Support NeoGAF

[CSJ]

Their latest attempt is Argo, 5v5, graphically mediocre and could potentially run superbly on consoles, but nope!

Why?

Your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the topic ends the discussion here, this is a very CPU dependant game and your assumption that "graphics" are the only thing that matter about being able to run or not on a console is wrong.
It'd be like asking for Digital Combat Simulator products to run on a console.

Poorly optimised engine is the word your looking for.

Who else are making games like this and make it run well?
Go on, with support of over 100 people in a relatively small area on user hosted dedicated servers with all those physics calculations and/or AI.

Seems you made this post to spout nonsense and shake your fist at it instead of doing a little bit of research.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Well, with Arma, the control scheme of the game is way too complex for consoles and the audience probably isn't there. And their games are generally demanding, especially for CPU, even when their graphics aren't high end.

Argo is an Arma 3 mod, and I can't see a reasonable Arma port on consoles that doesn't make so many sacrifices that it becomes pointless. If you want this type of game, PC is probably where you wanna be.

Or the OP could just list a game or two they've done? I would argue most people don't know them like bungie or naughty dog or you know, actually famous developers.

 

[horkrux]

Who else are making games like this and make it run well?
Go on, with support of over 100 people in a relatively small area on user hosted dedicated servers with all those physics calculations and/or AI.

Seems you made this post to spout nonsense and shake your fist at it instead of doing a little bit of research.

Isn't Arma still heavily single-threaded? If yes, then he certainly isn't wrong and the games are poorly optimized. I don't think that's the reason why we're not seeing the games on console though.

I've bought Operation Flashpoint for the OG Xbox out of curiousity not too long ago and I have to say that it's certainly playable, at least in the beginning (which might change later on when you take control of your own squads idk). I simply think there is little to no audience for these games on console.

 

[Turin Turambar]

Let's see:

-Gameplay designed to pinpoint accuracy at far away target.
-Seeing enemies hundreds of meters away (so there are only a pair of pixels) in a tv (that usually is placed further away from the player).
-~70 keys in a controller.
-Possible the most cpu demanding and especially single threaded game in the weak cpus used by consoles.
-Ambition and freedom over 'polish the product' philosophy.
-Modding as one of the core concepts that put them on the map in less synergistic modding platforms.

 

[nynt9]

Or the OP could just list a game or two they've done? I would argue most people don't know them like bungie or naughty dog or you know, actually famous developers.

I mean, instead of shitposting one could just google, if they care enough to post. If they don't care, why post? It's just shitposting acting like they're above BI. Just because a dev doesn't make AAAA blockbuster games with a marketing budget of a small country doesn't mean their games are invalid.

Your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the topic ends the discussion here, this is a very CPU dependant game and your assumption that "graphics" are the only thing that matter about being able to run or not on a console is wrong.
It'd be like asking for Digital Combat Simulator products to run on a console.

Who else are making games like this and make it run well?
Go on, with support of over 100 people in a relatively small area on user hosted dedicated servers with all those physics calculations and/or AI.

Seems you made this post to spout nonsense and shake your fist at it instead of doing a little bit of research.

I think people's lack of familiarity with simulation heavy games betrays them here. Like you said, these games are more complex than they look.

 

[Akronis]

They're engine is pure trash and getting it to run on console hardware would be a nightmare for them. Their games barely perform well on pc.

You literally have 0 idea what you're talking about.

Every single person that says "hurr durr engine sucks" is because they exclusively play on mp scenarios that have scripts written that are shit. A properly scripted mp scenario runs perfectly fine.

 

[Turin Turambar]

Isn't Arma still heavily single-threaded? If yes, then he certainly isn't wrong and the games are poorly optimized.

It isn't that easy. Bigger, more complex, more interactive, dependency-filled software is harder to multi-thead than others.
And you need a bigger and more complex codebase to do all the things that Arma 3 does.

In Arma 3, the renderer is actually decently optimized. Go to the editor, put yourself in the world, and it looks beautiful and you get easily 60 fps, with super far way rendering distance. It's when you put 10 more players and 75 AI entities when performance falls.

 

[spindoctor]

Isn't Arma still heavily single-threaded? If yes, then he certainly isn't wrong and the games are poorly optimized.

Yes, of course. Those silly devs. Why don't they just press the "enable multithreaded support" button in their editor and then their game will stop being poorly optimized amirite?

 

[Cuningas de Häme]

You want one of the most complex milsim games to come to consoles? The audience is not there. Console gaming is compromise gaming, sadly but true. Controller is only average at most when playing anything else than 3d person/racing/sports.

I really hope that at least some of the PC developers stay on PC, because going to console means that PC versions too will get more console-like gameplay (aka simpler), because there is not a whole lot of devs who can make completely separate games for different platforms. Case in point, Battlefield. When it went to consoles, PC version got a lot more simple and console-like pew pewing.

PC offers so much more customisation and allows so much more complex things to happen in the game. UI is the first one that comes to mind where PC offers immediately better experience. For example Skyrim, that game needed a mod to bring a good UI for PC. It had an awful console menu before that, made for controller.

EDIT. And mods, that alone should be a hint enough...