You made a thread just in my honor since we're debating this in other threads....and sympathetic b/c it's sad that mods would let this sort of thing go.
I mean...to let someone make threads solely for the purpose of manipulation.
Again...the kinds of games that make it on PC are NOT the average game. So in your thread I'll spill out the logistics like I have in the other threads.
MOBAs, F2P, and MMOs make up all that gaming revenu guys like to lump up together and say "PC makes more money".....yeah....for 3 types of games.
Steam doesn't release it's sales so you can't go by that figure.
Also, if PC gaming was profitable for the average dev/publisher.....then they wouldn't constantly go to console to sell games. Rockstar is a prime example. They basically look at PC gaming as an afterthought....if they thought it was worth it to release GTA V on PC ....they would have done it....but instead....
..the "master race" has to wait....unlike the "peasants".
Look at CDPR....they're all about PC gaming, right...and PC gamers generally speaking love them to death. Yet....they went to console for the second game....and waiting to put it on console b/c such things had to be tweaked and added....so, basically the PC crowd did beta testing.
Master race....seems you guys might not even get GTA V.
Which would suck....b/c I don't want anyone not to play a game they want to play....but, wow....would it say so much without speaking a word.
id wager at least 700 million of that 711 million are just playing fb games or f2p crap. the pc market for non f2p/fb games is a fucking fraction of the console market.
PC MASTER RACE.....the only master race to constantly beg for console exclusives.
lawl
So much begging going on for DR3, Ryse, Knack, infamous, killzone, the order, sunset overdrive, and so on.
GTA is a dumb example. Anyone with a brain knew it would could latter, but people got scared, probably because of RDR, which is a terrible example in itself since even the console versions where nearly unplayable due to bug overload, much less a pc version.
I even start guessing it would be revealed at E3 along side the next gen version. Oh, i was right.
There's always petitions and "begging" for games on ones platform, like Bloorborne and Halo MCC on PC, Titanfall on PS4, etc.
Don't remember any "begging" for Castlevania LOS, MK9, MGR, MGS V, and many others on PC. But, oh look, they're all coming to stteam, because every developer and publisher wants their games on pc nowadays.
I'm betting FF XV comes too, before launch. Only Destiny remains has the odd man out. The exception, not the rule.
Whats wrong with wanting has many games on pc as possible? Nobody is crying over these games not coming, like Destiny. But not having to buy a console to play multiplatform console exclusives is better.
7 TFlops for 1080 to 100% max current games out 60 FPS constant. If Maxwell doesn't suck like it's rumored it will... Then 1080 gaming is done and no longer need to upgrade.
4k is 4 times 1080. So... 7 x 4 = 28 Tflops. Round it up to about 32 for diminishing returns... Then you'll have enough power for 60 FPS 100% maxed.
After Nvidia Pascal, is when the be all end all GPU will come. Pascal is scheduled for 2016 and 2 years a new arc comes. So 2018 is when the mighty GPU comes to smash 4k into the ground.
If you game at a desk anything beyond 2k is a waste. 4k is just e-peen for anyone at a desk that sits 3 or less feet from their monitor.
Thing is Windows, drivers and durability are the 3 things that will drive people to spend money on an already sufficient PC.
7 TFlops for 1080 to 100% max current games out 60 FPS constant. If Maxwell doesn't suck like it's rumored it will... Then 1080 gaming is done and no longer need to upgrade.
4k is 4 times 1080. So... 7 x 4 = 28 Tflops. Round it up to about 32 for diminishing returns... Then you'll have enough power for 60 FPS 100% maxed.
After Nvidia Pascal, is when the be all end all GPU will come. Pascal is scheduled for 2016 and 2 years a new arc comes. So 2018 is when the mighty GPU comes to smash 4k into the ground.
If you game at a desk anything beyond 2k is a waste. 4k is just e-peen for anyone at a desk that sits 3 or less feet from their monitor.
Thing is Windows, drivers and durability are the 3 things that will drive people to spend money on an already sufficient PC.
Nonsense, 1080p is not the limit. There's high resolution VR, multiple monitors, and of course extremely demanding games that will certainly warrant upgrades in the future, regardless of where the hardware is.
PC MASTER RACE.....the only master race to constantly beg for console exclusives.
lawl
Why is that a bad thing?
It's better than the console users begging and making death threats to companies for making games multi-plat.
I'm not denying that console gamers....a very small minority, do that....but that doesn't deny the fact that the "master race" is always asking for console exclusives to come to PC.
And besides....I'm sure some bad stuff that was going on during the ME3 fiasco was from PC gamers.
Either way...sure, you're right....but PC ppl just hack into networks and screw us all....and specifically they pirate to hell and back. Sure there are non legit consoles....but that sort of thing is no where near the piracy problem on PC.
7 TFlops for 1080 to 100% max current games out 60 FPS constant. If Maxwell doesn't suck like it's rumored it will... Then 1080 gaming is done and no longer need to upgrade.
4k is 4 times 1080. So... 7 x 4 = 28 Tflops. Round it up to about 32 for diminishing returns... Then you'll have enough power for 60 FPS 100% maxed.
After Nvidia Pascal, is when the be all end all GPU will come. Pascal is scheduled for 2016 and 2 years a new arc comes. So 2018 is when the mighty GPU comes to smash 4k into the ground.
If you game at a desk anything beyond 2k is a waste. 4k is just e-peen for anyone at a desk that sits 3 or less feet from their monitor.
Thing is Windows, drivers and durability are the 3 things that will drive people to spend money on an already sufficient PC.
Games that don't require a very powerful hardware are bound to sell very well. It's like mobile gaming everybody can afford it. I highly doubt even half of those people have a robust hardware.
Show me a graphically demanding game that sold nearly as good as those games and I will admit I lost the argument.
Games that don't require a very powerful hardware are bound to sell very well. It's like mobile gaming everybody can afford it. I highly doubt even half of those people have a robust hardware.
Show me a graphically demanding game that sold nearly as good as those games and I will admit I lost the argument.
- Console gamers when PC has better graphics than their games: "Bu bu but graphics don't matter, only gameplay matters"
- Console gamers when PC makes WAY more money than consoles with games that have amazing gameplay : "Bu bu but those games have bad graphics so they don't count"
It's always funny how you guys decide what counts and what doesn't.
First off I never said that, secondly I think PC gaming is superior for hundreds of reasons. But this is an unfair comparison. Unlike consoles laptops and desktops are an essential part of our day to day lives much like cellphones. PCs can do numerous things and also play video games where as console are mainly designed to play video games.
Those games have poor graphical fidelity which means everybody can play them with their crappy laptops.
Games that don't require a very powerful hardware are bound to sell very well. It's like mobile gaming everybody can afford it. I highly doubt even half of those people have a robust hardware.
Show me a graphically demanding game that sold nearly as good as those games and I will admit I lost the argument.
- Console gamers when PC has better graphics than their games: "Bu bu but graphics don't matter, only gameplay matters"
- Console gamers when PC makes WAY more money than consoles with games that have amazing gameplay : "Bu bu but those games have bad graphics so they don't count"
It's always funny how you guys decide what counts and what doesn't.
You need a little common sense....especially for someone declaring to be the "walloftruth".
You really think that many ppl are hardcore PC gamers? Do you really expect me to fucking take that for granted....you're out of your fucking mind.
So many of those polls or surveys or whatever take facebook games and the like into account.
And, yes, I can hear the bullshit now..."those games are on PC, dur....why aren't they PC gamers...durrrr."....b/c genius they don't pertain to the group in discussion.
Fucking Aunt Susy doesn't give 2 shits about whether or not Dark Souls is coming to PC.
King of multiplayer online gaming. That's pretty much where most of their profit is made. Games like League of Legends, DOTA2, WoW, World of Tanks, etc.. is where they are making those billions. If game consoles ever tap into that market, they will grow as well. We already see it in games like CoD, BF and FFXIV.
They shoulda had a metacritic, gamespot, and gameranking list too showing PC has the most aaa-aa games every gen.
PC doesn't have generations, so I'm not sure how they would show that. Also the PC released 100's of more games then game consoles do each year, so there is more of a chance they will have more "AAA" & "AA" games because they release more games in total. If the PC releases 3000 games in one year and game consoles release 1000 games in the same year there's obviously going to be more "AAA" and more "AA" games released on the PC. If game consoles were an open platform like the PC it would be a different story. "Games 101" class is over.
"League of Legends, DOTA2, WoW, World of Tanks, etc.. is where they are making those billions. If game consoles ever tap into that market, they will grow as well."
How could they?
World of Tanks is already on game consoles and they added Minecraft which onsold the PC version on the XBox platform alone. With rumors of a STEAM app coming to consoles in the future, all M$ and Sony would need to do is support keyboard/mouse devices and gamers could easily play LoL or DOTA2 on their 60in HDTV. Blizzard got Diablo 3 to play brilliantly on game consoles without K/M. You think the same can't be done with DOTA2 and LoL? Only a matter of time and improved hardware down the road.
Also, if PC gaming was profitable for the average dev/publisher.....then they wouldn't constantly go to console to sell games. Rockstar is a prime example. They basically look at PC gaming as an afterthought....if they thought it was worth it to release GTA V on PC ....they would have done it....but instead....
..t
PC gaming is more profitable for average developer and publisher. it's why majority of developers never even touch consoles.
Console market is more profitable only for few selected huge publishers and those games that cost up to $100 mln to push into the market (development plus marketing). Those indeed do usually better on consoles. But everything else...nope, not even close.
@blackace: no single console version of mine craft has outsold the pc version ......at least not yet,I think you should check your facts and get back to us
@bldgirsh: Of course no one is surprised. Your PC numbers include FAR more people than consoles even reach. The only way to compare consoles to PCs fairly is to go by nation.
Good luck with multiple monitors... Pro gamers even say beyond 1080 it's worthless for them because they focus on such a small part of the screen. So if you want a wall of monitors in your face... Go for it... You not going to do any better in a game then someone with 1.
Like I said, if your at a desk and your sitting distance is 3 feet or less, 2k res for 27 inch and lower screen is perfect. http://isthisretina.com/ Anything more is E-peen.
As for VR it would be a no brainer that you would need high res... The screen is only about 3 inches from your eyes. 2k for VR is good for 3 inch viewing.
Of course no one is surprised. Your PC numbers include FAR more people than consoles even reach. The only way to compare consoles to PCs fairly is to go by nation.
Here we go again...next Cranler is going to stop by and claim that each console is a separate platform, and then we'll be comparing only Xbox One owners to PC gamers in the United States and ignoring everything else. So much moving of goal posts by console apologists.
Of course no one is surprised. Your PC numbers include FAR more people than consoles even reach. The only way to compare consoles to PCs fairly is to go by nation.
Here we go again...next Cranler is going to stop by and claim that each console is a separate platform, and then we'll be comparing only Xbox One owners to PC gamers in the United States and ignoring everything else. So much moving of goal posts by console apologists.
That isn't my point. My point is that PC gaming is widely available in places such as China and India. Those billions of people skew the numbers greatly. If consoles are widely adopted now that they are no longer in a grey market, and they adopt the free to play that has made PC gaming so popular overseas, then the tables will turn. However, my point stands. If one is going to compare two, or more, markets usefully, then one must compare said markets on even terms. In this case, if said comparison drilled down into numbers by major population centers it would be a far more useful than the metrics presented by the original poster. Through specificity comes understanding. We would then find out why one is more popular than another by region and be able to discuss/extrapolate as to why.
Fortunately, this has already been done. The end result of these professional studies concluded that PCs will always rule in poorer nations while wealthier countries tend to favor console gaming.
It's crazy to think that most of the profit is from F2P and WoW. With the money it makes I think more games the quality of Star Citizen should get made. Unfortunately that only happens once per gen. Crysis 1 was it last gen. I'm talking games that utilize modern GPU's from the ground up. And hardly any consideration for people with weak PC's. Not like they can't afford to do so.
It could likely sustain more titles, bu most Publishers want to spread the cost as much as possibe it is far cheaper to make a farily impressive game that runs on all platforms, then focus on any one platform (unless you are owned by the platform holder, and even then it is a bad buisness).
Focusing on any one platform tends to be bad buisness, noamtter if that platform is called Playstation, Xbox or PC. Irony has it that the advert campaigns tend to cost around as much as the games now if not more. Pretty much eliminating any game for any one platform and painting a sad Picture of gamers, WHO only play what they are told to.
As a Whole I think single platform Developments could sustain itself, but those WHO runs the industry seems awefully unhealthy for it, atleasting in sustaining it.
Good luck with multiple monitors... Pro gamers even say beyond 1080 it's worthless for them because they focus on such a small part of the screen. So if you want a wall of monitors in your face... Go for it... You not going to do any better in a game then someone with 1.
Like I said, if your at a desk and your sitting distance is 3 feet or less, 2k res for 27 inch and lower screen is perfect. http://isthisretina.com/ Anything more is E-peen.
As for VR it would be a no brainer that you would need high res... The screen is only about 3 inches from your eyes. 2k for VR is good for 3 inch viewing.
I don't give a shit about what pro gamers say, multiple monitors aren't for "being better in a game" they're for more immersion, and simply more pixels!
2k is not enough for VR. You want crystal fucking clear image on that, so that it looks as real as possible, even 4k would not be enough.
Of course no one is surprised. Your PC numbers include FAR more people than consoles even reach. The only way to compare consoles to PCs fairly is to go by nation.
Here we go again...next Cranler is going to stop by and claim that each console is a separate platform, and then we'll be comparing only Xbox One owners to PC gamers in the United States and ignoring everything else. So much moving of goal posts by console apologists.
That isn't my point. My point is that PC gaming is widely available in places such as China and India. Those billions of people skew the numbers greatly. If consoles are widely adopted now that they are no longer in a grey market, and they adopt the free to play that has made PC gaming so popular overseas, then the tables will turn. However, my point stands. If one is going to compare two, or more, markets usefully, then one must compare said markets on even terms. In this case, if said comparison drilled down into numbers by major population centers it would be a far more useful than the metrics presented by the original poster. Through specificity comes understanding. We would then find out why one is more popular than another by region and be able to discuss/extrapolate as to why.
Fortunately, this has already been done. The end result of these professional studies concluded that PCs will always rule in poorer nations while wealthier countries tend to favor console gaming.
Wait, why is this important?
Doesn't matter who's playing what or where they live or what their financial situation is... None of that matters.
Or do you really think we should only count gamers from developed countries?
Just shows how much you know... LOL which is very little.
My 24 inch about 2.5 feet away covers about 45% of my vision. If you want to waste money on peripheral vision go for it. Majority of gamers out there don't care. So stfu...
Of course no one is surprised. Your PC numbers include FAR more people than consoles even reach. The only way to compare consoles to PCs fairly is to go by nation.
Here we go again...next Cranler is going to stop by and claim that each console is a separate platform, and then we'll be comparing only Xbox One owners to PC gamers in the United States and ignoring everything else. So much moving of goal posts by console apologists.
That isn't my point. My point is that PC gaming is widely available in places such as China and India. Those billions of people skew the numbers greatly. If consoles are widely adopted now that they are no longer in a grey market, and they adopt the free to play that has made PC gaming so popular overseas, then the tables will turn. However, my point stands. If one is going to compare two, or more, markets usefully, then one must compare said markets on even terms. In this case, if said comparison drilled down into numbers by major population centers it would be a far more useful than the metrics presented by the original poster. Through specificity comes understanding. We would then find out why one is more popular than another by region and be able to discuss/extrapolate as to why.
Fortunately, this has already been done. The end result of these professional studies concluded that PCs will always rule in poorer nations while wealthier countries tend to favor console gaming.
Shame, you've already reached your 10 post limit. I surely hope this isn't an alternate account trying to simply ban dodge.
Just shows how much you know... LOL which is very little.
My 24 inch about 2.5 feet away covers about 45% of my vision. If you want to waste money on peripheral vision go for it. Majority of gamers out there don't care. So stfu...
Guide to Truth_Hurts_U's argument:
step 1: Ad hominem
step 2: Actual opinion
step 3: Ad populum
step 4: More ad hominem
I'll filter out all the shit:
My 24 inch about 2.5 feet away covers about 45% of my vision. If you want to waste money on peripheral vision go for it.
VR is all about peripheral vision bro. In fact, multiple monitors are also about peripheral vision. It isn't about weather or not it's worth it, or if the human eye can't even notice the difference past a certain resolution. I'm just pointing out that gaming/PC hardware will NOT stop progressing. Ever. There will always be innovation, more demanding games, new peripherals, etc.
VR is total emersion. You only need 2k which is to not see pixels at 3 inches with a 4 inch display per eye. If you add each eye's 2k it would be 4k total.
F2P., MMORPGs and MOBAs, not exactly worth bragging about.
Uhh...why not? These are some of the absolute most competitive skill based games on the planet, making console titles seem like jokes in comparison: and many of them score AAA/AA....what am I missing here?
I thought we were over this whole "doesn't count" when idiots stopped doing it for RTS and Sim games last gen.....
@m3dude1 said:
id wager at least 700 million of that 711 million are just playing fb games or f2p crap. the pc market for non f2p/fb games is a fucking fraction of the console market.
I'd wager no 1 console alone beats PC's revenue if you take out facebook games. It's F2P games with higher skill requirement than any console title that help gives it high revenue btw.
What faction are you btw? You seem to flip-flop some kind of cow and lemming to try and beat PC, and you still lose. Might have to be part sheep too if you wanna stand a chance.
Log in to comment