Is PC elitism justifiable?

With elitism I don't mean complaints that some games are poorly optimized for the PC interface but rather the constant complaints that come from certain PC gamers about "consolization", "dumbing down for the console public" and ever outright hate towards consoles and console games.

In some extreme cases, some PC gamers seem to hate certain games just because they are from a console background and look down on consoles and console gamers.

I think such elitism is ridiculous and I wouldn't consider anyone saying or doing this to be a real gamer.

Discuss.

Any sort of elitism is annoying.

You just come off as a whiny b****.

If a product changes in a way you dislike, and you do NOT complain then I'd think there was something wrong with you.

Therefore I do believe most PC "elitism" is just normal behavior. Nothing about it needs justifying.

All elitism is justifiable... it is close-minded arrogance that isn't.

You don't need to be a PC elitist to recognise that consolization is a real problem when it comes to cross platform development. There are plenty of examples.

If a product changes in a way you dislike, and you do NOT complain then I'd think there was something wrong with you.

Therefore I do believe most PC "elitism" is just normal behavior. Nothing about it needs justifying.

Raymundo_Manuel

Well said.

... plus the PC is superior, and we're on a forum here. I prefer PC gaming IRL too, but it's not like I don't enjoy my consoles.

Elitism is annoying. It's quite obvious to people that PC gaming has tons of perks, but rubbing it in to people who can't afford it/don't want it just makes the whole hobby look bad.

I will say though that consolization is somewhat real and very frustrating, yet something that is overblown. Mass Effect 2 not having AA by default isn't going to seriously hamper your gaming experience. TFU requiring a bajillion gigabytes of hardrive space and being generally unoptimized is going to ruin it.

What is with the Fanboy Wars threads, espcially those that single-out PC gamers? Can we just talk about the games instead of making it personal? Elitism is bad in many ways, as I do not think that gaming deserves to a gang turf war.

How would you like it if we turned Halo, Killzone, Mario, Zelda, Uncharted into an MMO that makes you click a thousand times to do something as arbitary as attacking? You'd be all up in arms and angry as hell would you?

Battlefield 3 is 64 player multiplayer on PC and 24 on consoles. PC elitism is justifiable.

How would you like it if we turned Halo, Killzone, Mario, Zelda, Uncharted into an MMO that makes you click a thousand times to do something as arbitary as attacking? You'd be all up in arms and angry as hell would you?

Vesica_Prime

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

[QUOTE="Raymundo_Manuel"]

If a product changes in a way you dislike, and you do NOT complain then I'd think there was something wrong with you.

Therefore I do believe most PC "elitism" is just normal behavior. Nothing about it needs justifying.

psn8214

Well said.

... plus the PC is superior, and we're on a forum here. I prefer PC gaming IRL too, but it's not like I don't enjoy my consoles.

Battlefield 3 is 64 player multiplayer on PC and 24 on consoles. PC elitism is justifiable.

Ninja-Hippo

With elitism I don't mean complaints that some games are poorly optimized for the PC interface but rather the constant complaints that come from certain PC gamers about "consolization", "dumbing down for the console public" and ever outright hate towards consoles and console games.

In some extreme cases, some PC gamers seem to hate certain games just because they are from a console background and look down on consoles and console gamers.

I think such elitism is ridiculous and I wouldn't consider anyone saying or doing this to be a real gamer.

Discuss.

nameless12345

:|

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

Ravensmash

well, I dont think any type of elitism is justified, but PC elitism is especially annoying. I picture it like this

----------------------

Xbox fanboy: the ps3 has a crappy community and cant compete with multiplats! the ps3 is obsolete!

ps3 fanboy: the xbox exclusives are overrated garbage and the console failure rate is ridiculous! the xbox is obsolete!

PC fanboy: all console games are inferior! every console in history is obsolete!

*everyone turns and glares at PC fanboy. all begin throwing nearby objects*

---------------------

Press Start to begin

With elitism I don't mean complaints that some games are poorly optimized for the PC interface but rather the constant complaints that come from certain PC gamers about "consolization", "dumbing down for the console public"

nameless12345

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

GeneralShowzer

If I recall correctly then it was haberman who said that - I can't tell for sure if he was serious, but it's stuff like that which makes me think "..what?"

[QUOTE="GeneralShowzer"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

Ravensmash

If I recall correctly then it was haberman who said that - I can't tell for sure if he was serious, but it's stuff like that which makes me think "..what?"

I don't know. Is PS3 elitism justifiable? How about XBL elitism?

Before Crysis 2 was announced, I had to explain on numerous occasions why Crysis 1 wasn't possible on consoles.

Regardless of how much the graphical quality was scaled, Crysis 1 stores the basic information of a level in its entirety, streaming additional information as needed; based on the players location. This enabled one of the largest scale experiences provided in a FPS, interactive range was limited by real factors such as ability to hit a target; rather than artificial range constraints. The result of this is high ram usage, a all or nothing scenario; making it impossible to fit Crysis scale onto consoles limited memory.

This was backed up by the head of Crytek also giving this explanation. He said if it was to work on consoles, they would have to change to a cell streaming based model. This however would change part of the Crysis 1 experience, the open environment. Cell streaming games load chunks of a level to keep memory usage to a minimum, but your interactivity is limited to within those loaded chunks.

This is a perfectly reasonable, logical and sourced explanation as to why Crysis 1 cannot be ported to consoles. Given that Crysis 2 was converted to a cell streaming mode, and its scale was reduced significantly, it's far to say this is a fact.

However, many times when I gave this explanation in the past; it was met with aggression. Console gamers didn't like the idea of PC being able to do something that they couldn't, which had nothing to with with GPU and CPU performance. Some rationalized that they could simply "optimize" it to work, suggesting that there is some programming trick to magically fit 1GB+ worth of information into consoles 256mb of ram; without losing anything. Others would attack the point of using these large environments, attempting to negate their value; and hence the meaning of consoles not being able to support them. Some even went as far as to say people like me were proven wrong by Crysis 2 coming to consoles, despite its memory management model being changed to cell streaming, supporting the original argument.

But what it always ended up falling down to, was I was elitist for giving; and supporting this explanation. Even though it is essentially a technical fact, something even the head of Crytek himself has backed up, I was a elitist PC gamer for just mentioning it.

It really isn't hard to be called a elitist in PC gaming, you just have to know what you are talking about; and for console gamers to not like what you are saying. If you want to find real elitism, look to the people who reject reality; in favour for what makes their platform look good.

No.

I hate the way many hermits act like console gamers are inferior people.tomarlyn

i thought they where

For my answer, I'm going to refer you guys to the South Park episode entitled, "Smug Alert"

Look it up if you don't remember it or haven't seen it.

I hate the way many hermits act like console gamers are inferior people.tomarlyn

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

Ravensmash

Consoles are fine, but think about it for a second: if the best PC game is 10X "better" (as in objectively agreed upon by the general consensus) than the BEST console game, and apply that same conversion to mediocre games it becomes apparent that on a scale of "epicness" console games are really just bad PC games.

Making the statement true that consoles don't have good games, they only have good console games. (this assumes a relative judgment with a starting point as PC games)

If all you know are console games, this formula doesn't apply.

Elitism is justified, being a dingus to people isn't.

I also love how PC gamers get labled as elit, yet console players (PS3 & 360) **** back and for over the most pathetic things. I mean, what's with the double standard? PS fanboys say 360 holds back PS3, yet they have yet to be called elite? Hell, at least PC gamers have a reason to fell elite :P

I don't know. Is PS3 elitism justifiable? How about XBL elitism?

glez13

Before Crysis 2 was announced, I had to explain on numerous occasions why Crysis 1 wasn't possible on consoles.

Regardless of how much the graphical quality was scaled, Crysis 1 stores the basic information of a level in its entirety, streaming additional information as needed; based on the players location. This enabled one of the largest scale experiences provided in a FPS, interactive range was limited by real factors such as ability to hit a target; rather than artificial range constraints. The result of this is high ram usage, a all or nothing scenario; making it impossible to fit Crysis scale onto consoles limited memory.

This was backed up by the head of Crytek also giving this explanation. He said if it was to work on consoles, they would have to change to a cell streaming based model. This however would change part of the Crysis 1 experience, the open environment. Cell streaming games load chunks of a level to keep memory usage to a minimum, but your interactivity is limited to within those loaded chunks.

This is a perfectly reasonable, logical and sourced explanation as to why Crysis 1 cannot be ported to consoles. Given that Crysis 2 was converted to a cell streaming mode, and its scale was reduced significantly, it's far to say this is a fact.

However, many times when I gave this explanation in the past; it was met with aggression. Console gamers didn't like the idea of PC being able to do something that they couldn't, which had nothing to with with GPU and CPU performance. Some rationalized that they could simply "optimize" it to work, suggesting that there is some programming trick to magically fit 1GB+ worth of information into consoles 256mb of ram; without losing anything. Others would attack the point of using these large environments, attempting to negate their value; and hence the meaning of consoles not being able to support them. Some even went as far as to say people like me were proven wrong by Crysis 2 coming to consoles, despite its memory management model being changed to cell streaming, supporting the original argument.

But what it always ended up falling down to, was I was elitist for giving; and supporting this explanation. Even though it is essentially a technical fact, something even the head of Crytek himself has backed up, I was a elitist PC gamer for just mentioning it.

It really isn't hard to be called a elitist in PC gaming, you just have to know what you are talking about; and for console gamers to not like what you are saying. If you want to find real elitism, look to the people who reject reality; in favour for what makes their platform look good.

AnnoyedDragon

Pretty much this...ppl just provoke PC gamers on purpose then point at us for not being friendly or nice.

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

There's a difference between exaggerating the visible advantages of a system, and making silly claims.

Just earlier today I saw a comment saying that there are no good games on console, only good console games...therefore implying that PC Games are a league above - that's elitism and I can't stand that.

haberman13

Consoles are fine, but think about it for a second: if the best PC game is 10X "better" (as in objectively agreed upon by the general consensus) than the BEST console game, and apply that same conversion to mediocre games it becomes apparent that on a scale of "epicness" console games are really just bad PC games.

Making the statement true that consoles don't have good games, they only have good console games. (this assumes a relative judgment with a starting point as PC games)

If all you know are console games, this formula doesn't apply.

Elitism is justified, being a dingus to people isn't.

:| And people wonder why PC gamers aren't the most popular people here.

I don't know. Is PS3 elitism justifiable? How about XBL elitism?

The elitism could possibly be construed as being justifiable, seeing as how the console industry, as a whole, is holding back the majority of the gaming industry on a technological scale.

I think the term elitism is thrown around way too easily on this board. Naturally there are PC "elitists" on this board, but the term itself is bandied about way too often. Half of the time, you state anything about superior multiplats etc on PC and you are labelled as being "elite". Then you have PS3 vs 360 debates which basically label superiority over minute differences in details :P

[QUOTE="glez13"]

I don't know. Is PS3 elitism justifiable? How about XBL elitism?

DarthBilf

If someone owns a gaming pc the only time they are going to play console is if their rig gets outdated and cant even play at med settings anymore, or if their friends make them play a co-op game or something.

In general a gaming pc is a more enjoyable experience.

Console does have simplicity on its side and some other stuff, but for me the advantages of pc far outweigh the advantages of console.

If someone owns a gaming pc the only time they are going to play console is if their rig gets outdated and cant even play at med settings anymore, or if their friends make them play a co-op game or something.

In general a gaming pc is a more enjoyable experience.

Console does have simplicity on its side and some other stuff, but for me the advantages of pc far outweigh the advantages of console.

edinsftw

Disagree there... As a PC gamer I play on the PS3 quite often... With games like Borderland, Black ops, Batman AA, etc etc.. The console has their own advantages...

I think that's just a vocal minority. I mean a lot of pc users enjoyed Alpha Protocol, and it's menus were somewhat annoying and one minigame was horrible on pc. Most can look past some flaws if they enjoy the game. And look at Crysis 2, a lot of pc users have been having second thoughts about the game after seeing the demo, and dx11 being patched in, etc.

[QUOTE="DarthBilf"][QUOTE="glez13"]

I don't know. Is PS3 elitism justifiable? How about XBL elitism?

tomarlyn

I used to be able to glide easily between Goldeneye, Halo, and Counterstrike many years ago. Back when I was bad at using mouse/keyboard.

However, the skill ceiling for a mouse/keyboard is far greater than that of a controller, so as I got better with that I found myself unable to enjoy the slow, clumsy dual analog setup for FPS games nowadays.

You acknowldege PC gamers complaints? They're just bitter and I'm sorry but I don't have time for bitter annoying people who like to repeat the same line over and over again.

If someone owns a gaming pc the only time they are going to play console is if their rig gets outdated and cant even play at med settings anymore, or if their friends make them play a co-op game or something.

In general a gaming pc is a more enjoyable experience.

Console does have simplicity on its side and some other stuff, but for me the advantages of pc far outweigh the advantages of console.

edinsftw

I think that, despite of the appearances, most people here just loves games and really havea connection to their gaming background even the so-called elitists. Perhaps because the PC plataform as we know it is in some ways disappearing our resentness shows a bit more (specially with this Crysis 2 fiasco). However the so called consolization is a problem to be recognized. Inovation and creativity, as well as depth in the games have taken a nose dive theses last years and it shows even more in the PC. If you adventure yourself into PS3 or 360 forums it is also a problem that is taking toll over some gamers out there.

Before Crysis 2 was announced, I had to explain on numerous occasions why Crysis 1 wasn't possible on consoles.

Regardless of how much the graphical quality was scaled, Crysis 1 stores the basic information of a level in its entirety, streaming additional information as needed; based on the players location. This enabled one of the largest scale experiences provided in a FPS, interactive range was limited by real factors such as ability to hit a target; rather than artificial range constraints. The result of this is high ram usage, a all or nothing scenario; making it impossible to fit Crysis scale onto consoles limited memory.

This was backed up by the head of Crytek also giving this explanation. He said if it was to work on consoles, they would have to change to a cell streaming based model. This however would change part of the Crysis 1 experience, the open environment. Cell streaming games load chunks of a level to keep memory usage to a minimum, but your interactivity is limited to within those loaded chunks.

This is a perfectly reasonable, logical and sourced explanation as to why Crysis 1 cannot be ported to consoles. Given that Crysis 2 was converted to a cell streaming mode, and its scale was reduced significantly, it's far to say this is a fact.

However, many times when I gave this explanation in the past; it was met with aggression. Console gamers didn't like the idea of PC being able to do something that they couldn't, which had nothing to with with GPU and CPU performance. Some rationalized that they could simply "optimize" it to work, suggesting that there is some programming trick to magically fit 1GB+ worth of information into consoles 256mb of ram; without losing anything. Others would attack the point of using these large environments, attempting to negate their value; and hence the meaning of consoles not being able to support them. Some even went as far as to say people like me were proven wrong by Crysis 2 coming to consoles, despite its memory management model being changed to cell streaming, supporting the original argument.

But what it always ended up falling down to, was I was elitist for giving; and supporting this explanation. Even though it is essentially a technical fact, something even the head of Crytek himself has backed up, I was a elitist PC gamer for just mentioning it.

It really isn't hard to be called a elitist in PC gaming, you just have to know what you are talking about; and for console gamers to not like what you are saying. If you want to find real elitism, look to the people who reject reality; in favour for what makes their platform look good.

AnnoyedDragon