achieved monopoly of the pc os market a long time ago, and your initial statement was that MS is doing more than Valve right now for pc gaming.

Why would you count a fully portable PC as doing nothing for gaming, but simply installing Steam onto small form-factor PCs built by other manufacturers as apparently being a noteworthy contribution?... Basically every Windows PC (including mine, that's hooked up to my TV right now) would be MS' equivalent to that.

An 800 dollar tablet that can run games like a 360 in 2015 is not contributing much to gaming. As for "simply stalling steam on and sff pc" I think that is selling short the fact that Valve actually created a not just a target distribution, but has created a market for open platform gaming out of thin air in a few years. You call that "simply installing steam". C'mon don't tell me you didn't know what you were doing there.

I don't get your contention with the controller tbh... even if it were still only the 360 pad, it'd still have been responsible for standardizing joypad support in PC games, which has honestly been key to getting many of the games we have over the years.

Even if it was the just 360 pad... and is is only the 360 pad if you are talkig about contributions to pc gaming at large.... that was ten years ago. What are they doing now as you contend? Releasing a luxury version? Right now valve is shipping a controller that can control all pc games -ever-.

Anyway, we could go back and forth on this for ages really...

And here you are correct. It could technically be argued that MS is doing more than Valve right now in regards to pc gaming.

 

[etta]

Not an xbox game. Something that is actually made for pc and not for their console. They used to do this, now their pc game releases are sadder in comparision(imo obviously). If they want to show commitment for the platform, then they should release a game for it that is made for it and not for their console. That could be a new Mechwarrior, AoE, RoN, Freelancer, The Movies, etc.

I don't understand why anyone asks Microsoft about what their plans are for pc releases when it is always gonna be the same answer, and they are just gonna release less important games from their xbox portfolio. I mean how many times this year has Phil Spencer talked about their renewed commitment.

Okay, how do you know they haven't started resurrecting PC IPs? The Xbox division has been used to making and dealing with console games for a long time, this whole PC commitment was talked about in 2014, when Spencer took lead of Xbox and Nadella of Windows. I imagine what happened was Xbox division being tasked with looking into PC games in early 2014, but this type of venture takes time, they can't just say "let's make a PC game." The landscape isn't set up yet as it is on Xbox One. The easier jobs would be to do Xbox One ports/co-releases, but the meaty stuff, figuring out what IP's will actually sell on PC, takes more than a year.
I'm not saying you should believe that they are actually committed, I'm saying you're not going to know for sure for some time.

Also, for 2016 they already have a title that is not a remaster or free to play, Halo Wars 2. As a publisher on PC, how many games do you expect them to pump out per year to show they are committed? More than 1 per year? Do you expect as many titles as on Xbox One? Several a year?

 

[spannicus]

The man has been getting a few games over to pc. See no point in all xbox exclusives going to PC. Might as well sell my xbox one. See more than enough games on steam to play.

 

[pvpness]

I'm in for Crackdown 3 if it ever makes it across. I'm glad to hear that there might be a chance, even if it's improbable because I'm unlikely to ever buy and Xbox One.

 

[travisbickle]

I can understand why they won't port crackdown3 on PC because PCs don't have access to the cloud. But they should put the other games on PC.

 

[TSM]

This is fool me how many times by Microsoft at this point? An impressively quick turnaround this time before they admitted they didn't really mean it.

 

[Kayant]

I can understand why they won't port crackdown3 on PC because PCs don't have access to the cloud. But they should put the other games on PC.

PC's have access to azure. Almost any platform does(Thunderhead) is a small sub section that is only for XB1. Anyways Phil comment here is more of a not right now because of PC not being in mind at the start of development so it wouldn't launch on PC but may/may not come later depending things like if they feel it's a game that works on PC.

 

[epmode]

I can understand why they won't port crackdown3 on PC because PCs don't have access to the cloud.

Why not?

 

[Pathfinder]

I can understand why they won't port crackdown3 on PC because PCs don't have access to the cloud. But they should put the other games on PC.

Uhh what? Titanfall for PC, and its AI, run on Azure. Same as the Xbox One version.

 

[Wensih]

"It’s not to say those games could never come to Windows"

I'm fine with waiting.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Oh noes MS keep exclusives to their console, how could they be so evil!

oh noes If only Spencer had said that, instead of what he actually did say!

 

[EloKa]

Following Cybits logic I am 4 consoler gamers and just 1 pc gamer.

but but but ... i owned at least 5 different PCs over the last 20 years? Am I now 4 console gamers and 5 pc gamers in one person?

 

[Jigorath]

Just gonna copy paste my thoughts on this from another thread earlier.

Microsoft just paid a ton of money to Square to delay the PC version of Tomb Raider a few months. Phil still views the PC platform as competition to Xbox in my eyes. Any bones he throws to PC gamers is probably because of Nadella breathing down his neck.

 

[Cybit]

Following Cybits logic I am 4 consoler gamers and just 1 pc gamer.

but but but ... i owned at least 5 different PCs over the last 20 years? Am I now 4 console gamers and 5 pc gamers in one person?

Considering I specifically stated that the size of the market is subject to interpretation and not easily definable (and didn't define it); my logic and reading comprehension are things you still need help following.

It also means that if I release a game on console; you have access to it. Which means going after your PC dollars is a waste of money. Thank you for proving my point.

Still gonna point out that big (multiplat) first party games that come out on console and PC sell squat on PC historically (relative to their console sales). Even modern 3rd party games have this issue.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Just gonna copy paste my thoughts on this from another thread earlier.

I think it's just as likely he wanted them to prioritize the xbone version so it could make it's holiday release and worry about the PC port after.

 

[GVA1987]

Man every Spencer thread is so full of salt I feel like I'm having a heart attack. Some of you guys read into this stuff so much.

It read to me like he was saying that he wants PC exclusive stuff designed for PC and not just console ports so that PC gamers aren't getting something rushed and terrible just to sate the pitchfork waving crowd demanding more games on more platforms.

Surely we should all be happy with less rushed and buggy PC ports just for the sake of having it on multiple platforms.

 

[EloKa]

Considering I specifically stated that the size of the market is subject to interpretation and not easily definable (and didn't define it); my logic and reading comprehension are things you still need help following.

It also means that if I release a game on console; you have access to it. Which means going after your PC dollars is a waste of money. Thank you for proving my point.

No thank you. There's no need to follow every pseudo logic just because someone (you) claims that he's right. I'll take the viewpoint of most others in this thread.

Still gonna point out that big (multiplat) first party games that come out on console and PC sell squat on PC historically (relative to their console sales). Even modern 3rd party games have this issue.

Yeah definately. Because games like the Diablo, Anno, the Battlefield franchise or anything by valve sell that many more units on consoles compared to PCs. PC got no GAEMS or franchises or genres or players!

Ever came up with the idea that for example the last Assassins Creed entries didn't sell gangbusters on PC because a) people were aware of the quality and b) there are many other choises compared to consoles? There's no need to buy a low quality game when the assortment of PC games is this big.

 

[GhostTrick]

Considering I specifically stated that the size of the market is subject to interpretation and not easily definable (and didn't define it); my logic and reading comprehension are things you still need help following.

It also means that if I release a game on console; you have access to it. Which means going after your PC dollars is a waste of money. Thank you for proving my point.

Still gonna point out that big (multiplat) first party games that come out on console and PC sell squat on PC historically (relative to their console sales). Even modern 3rd party games have this issue.

What do you mean ? That may not even be true.

 

[impact]

"Even with Gears, like the Gears 1 remake, we thought about framerate, we thought about multiplayer. The opportunity to bring it to Windows in a refreshed way felt like a great opportunity from the beginning. I’m trying to be more deliberate in the choices that we make."

Why don't we get MCC then -_-

 

[GhostTrick]

Why don't we get MCC then -_-

Well, then again, Halo is a brand tied to Xbox. I understand why they want to keep it an exclusive. What I dont get is why they don't say it this way instead of PR control.

 

[Bidermaier]

SteamOS is forcing a lot of developers to launch otherwise unexpected ports to linux. These days you could be a linux gamer and not feel like a weirdo zealot. That is a sign that things are changing.
The game industry feels a bit saturated, it the past it was ok to not care about Nintendo unless you were a fanboy, now that is extending to other platforms, because there are lots of games everywhere.

Being defensive and protective was ok in other time, now it is going to backfire microsoft big time.

 

[Bru]

Why don't we get MCC then -_-

My God. It's taking enough time to get that title working as expected on a closed system. Do you REALLY want MCC to drag its mutated carcass over to your open format PC in its current state?

 

[dragonlife]

I'll wait for Quantum Break PC as patiently as I can.

 

[JoJo UK]

I sat here scratching my head for a good 10 minutes before I realised that this post says exactly what I thought it said. Well played.

My head was totally up my arse last night when posting, I'm not sure I understand it this morning...

 

[Shin-chan]

I guess I just don't really get this from a PC gaming business perspective - I mean it's an incredibly half hearted approach to creating a powerhouse store that's able to attract the millions of users Windows 10 has into buying their regular games there, as well as first party. As of now we have no where near enough or the type of titles that most Steam users want to play, and so the response to the store when the games that are coming to it arrive is going to be a bit of a wet fart. There actually has to be something there that's going to push people into the store and I just done believe a F2P Fable, a Gears remake and whatever else is actually going to do anything. Halo Wars is the strongest push they've made since they started talking about this, which is progress ... maybe ... probably not? It just feels like it's going to fail without any compelling software and then we're back to the situation we've always had where Microsoft sees no value in the PC market over Xbox and blames it on the users for not gobbling up their somewhat subpar effort to cater to them.

 

[ashecitism]

Well, then again, Halo is a brand tied to Xbox. I understand why they want to keep it an exclusive. What I dont get is why they don't say it this way instead of PR control.

Since 1 and 2 have PC versions, at least what they could do is make them digitally available or release the anniversary editions on PC.

 

[mrklaw]

The man has been getting a few games over to pc. See no point in all xbox exclusives going to PC. Might as well sell my xbox one. See more than enough games on steam to play.

Consistency of offer would be one reason. They have the Xbox app on PC and some games coming across,mbut not all. That can be a confusing message for consumers. Currently I'm just reading the Xbox app as a way to expand the brand name around games generally - so the XBL accounts, streaming, messaging, friends lists etc. But I do think MS will need to pick a clear strategy soon, and communicate it clearly. If that is 'some games will come to PC but some won't. And some may release only on PC', then I'm ok with that. And that is what these comments from Phil sound like. What they need to stop doing is stringing people along with ifs and maybes. Tell us what the offer is and let us decide if that is value for us.

You don't see any point in exclusives coming to PC, but others that have gaming PCs and don't have xboxes *would* see the point. I'd argue that although you may lose some Xbox sales, you'd have an overall larger addressable market by including PC releases of all games. Assuming they only release through the win10 store, MS can also keep all the revenue as they are the publisher and owner of the store.

 

[KainXVIII]

Well, if they can't port new games, just port some "old" ones (like Halo:MCC or Rare Replay)

 

[Cybit]

What do you mean ? That may not even be true.

I don't believe Halo 1 / GoW / sold well on PC compared to consoles. In news that should surprise no one; folks who buy dedicated game machine likely to purchase games for said dedicated machines. :-D.

I think the highest end sales you'll get on PC for a game that is also on consoles simultaneously (that is a AAA / $60 game) is probably in the 2-2.5 million games sold barring crazy discount sales. (Aka GTA V numbers). Witcher 3 was at 1.3 million, and that's as best case scenario for PC as a multiplatform game can get in terms of dev support.

I am starting to think genre might be a bigger determination though; Alan wake as an example.

No thank you. There's no need to follow every pseudo logic just because someone (you) claims that he's right. I'll take the viewpoint of most others in this thread.


Yeah definately. Because games like the Diablo, Anno, the Battlefield franchise or anything by valve sell that many more units on consoles compared to PCs. PC got no GAEMS or franchises or genres or players!

Ever came up with the idea that for example the last Assassins Creed entries didn't sell gangbusters on PC because a) people were aware of the quality and b) there are many other choises compared to consoles? There's no need to buy a low quality game when the assortment of PC games is this big.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-reveals-80-percent-of-battlefield-hardline-sale/1100-6427125/

I'll just leave that there.

PS: Left 4 dead 1 console sold close to equally as their steam counterpart did. /kappa /basedGaben

The elitist bullshit is rife in the assassins creed comments; especially in light of mkx and arkham knight. Those discerning tastes got so good steam had to make a refund system.

As of the last earnings call from take two - GTA V had sold 2.5 million copies on PC (all methods) as part of 52 million copies sold total. To put that 50 million in context; that is close to the combined lifetime steam sales of CS:GO (15.2), HL2 (9), L4D2 (12.6), portal 1 (8.5) and portal 2 (7). Those are the 5 highest non F2P games in Valve's history post Steam.

Best Part: destiny might have actually sold more copies.

The Witcher 3 - a now AAA 3rd party franchise that started on PC and has had massive PC support was tracking at 1/3 of its buyers.

Alan Wake would be a good example of a game that would be a good argument for PC; in that PC sales saved it. I could see strategy and adventure games both being games you want on PC due to the history of the fanbases and genre. I Don't think it is coincidence that halo wars is coming to PC? But hard to justify other games for cost / development time alone. MS should go for revitalizing RTS games and adventure games on PC IMO; because those genres don't do well on consoles.

 

[Lemonte]

I'll wait for Quantum Break PC as patiently as I can.

Me too. In Remedy we trust.

 

[Lanrutcon]

There's that pc support we were promised.

Nothing has changed.

 

[Henrar]

Yeah definately. Because games like the Diablo, Anno, the Battlefield franchise or anything by valve sell that many more units on consoles compared to PCs. PC got no GAEMS or franchises or genres or players!

This is BF4 right now:
http://bf4stats.com/

PS3 has 11k players, PC 10k, PS4 almost 20k (twice a many players as PC version), only XBO and 360 have less players than PC versions.

And BF3:
http://bf3stats.com/
PC 3631
PS3 3653
360 1156

 

[SparkTR]

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-reveals-80-percent-of-battlefield-hardline-sale/1100-6427125/

I'll just leave that there.

PS: Left 4 dead 1 console sold close to equally as their steam counterpart did. /kappa /basedGaben

The elitist bullshit is rife in the assassins creed comments; especially in light of mkx and arkham knight. Those discerning tastes got so good steam had to make a refund system.

As of the last earnings call from take two - GTA V had sold 2.5 million copies on PC (all methods) as part of 52 million copies sold total. To put that 50 million in context; that is close to the combined lifetime steam sales of CS:GO (15.2), HL2 (9), L4D2 (12.6), portal 1 (8.5) and portal 2 (7). Those are the 5 highest non F2P games in Valve's history post Steam.

Best Part: destiny might have actually sold more copies.

The Witcher 3 - a now AAA 3rd party franchise that started on PC and has had massive PC support was tracking at 1/3 of its buyers.

Alan Wake would be a good example of a game that would be a good argument for PC; in that PC sales saved it. I could see strategy and adventure games both being games you want on PC due to the history of the fanbases and genre. I Don't think it is coincidence that halo wars is coming to PC? But hard to justify other games for cost / development time alone. MS should go for revitalizing RTS games and adventure games on PC IMO; because those genres don't do well on consoles.

Your link there was relating to console sales, "approximately four out of every five copies of Battlefield Hardline sold for consoles were for Xbox One or PlayStation 4". It makes no mention of PC anywhere. Do you have any data on how the GTAV PC release compared to the next-gen versions in sales? Because I'd imagine that's a much better number to compare considering the release scheduled and system requirements, the last gen version never saw the light of day for PC, only the next-gen version. Also it's numbers are at 2.8m on Steam with an undisclosed number for retail these days, not 2.5m.

Also do we even have recent Destiny sales numbers? I swear I've never seen a company go through so much linguistic gymnastics to avoid talking about sales in regards to Destiny. Why so vague?