Uh... yeah. So, consoles told us how to think. Seriously though, I admire his honesty, but it doesn't look good for recent trends in PC devs running the console mills. I'm starting to think that in order to make "the business" take PC gaming more seriously, we're all going to have to take extra jobs and buy 10 copies of each game we like. Oh, and 5 copies of games you don't like. Plus, make sure you go on metacritic and score 10 everytime. On a more positive note, I'm glad there is no multiplayer. I know I don't enjoy games like this with multiplayer and co-op so ten thumbs up for that... We don't want WoW shitting all over our balls. Also, he's right about the view points for this game. I mostly play in first person and only change views to look at how cool I am or to spruce up a walk in the park. Admittedly, it could be that they are doing lovely graphical features on the consoles via different techniques to the PC, but because I don't know what those are, or what I'm talking about in even the vaguest sense, that's all just conjecture.
He quotes ... "Our graphics work centers around doing things that will look the same regardless of platform, and sometimes that implementation will be different on the 360, PS3, and PC." That's not good news really unless they have managed to find some way of replicating high end PC graphics in the Xbox. It's not surprising though. Unfortunately the mass market is consoles, so publishers are going to go for that - most businesses would aim for that with only some aiming for the niche market exclusively (which the PC only market is becoming). I don't think there is anything that can be done about it though unless High End PCs start to sell better than consoles - which is unlikely. There is also a perception in the games industry that a PC game is a more easily pirated media - to which there is some truth - maybe this perception will change as services like Steam become the norm and physical media dies out. On a less depressing note, I would actually like to see some kind of multiplayer (or at least drop-in co-op). Me and a mate both played Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Fallout NV at the same time and it would have been great to meet up occaisionally to complete a quest. I can see the difficulties as it is story based and you may be at a different point in the story, but it would be good to see some sort of co-operative element. Putting too much multiplayer in takes it dangerously close to traditional MMORPGs though and I can see why they want to avoid that. I think PVP would be rubbish though. Even so, the game is looking good and as long as the gameplay is spot on, I will forgive them not giving me a DX11 visual orgasm.
I have no friends. So online gaming isn't for me. Or is that the other way round? I forget how this works. Essentially though, it does look better than the last betheseda outings. Although, it should though right? Or should I go back to a gt8800? Dragons!
Lol - these are actually real live friends that I actually know (I am sure you have some of those!). The 8800 was a great card - my spare rig has a pair of them in SLI and they still chew up most things you throw at them! In fact they run Crysis 2 better than my HD5970 OC!!
If this is the attitude game devs are going to take then this time really will mark the slow but final demise of PC gaming. If graphics are updated not when new hardware exists, but when a certain percentage of the market (which is massively dominated by consoles) has a certain degree of hardware, then the advantage of having an expensive graphics card, or lots of ram, or whatever, fades. I have noticed this increasingly in recent years. It used to be that if your graphics card was more than a couple of years old it was nigh on useless. I'm running an 8800GTS (a 2006 card - 1 year newer than the 360), and the need to upgrade has only finally now made itself even partially felt since I've upgraded to a 1920x1080 monitor. I do wonder if hardware manufacturers like Nvidia, ATi, etc. will club together in order to try to entice game devs into making the most of their brand new awesome hardware, but I can't see it happening. Hardware manufacturers make their money off the mid-range. There's simply going to be less incentive to advance, the march of graphics tech will slow, and the graphics manufacturers will make the same chip for the same massive console manufacturer for a decade at a time, instead of having to release 50-100 different cards which are bought by a fraction of the number of people who buy consoles in that same time. Our platform is dying. Sales are down, even sites that used to be bastions of the PC gamer and modder like Bit-tech are now primarily reviewing multi-platform big-name games on console. We are 10% of the market in money terms, and we shrink everyday. It's a shame, because the PC allows for the very best in terms of graphics and technology, something no console will ever offer. PC's have also regularly seen games with unrivaled depth, complexity, and maturity - something I've noticed the steady decline of in recent years, especially with multi-platform games. I wouldn't really say I resent consoles, console gamers, or console developers. I can understand the economics behind it, the motivations. I just think most console gamers want something different than what most PC gamers want, but we're effectively now just getting sloppily converted games and the odd title made just for us. Regarding Skyrim, I'm adding it to my list (which now includes it, and Deus Ex HR) of make-or-break games for the year. I've been what most would describe as a hardcore gamer for 21 years now, but if Skyrim and Human Revolution suck, I think I'm just going to call it a day on gaming. In fact, I think PC gaming will have called a day on itself.
I for one honestly dont mind that they are not developing games for the latest hardware, because it saves money. As long as Skyrim does not end up being a turdtastic console port like most games seem to be these days then i doubt anyone will care too much. Wish developers did not feel like they have to release a game across all platforms on the same day, they can release first on console, and spend a little extra time to make it run ideally on a PC version. I wouldnt mind waiting a few weeks if it means getting a game that is not blatantly a lazy console port
For me, PC gaming is all about the lower budget games, the games like Galactic Civilisation II and Uplink. Where developers focus on the gameplay rather than spend a huge amount of time and money on having the best cutting edge graphics. I'm not really fussed at all about the graphics, remember Deus Ex and Neverwinter Nights? Both developed for PC, both had bad graphics for their time, both well received and regarded as classics by fans. So I'm not really bothered about the lack of DX11 support. I don't think consoles holding back PC graphics has anything to do with what's killing PC gaming (and I think PC graphics are also being held back by a previously mentioned point, most people buy mid range, developers have to make sure their game will play on a card that was mid range a few years ago if they want to get a big PC audience, because not everyone has the disposable income to upgrade to the best card every year).
It's always like this. During the height of the xbox and the PS2, PC games weren't florishing as well as they were. It's a matter of timing, and at one point the new consoles will have to be replaced. Although whatever supercedes them is still a mystery.
Although, what's happened is, as the PS3 and 360 have, along with a few years of dev tools and workarounds, progressed to the level of the G80 cards top end, which are late 2006 cards, around when the 360 was out and the PS3 was fresh. So, midrange cards have, for the last 4 years only had to be as powerful as a 8800GT. It's swings and roundabouts, as that means gfx cards manufacturers haven't had the pressure on to make the ultra fast cards; pc gaming should benefit from the very same things consoles gain from. So yeah, it's kind of down to the indie markets or the long term PC devs, like Valve. It's just a shame that the reality is that the market is dwindling despite booming also. Consoles are taking up the indie devs with live and PSN, let alone phones. Maybe though, we've got it wrong about Betheseda. Maybe they just want to make the best PC game they can without commiting to features they've yet to try implement. TBH, the trailers look a bit far off what consoles can achieve already. I agree with this too. It seems many games aren't what they should be. For instance, Mass Effect: I love it, but it's not big enough. You supposed to be able to roam the galaxy, but you feel really confined and the RPG aspect doesn't quite feel as rewarding as a game like Deus Ex, let alone the shroud of secrets and conspiracy. Alien races don't seem to have colourful enough stories either, although that might have been the point; be ignorant as Humans are a new race in the community. However, you just didn't get any or enough chances to explore the possibility that they had culture and wonder, rather just collecting text for a journal, even if I did enjoy that. Still Deus Ex and MassEffect are good eamples of games were graphics don't matter as much as a mature story. Morrowind is one of favourite RPGs... it felt like there was so much exploration to do. I hope Skyrim holds up to this as I didn't get to play Oblivion really.
I can't see consoles ever completely wiping out PC gaming. Console gaming has been going on just as long as PC gaming. Some genre's will always suit PCs more than they will ever with consoles. MMORPG's are a big industry and you can't deny that they will only really work on a PC. Other games that will also be forever better on a PC are RTS games and first person shooters just seem to work so much better with a mouse and keyboard. Whether companies actively support PC gaming will always be a sticking point, but a game isn't just about the graphics, the gameplay is the most important thing for me. Betheseda certainly seem to want to support consoles more at the moment but you still know you will get an excellent PC game. Games will always look better on PC whether they were pushed to suit PCs or not. It's a big shame about Crysis 2 though, Crytek really seemed like a PC supporting company. Guess money talks, and there is a much bigger audience for console gaming.
Short memory, eh? In the first couple years of a next gen console they're hugely competitive. They're also hugely beneficial to the graphics hardware market and visual quality of games. Since new platforms are required to play new games most console gamers suddenly surge forward over the course of a few months and developers are free to make games equivalent to that hardware. This puts the burden on PC gamers to meet the demands of the new console. At that point you're seeing just the opposite as developers try to make things run as evenly as they can since not every PC gamer will have just bought a new $300 video card to match the consoles. It's also very tough convincing new gamers to go with a PC during these times, but that's beside the point.
PC gaming will surge like it does every console life cycle. Near it's end. Remember 2005-2006? When the PC market showed how capable it was again? And then 2007-2008, when the bar was pushed because the PC now had to compete with consoles? I say give it 2-3 more years until no more compromises can be made.
Well it can't be until games reach that point in the PS2. Where even the most amount of optimization becomes negligible. That or when people want native 1080p.
lol Too true. My PS3 hardly ever plays a game at 1080p, mostly 720p and, if that even. Meanwhile, my PC is happy to play at 1680x1050 in most games with vsync on at mostly maxed out settings. Visuals aren't everything, put playability sometimes benefits from the power.
The funny thing most PS3 games aren't even 720p native but 1152x??? upscaled. Notwithstanding it's still not too bad, but it's starting to show it's age. Mind you as long as the gameplay's solid and smooth I can deal with it. Although it's aslways fun to have that extra view distance and such.
The problem with PC gaming is who takes responsibility? for getting it to run smootly? AMD? Nvidia? thee developers themselves? Microsoft? PC gaming has many advantages if only developers would take the time to implement them properly, even if it means waiting 2 months extra. What Im talking about is:- 1) Higer res/eyefinity 2) AA 3) Higher frames per second Those are 3 graphics related and can make a meh engine look decent. Add in texture mods and PC gaming still is the elite gaming platform and will never loose that (unless its completely locked down and look how well thats going for sony). The problem is still how takes responsibility? Developers are lazy and just porting a game over then AMD and Nvidia "optimise it" and get extra features working. Then the development community produces mods. The real problem with PC gaming is the original game developers refuse to take control of their product and force other people to (and in the case of STALKER, Oblivion and to an extent fallout the community done a better job) the other side is mod community vs DLC. Mods kill the need for DLC really.
Well you also have to look at the companies that don't allow mods. Which make a crappy game immobile. I mean look at Far Cry 2, modders paradise. But alas there was no mods to be made. Shame too.
Or the opposite with something like Counter Strike: Source. Still one of Steam's most purchased and played games despite being old. Certainly no coincidence that it's also incredibly easy to mod and has a huge modding community behind it. It's not like the game was bad and modders saved it, it's simply a game that was a hit that people made even better or changed to their own uses. There really are few games where mods have a negative effect (if any?). Mods don't have to directly compete with DLC either, they just force it to be at a higher standard. Afterall, this is unpaid modders versus professional developers. No more charging $15 for some maps that the community can make with a decent SDK.
There's the hitch, no one wants to compete. (except bethdesa who know that if they stopped the modding community their offices would be lit on fire). In an ideal world, every game would have a moddable SDK and an editor akin to the Fallout 3 editor or CryEdit, but alas that isn't the case. I mean after all, who wouldn't want to add a few things to assassin's creed? Or throw in more cars for GRID?
