potatohead
Member
PCMR alive and well, I see.
Nah he is just childish as fuck. Most PC Gamers aren't elitist like that. Just the vocal minority.
PCMR alive and well, I see.
Nah he is just childish as fuck. Most PC Gamers aren't elitist like that. Just the vocal minority.
Well, I am primarily a PC gamer, and I'd say it makes reading that kind of crap extra aggravating.
Man, this invisible war you're fighting in sure is important. It's definitely other people that are childish and not the person getting riled up on where people prefer to play VIDEO GAMES (you do know where you are, right?).Heaver forfends you have to read something you don't like. Or, gasp, someone else's opinion. Grow up.
How about both of you stop hurling insults like you're 12 over motherfucking VIDEO GAMES. And join the conversation.
Well, I am primarily a PC gamer, and I'd say it makes reading that kind of crap extra aggravating.
As someone that worked on a PC Exclusive game. Shit PC hardware is holding developers back... making sure a game runs on your grandma's laptop limits the shit out of you.
I'm not sure of anyone that focuses solely on top of the line hardware. If you did that, your game would never come out because by the time you are done, it'd be outdated again.
Newsflash: current-gen consoles are now and have always been holding the gaming industry back. And they'll continue to do so until the law of diminishing returns slows down gains in GPU and CPU technology.
Man, this invisible war you're fighting in sure is important. It's definitely other people that are childish and not the person getting riled up on where people prefer to play VIDEO GAMES (you do know where you are, right?).
What's interesting is I've always been interested in budget PC's, or using yesterday's used parts. The PS4 and Xb0 are pretty good at what they do - simple, straightforward game-on-TV boxes. I approve of that.
PC is in an interesting place. Most of the games that set a PC apart from the console exclusives are the choices that are enabled on the open system. That means weird input options, higher framerates or high resolutions at the expense of graphical fidelity, mods, or a lot of releases that just wouldn't make the cut through the console gatekeeper. So I don't really agree with the developer in the article in regard to holding gamers back - what we've seen on PC is a culture that's built on top of each game. The same culture tends to build on console games too, but without the open platform it just doesn't stick around as long.
There's certainly some games that aren't possible on consoles right now - anything involving heavily simulation and CPU cycles. But I've thought that we've reached the point where any gameplay was possible on any modern platform quite a while ago, and I still think we're there. Even the Xbox 360 received a playable and largely intact port of Crysis 1, which I don't think I've seen too many shooters ever top in terms of systematic complexity.
Next-gen will have a lot to sell us on. I do like playing my games on PC at 60 fps with special ultra settings, but it's not like those will be enough for those who play the grandest AAA games. I'm sure the industry will scale up again whenever the PS5 comes around, but until then I'll enjoy the AF x16 and the fancy effects I can't pronounce or spell, even if it's only a marginal upgrade over the console versions. That's not really why I play on PC primarily though.
My games sure did.I could probably format my hard drive, load windows, download drivers and a sizable game in 2 hours. Yesterday I updated my bios and it took me less than 15 mins. If it takes hours to update drivers and "settings" you got issues.
Can someone clarify me. I don't understand his statement.
I don't want to sound like a 12-year old child but X1 is way less powerful than PS4, we all know this. How can he bitch about the PS4 but not refering to X1?
PS4 has been praised at launch for the power... I don't understand.
Next half step should or will drop support for the base models.
Most people here think he was being more general - he meant consoles in general, it just so happens the console nearby was a PS4. He would have pointed at an Xbone if that had been handy instead.
My guess is he was just frustrated with the difficulty in getting his game to run well on console hardware. I'm sure they'll figure out what they have to optimize to get where they need to get to eventually.
As a person who can only afford to buy mid-range PC each time... Thank god for PS4 being weak. Sony is truly #4theMidRangePCGamers.
Also my PC is five years old and holding up just fine thankyou.
Can't say I've seen anything more technically impressive than Horizon or UC4, so I'm not sure why this matters.
I never said either of those games were the best looking or best playing. Please do not put words in my mouth. The only thing I said is that they were better looking than the witcher 3 which isn't an accomplishment because of how average the game looks.
Richard Huddy said:We often have at least ten times as much horsepower as an Xbox 360 or a PS3 in a high-end graphics card, yet it's very clear that the games don't look ten times as good. To a significant extent, that's because, one way or another, for good reasons and bad – mostly good, DirectX is getting in the way."
John Carmack said:But the downside is, despite a high-end PC being ten times as powerful as the consoles, we suffer a lot from API overhead. Because of the way id Tech 5 works, where we're breaking it up into so many texture pieces and uploads, on the consoles we're just like, I'm going to stick this in that memory right there and we just go do it
Yeah, ultimately its all sleight of hand and trickery, and a balancing act to materialize a game's vision within any platform and market and time and budget constraints. That some games don't pull it off doesn't often lead me to think that the hardware is the culprit.There's a give and take and the game knows how to exploit it's style to do crazy shit with shaders and lighting.
Yea well whatever you say. I don't share your view point and I guess you'll have to deal with it? Probably not based on your response.I mean... telling that HZD is top tier and saying Witcher 3 on Ultra settings on PC is "avarage" is such a bullshit. I can't take what you're saying seriously... for real.
AMD's Richard Huddy and separately, John Carmack in 2011 talking about ~5 year old PS3 and Xbox 360 vs high-end PC.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-21-pcs-have-10x-console-horsepower-amd
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-16-john-carmack-the-future-now-interview
As someone that worked on a PC Exclusive game. Shit PC hardware is holding developers back... making sure a game runs on your grandma's laptop limits the shit out of you.
I'm not sure of anyone that focuses solely on top of the line hardware. If you did that, your game would never come out because by the time you are done, it'd be outdated again.
Base PS4?
OG Xbone?
I'm confused. Is this game not meant to run on these systems? Article is weird.
The best game released this year was designed for the ancient Wii U hardware.
The best selling game of this generation once ran on an Xbox 360.
The only thing holding developers back is their reliance on tech and total lack of ambition in every other area.
Yea well whatever you say. I don't share your view point and I guess you'll have to deal with it? Probably not based on your response.
It just can't be some stupid, on rails action adventure game with whack a mole third person shooter mechanics and juvenile writing. PC gamers aren't going to buy that.
Heaver forfends you have to read something you don't like. Or, gasp, someone else's opinion. Grow up.
How about both of you stop hurling insults like you're 12 over VIDEO GAMES. And join the conversation instead.
One guy called me a PCMR elitist which is bannable, by the way, because I said PC gamers probably wouldn't like your typicla AAA action adventure console exclusive. Somehting borne out by sales stats over and over again.
And i'm childish for teling them to stop calling people names, and maybe say somethign intelligent?
And I'm obvisouly not getting riled up. What would that even entail? But that's the usual tactic of trolls who have nothing to contribute to the discussion and just want to derail.
Proclaim anyone they don't agree wiht is angry.
The best game released this year was designed for the ancient Wii U hardware.
The best selling game of this generation once ran on an Xbox 360.
The only thing holding developers back is their reliance on tech and total lack of ambition in every other area.
He [Fares] isn't wrong, but for the type of game he's trying to make, consoles are a necessary evil. Console hardware "holds back" the industry on the technical level, but it's still the driver or sales for the type of games we're talking about. 2015 total PC digital game sales were $25.1B. Of that, $17B was from f2p MMOs, and social network games accounted for another $8B. Add those up and you see the remaining sales figures for "AAA games" including COD, BF, FF, AC and every other franchise you can name are but a sliver of total sales and a fraction of sales on console. In that same year digital sales on console were $4B.
Unfortunately no breakdown was given as to how much of that f2p MMOs accounted for, but assumably much less than PC as the majority of and the biggest f2p games are not on console (obviously console has it's share: Warframe, FFXIV, Smite, World of Tanks, etc). The majority of console games sales still comes from physical media though, a market that is a barren wasteland for PC. So yeah, console hardware holds games back but it also kind of funds a significant share of the AAA market, probably in large part because console hardware is cheaper and thus less powerful.
These kinds of threads always gets so ugly :/
Wasn't this said in the past generation of consoles as well, yet we got games like God of War3, Uncharted 2,3, The Last of Us, that looked infreakingcredible!
Did a 12 year old write this?
Sorry, when I talk about gameplay, I'm referring to the mechanical stuff that players interact with. Does steep offer a mechanically superior experience to skate or ssx? My answer to that is no. I also don't buy the idea of large worlds vs full worlds and for the most part, neither do consumers. For the most part, a game's player base tends to shrink significantly after about 3 months which means that these games are not offering deep enough gameplay to engage the players. I also don't ascribe to the belief of "making your own fun". When a developer says that, it's usually a signal that the game is poorly designed. GTA V is both a large and full world. It's known as a game that allows you to make your own fun and yet it's exceptionally designed to keep players engaged. Making your own fun means the developers provided the players with tools that link together in a way that makes sense in the game world.Edit:
This is Untrue. The proof of this is Ubisoft's Steep which essentially fulfills the promise of what an open world Mirrors Edge game should be. A Large open high fidelity platforming sandbox where you can either follow tightly scripted missions or enjoy making you own path/own fun. Its a not a new gameplay idea, we had skate last gen. Yet Steep is the best itteration this generation and uses the extra power of modern consoles to make the world larger and more detailed. In a place where atmosphere is important, this is greatly appreciated. Yet Steep for all its positives is noticeably empty and is pretty light on snow physics.
This is the issue. Right now Devs can either make large empty worlds or they can make full worlds. This directly effects gameplay. For instance Steep's chairlift is a static object. With more CPU power it could be in motion. Going from static platforms to moving platforms in a platformer is a pretty big "gameplay" change.
That shit is some way outdated stuff man.
We're talking DX9 level stuff. It's really not releveant to modern PC gaming.
Jesus if that is an excerpt from the article, I'm glad I saw your post before clicking on it to read. That is an abomination of the English language.