Star Citizen, Wing Commander creator says PC held back by consoles
This topic is locked from further discussion.
lol, consoles aren't holding anything back. If you want to make a graphically ambitious game just make a PC exclusive. Problem solved. Is the 3DS holding back PC gaming as well?GunSmith1_basicGiving such a hasty conclusive answer does show your limits on the subject. Due to revenue and current playerbase per console, games are always targeted to be developed for consoles, then ported to the pc. That porting process makes things rather unoptimized for the pc counterpart. The graphical engines are purely designed for console hardware, and to just optimize that engine to run on current pc hardware, means a lot of potential lost to what current average pc gaming hardware can handle. The Cryengine 2 was made for high end pc hardware at that time, and that game looks much better then the best consoles could ever wish to offer. 2007 man, 5 years ago. If all the current consoles developers changed their platform to pc and would start developing engines for far more potential hardware, not only does it cost les money to optimize, profits could improve if multiplayer is unhackable with a good security. Company's do not realize their games are being illegally downloaded due to hardly investing in pc exclusive features. Consoles are holding the pc back, if you like it or not ;D
[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]
Consoles shouldn't exist, full stop.
Vatusus
How bout... no
Consoles are just weak, cheap Pcs anyway....
Giving such a hasty conclusive answer does show your limits on the subject. Due to revenue and current playerbase per console, games are always targeted to be developed for consoles, then ported to the pc. That porting process makes things rather unoptimized for the pc counterpart. The graphical engines are purely designed for console hardware, and to just optimize that engine to run on current pc hardware, means a lot of potential lost to what current average pc gaming hardware can handle. The Cryengine 2 was made for high end pc hardware at that time, and that game looks much better then the best consoles could ever wish to offer. 2007 man, 5 years ago. If all the current consoles developers changed their platform to pc and would start developing engines for far more potential hardware, not only does it cost les money to optimize, profits could improve if multiplayer is unhackable with a good security. Company's do not realize their games are being illegally downloaded due to hardly investing in pc exclusive features. Consoles are holding the pc back, if you like it or not ;D
teun3sixty
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one platform or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
Then,in detail,what is your point?[QUOTE="Nanomage"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]
Which has nothing to do with my point.
SUD123456
1. WC creator is not being held back by consoles. He is making his new game exclusively on PC.
2. As hermits say, PC has many/the most exclusives. None of those are being held back by consoles.
3. WC says that:no ones really pushing PC. There are a lot of PC gamers who are proud of their gaming rigs but dont have anything to really show it off" which has nothing to do with consoles since the PC has many/the most exclusives.
4. Games ported from consoles to PC - don't buy them if they are below your standards
5. Games on PC - buy more of them and developers will make more of them
6. Technically advanced games on PC, see above.
7. Games on PC that are simultaneously developed on consoles and downgraded because of it (real or perceived). Don't buy either version. They won't make the PC follow-up. Reward the PC game makers of games you like, not the ones you don't.
7. Hermits who own at least one console and then complain about consoles - you are idiots. Assuming you game for entertainment and you do not have infinite time and money then: A. you are encouraging developers to make console games, which is self defeating of your position, and B. you are spending money on a console game, that you would have otherwise spent on a PC game, thus denying the PC developer your business. Double whammy.
If enough PC gamers buy enough PC games, particularly the most demanding PC games from a technology point of view, then those types of games will exist. If not, then they won't. It has nothing to do with consoles. I have yet to hear Ferrari or Porsche complain that they can't engineer and sell enough great cars because Hondas and Toyotas exist.
TL:DR My point is that gaming is not immune to the laws of capitalism. Every single PC complaint about consoles has nothing to do with consoles. It has everything to do with the PC game marketplace which is defined by PC gamers' purchasing habits.
Bravo! clap.jpg[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]
Giving such a hasty conclusive answer does show your limits on the subject. Due to revenue and current playerbase per console, games are always targeted to be developed for consoles, then ported to the pc. That porting process makes things rather unoptimized for the pc counterpart. The graphical engines are purely designed for console hardware, and to just optimize that engine to run on current pc hardware, means a lot of potential lost to what current average pc gaming hardware can handle. The Cryengine 2 was made for high end pc hardware at that time, and that game looks much better then the best consoles could ever wish to offer. 2007 man, 5 years ago. If all the current consoles developers changed their platform to pc and would start developing engines for far more potential hardware, not only does it cost les money to optimize, profits could improve if multiplayer is unhackable with a good security. Company's do not realize their games are being illegally downloaded due to hardly investing in pc exclusive features. Consoles are holding the pc back, if you like it or not ;D
GunSmith1_basic
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream starting price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo should always make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. A 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles(production costs reduced just by the sheer amount of sales). Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more.
[QUOTE="SUD123456"]
[QUOTE="Nanomage"] Then,in detail,what is your point?Zen_Light
1. WC creator is not being held back by consoles. He is making his new game exclusively on PC.
2. As hermits say, PC has many/the most exclusives. None of those are being held back by consoles.
3. WC says that:no ones really pushing PC. There are a lot of PC gamers who are proud of their gaming rigs but dont have anything to really show it off" which has nothing to do with consoles since the PC has many/the most exclusives.
4. Games ported from consoles to PC - don't buy them if they are below your standards
5. Games on PC - buy more of them and developers will make more of them
6. Technically advanced games on PC, see above.
7. Games on PC that are simultaneously developed on consoles and downgraded because of it (real or perceived). Don't buy either version. They won't make the PC follow-up. Reward the PC game makers of games you like, not the ones you don't.
7. Hermits who own at least one console and then complain about consoles - you are idiots. Assuming you game for entertainment and you do not have infinite time and money then: A. you are encouraging developers to make console games, which is self defeating of your position, and B. you are spending money on a console game, that you would have otherwise spent on a PC game, thus denying the PC developer your business. Double whammy.
If enough PC gamers buy enough PC games, particularly the most demanding PC games from a technology point of view, then those types of games will exist. If not, then they won't. It has nothing to do with consoles. I have yet to hear Ferrari or Porsche complain that they can't engineer and sell enough great cars because Hondas and Toyotas exist.
TL:DR My point is that gaming is not immune to the laws of capitalism. Every single PC complaint about consoles has nothing to do with consoles. It has everything to do with the PC game marketplace which is defined by PC gamers' purchasing habits.
Bravo! clap.jpg ^he just violated me wth sheer logic....
[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]
[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]
Giving such a hasty conclusive answer does show your limits on the subject. Due to revenue and current playerbase per console, games are always targeted to be developed for consoles, then ported to the pc. That porting process makes things rather unoptimized for the pc counterpart. The graphical engines are purely designed for console hardware, and to just optimize that engine to run on current pc hardware, means a lot of potential lost to what current average pc gaming hardware can handle. The Cryengine 2 was made for high end pc hardware at that time, and that game looks much better then the best consoles could ever wish to offer. 2007 man, 5 years ago. If all the current consoles developers changed their platform to pc and would start developing engines for far more potential hardware, not only does it cost les money to optimize, profits could improve if multiplayer is unhackable with a good security. Company's do not realize their games are being illegally downloaded due to hardly investing in pc exclusive features. Consoles are holding the pc back, if you like it or not ;D
teun3sixty
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo may still make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. An 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles. Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more. and thats the day your pc is a tablet and is playing angry birds 2040...which is the mainstream since angrybirds has sold s***ton compared to all other games.Then,in detail,what is your point?[QUOTE="Nanomage"][QUOTE="SUD123456"]
Which has nothing to do with my point.
SUD123456
1. WC creator is not being held back by consoles. He is making his new game exclusively on PC.<---I do not believe they aim for the best
graphics since that is not their selling point.
2. As hermits say, PC has many/the most exclusives. None of those are being held back by consoles.<---Yes they are, directly even. Consoles
essentially are downgraded pc hardware and software. They are the result of greedy companies wanting it their own way, that's what big companies do.
Because of difference in code, you can not insert your ps3 disc in your 360, even if they had the exact same specs. Imagine the ps3 and xbox 360
in the form of software on computers. MS and Sony decide what specifications you need, and they will not force upgrades on you as those specs will stand
for 3 years. Nvidia drivers and Ati drivers will only improve over time. Developers can opt for either gamepad only or mouse+kb option, because
some prefer the entertaining feedback of a controller(like me in racing games, open world rpg's etc). For people who would not decide to join sony or ms
, they could join steam. No hardware limits to games, and the same developer option for gamepad or not. Sounds smarter?
3. WC says that:no ones really pushing PC. There are a lot of PC gamers who are proud of their gaming rigs but dont have anything to really show it off" which has nothing to do with consoles since the PC has many/the most exclusives. <---Casual consumer homebase is at consoles due to trickery by ads and the media world and limited knowledge on basic computer hardware. Obviously those Developers can risk investing in High budgets for their graphics like console developers do, right? No
4. Games ported from consoles to PC - don't buy them if they are below your standards<---true
5. Games on PC - buy more of them and developers will make more of them<---previous statement applied
6. Technically advanced games on PC, see above.<---But dear sir, the hardware of an average budget gaming
pc has 28nm gpu's compared to the 90nm in x360, clock speeds and pure compute power way beyond of
your knowledge on hardware.
7. Games on PC that are simultaneously developed on consoles and downgraded because of it (real or perceived). Don't buy either version. They won't make the PC follow-up. Reward the PC game makers of games you like, not the ones you don't.<--- Being the smart guy is not being like the average consumer. This arguement is pretty much nullified.
7. Hermits who own at least one console and then complain about consoles - you are idiots. Assuming you game for entertainment and you do not have infinite time and money then: A. you are encouraging developers to make console games, which is self defeating of your position, and B. you are spending money on a console game, that you would have otherwise spent on a PC game, thus denying the PC developer your business. Double whammy.<--- What a nice big generalization you made there. Consoles are concepts that the average mainstream person is very interested in. You follow their views if you say this. Clearing your mind of how everything is, think of alternative possible realities, do not play a long with the stream of stupidity. I love console games, but not due to the fact they are on console. I would love all console games to be playable on my pc, but the market won't allow such thing. Why? the horrible
way of thinking from the mainstream. This will change due to old fashion still playing a roll.
If enough PC gamers buy enough PC games, particularly the most demanding PC games from a technology point of view, then those types of games will exist. If not, then they won't. It has nothing to do with consoles. I have yet to hear Ferrari or Porsche complain that they can't engineer and sell enough great cars because Hondas and Toyotas exist.
TL:DR My point is that gaming is not immune to the laws of capitalism. Every single PC complaint about consoles has nothing to do with consoles. It has everything to do with the PC game marketplace which is defined by PC gamers' purchasing habits.
Apply psychology, philosphy, a wide knowledge base on hardware and software, the concept of time, the multiperspective way of thinking. Only then you can clearly prove me wrong. shoot
Well of f*cking course they are. Look at what they achieved back in 2007 with Crysis (made with absolutely no consoles in mind, at all). 2007! I'm not sure if we've even seen another game that technologically advanced. Now imagine a game in 2012 or 2013 that had that kind of commitment put into it without the need of having to pander to consoles. We probably would have damn near reached Pixar graphics.
[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo may still make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. An 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles. Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more. and thats the day your pc is a tablet and is playing angry birds 2040...which is the mainstream since angrybirds has sold s***ton compared to all other games.Concluding from this reaction, I can identify how your mind set completely ignored the entire purpose of my post. I personally believe Angry birds success is based of the audience it was targeted for. Its a simple and entertaining concept that you could not simply ignore on the Istore and later what is now Google store. However, I also think this game does not describe the potential of the total gaming industry their consumers on the pc platform[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
WilliamRLBaker
[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]
Consoles shouldn't exist, full stop.
Vatusus
How bout... no
How about... Yes. :PConsoles shouldn't exist, full stop. Everything should be on PC.
I can't wait for Star Citizen. It looks awesome!
GamerwillzPS
.
Consolites shouldn't deny that that is indeed true.
But PC gamers shouldn't deny that piracy holds back PC gaming too. If more people would buy PC games theren't wouldn't be a need for so many games to go multiplat and take into account the least powerful hardware (i.e. consoles)
And there are still more reasons why PC gaming is held back. It's not just one reason
Consoles shouldn't exist, full stop. Everything should be on PC.
GamerwillzPS
Stop. Just stop.
Consoles shouldn't exist, full stop. Everything should be on PC.
I can't wait for Star Citizen. It looks awesome!
GamerwillzPS
GamerwillzPS " Xbox is teh suxxors, Ps3 rulez, Lems be jellyz.
*gets gaming pc*
"Consoles are for noobz, holding back teh PC master race"
anyways PC exclusives aren't being held back by consoles, and with multiplats developers should put more effort into a serious port taking advatntage of the hardware.
If people are going to blame consoles then they should blame PC gamers who can't afford/don't want to upgrade.
Or they could do the most sensible thing and realize that DEVS CHOOSE the 360 as their lead system. If PC graphics advanced as fast as the hardware it (PC gaming) would still be facing the same problems it did prior to this console generation.
Well of f*cking course they are. Look at what they achieved back in 2007 with Crysis (made with absolutely no consoles in mind, at all). 2007! I'm not sure if we've even seen another game that technologically advanced. Now imagine a game in 2012 or 2013 that had that kind of commitment put into it without the need of having to pander to consoles. We probably would have damn near reached Pixar graphics.
Master_ShakeXXX
Then again it took atleast three generations of graphics cards for Crysis to becomme "maxed out" on "mainstream" graphics cards.
It's either "consoles holding us back" or "too high system requirements".
The whine will never end, however you turn it...
[QUOTE="Jebus213"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]No it isn't. In detail, why not?Read the previous comments before asking repeated questions.I don't buy that excuse. Developers are free to enhance their games for the PC. It's their fault if they don't.
lowe0
In detail, why not?Read the previous comments before asking repeated questions. I did read your comment earlier, actually. It made no sense, but I didn't have time to respond. So now, I'll ask: in what way are consoles affecting the following PC exclusives: Total War: Shogun 2, ARMA 2, or Planetside 2? Provide specific in-game examples of compromise along with reasoning for why those compromises were due to consoles.[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Jebus213"] No it isn't.teun3sixty
If anything pc gaming is holding back pc gaming, your platform is not strong enough to support itself with high end exclusives because not enough people buy high end hardware to play games with the latest and greatest tech. Dont blame consoles blame pc gamers for not actually buying there games and owning the proper hardware.
They do, actually, but look at Star Citizen. The average pledge on RSI right now is $90; on Kickstarter, it's $47.67 with at least some of those being the $5 double-dip for the skin. Niche games like this are still commercially viable, but not necessarily at the $60 price point. If you want to bring back a genre that's fallen out of favor (this, MechWarrior Online, etc.), be prepared to put your money where your mouth is.If anything pc gaming is holding back pc gaming, your platform is not strong enough to support itself with high end exclusives because not enough people buy high end hardware to play games with the latest and greatest tech. Dont blame consoles blame pc gamers for not actually buying there games and owning the proper hardware.
AM-Gamer
SW has been saying this for years now.... so, why is this thread necessary?
Also, just to add to the conversation.... if more PC gamers paid for their games, more devs would focus more heavily on the platform.
Hacking / Piracy happens on all platforms.... but everyone I know that plays games on PC has stolen something on PC.... only 1 I know that has
a modded console.
Do the math.... people stop stealing.... more devs invest more heavily into PC gaming.... then the profits are there, no longer is it necessary to squeeze the game onto the hardware of a console.
Also... the barrier to entry is much higher for PC gaming (for the most part, if you are a "gamer").... Joe Smith can walk into a store, buy a XBOX for $200-$300... carry it home, open the box, plug it in and play.
Joe Smith (if he's smart), needs to go online, research / order components (will still cost 2x as much with a moderate build), wait a week or 2 for them to arrive, put it together, install all necessary software, then they can play.
Now, most people are intimidated by building their own PC's.... so Joe Smith is probably gonna have to invest 3x as much to get himself a capable gaming PC.... 4 or 5x as much if we're building a PC that isnt going to be "HELD BACK" by consoles.
SW has been saying this for years now.... so, why is this thread necessary?
Also, just to add to the conversation.... if more PC gamers paid for their games, more devs would focus more heavily on the platform.
Hacking / Piracy happens on all platforms.... but everyone I know that plays games on PC has stolen something on PC.... only 1 I know that has
a modded console.
Do the math.... people stop stealing.... more devs invest more heavily into PC gaming.... then the profits are there, no longer is it necessary to squeeze the game onto the hardware of a console.
Also... the barrier to entry is much higher for PC gaming (for the most part, if you are a "gamer").... Joe Smith can walk into a store, buy a XBOX for $200-$300... carry it home, open the box, plug it in and play.
Joe Smith (if he's smart), needs to go online, research / order components (will still cost 2x as much with a moderate build), wait a week or 2 for them to arrive, put it together, install all necessary software, then they can play.
Now, most people are intimidated by building their own PC's.... so Joe Smith is probably gonna have to invest 3x as much to get himself a capable gaming PC.... 4 or 5x as much if we're building a PC that isnt going to be "HELD BACK" by consoles.moistsandwich
Then how come PC have more highly rated exclusives then any console, by a massive margin? They truth would seem to conflict with your post.
Your post is also anecdotal and so completely worthless.
Joe Smith (if he's smart), needs to go online, research / order components (will still cost 2x as much with a moderate build), wait a week or 2 for them to arrive, put it together, install all necessary software, then they can play.
moistsandwich
Where the hell do you live that it takes a week or two to ship to you? I always get my $hit in 2-3 days.
Also, I can take it from parts delivery to playing games in two hours. That includes building the PC, installing the OS and the game.
It's not rocket science.
SW has been saying this for years now.... so, why is this thread necessary?That's just a bad excuse, games have always been pirated, back on Amiga, commodore and early PC copying games between friends were just as common, if not more, than it is now.
Also, just to add to the conversation.... if more PC gamers paid for their games, more devs would focus more heavily on the platform.moistsandwich
Hacking / Piracy happens on all platforms.... but everyone I know that plays games on PC has stolen something on PC.... only 1 I know that has a modded console.moistsandwichAnd your thieves for friends make up a reliable statistical basis for making that conclusion?
Do the math.... people stop stealing.... more devs invest more heavily into PC gaming.... then the profits are there, no longer is it necessary to squeeze the game onto the hardware of a console.moistsandwichFirst, copying is not stealing, it's two very different things no matter how you or the big company lobbyists try to spin it.
Second, the profits are there, it's just that many publishers/developers are lazy and greedy.
In many ways it's easier to develop for consoles, it's more limiting, but easier as the developer can make the game to work on a pre-defined hardware platform, controls are more limited so there's also a set number of options to play with. Also there's the possibility to port the game to other consoles and PC which makes a lot of profit for little investment.
So, the choice to develop primarily for console instead of PC is an economic one, just not in the way the publishers would have you believe.
Piracy is a perfect excuse for them, blame copying of games instead of saying that you choose the consoles limitations over the possibilities on PC because you want more money and don't care as much about creating original gaming experiences as the big cash. So, with a little lie you get the sympathy from some people (who don't think for themselves) instead of angry fans that knows you've sold out.
Also... the barrier to entry is much higher for PC gaming (for the most part, if you are a "gamer").... Joe Smith can walk into a store, buy a XBOX for $200-$300... carry it home, open the box, plug it in and play.
Joe Smith (if he's smart), needs to go online, research / order components (will still cost 2x as much with a moderate build), wait a week or 2 for them to arrive, put it together, install all necessary software, then they can play.
Now, most people are intimidated by building their own PC's.... so Joe Smith is probably gonna have to invest 3x as much to get himself a capable gaming PC.... 4 or 5x as much if we're building a PC that isnt going to be "HELD BACK" by consoles.moistsandwich
Now these are valid points, PC gaming is not for everyone, console gaming and PC gaming are quite different and clearly have their own raison d'être, but this does not have much to do with consoles holding PC back.
I strongly believe that consoles (from MS and Sony as the Nintendo consoles doesn't really compete with PC gaming) are holding back PC, but not so much in terms of graphics as in creative game ideas and advanced and in-depth games.
Development for MS and Sony consoles have no doubt taken a lot of potential resources from development of PC games.
And I think most people can agree that most games for consoles are games for casuals, sure there are hardcore gamers, but most games are really aimed at casuals.
Sports games, arcade racers, simple shooters and so on - all aimed at a casual market only interested in fast, easy games with lots of polish and little substance.
Those games belong on consoles because the typical console owner wants those kinds of games.
Some type of games however only fit on PC, typically the games that are more advanced such as in-depth simulations, strategy games and so on.
These types of games has clearly been given less and less resources while development for MS and Sony consoles have gone up.
That's how I see things.
I will pay $100 for this game if it gets a Linux native version. They should put that on the goals.kuraimen
I'm with you there.
Direct X is the only reason I haven't switched exclusively to Gentoo.
OpenGL needs more marketing.
[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]No it isn't.I don't buy that excuse. Developers are free to enhance their games for the PC. It's their fault if they don't.
Jebus213
Of course it is the developer's fault. They're the ones making the game. Are you saying developers are boneheads who can't think for themselves? They choose what game to make and what systems they'll run on. There's nothing to stop them from making PC-only games if they really want to.
Anything else like supporting consoles to make more moolah is optional. Making games with consoles as the LCD is optional.
But, the developers chose to do those things. So, it's their fault. Blaming consoles which are nothing more than an assortment of plastic and metal parts with an electric current running through them is silly.
[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]
[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]
Giving such a hasty conclusive answer does show your limits on the subject. Due to revenue and current playerbase per console, games are always targeted to be developed for consoles, then ported to the pc. That porting process makes things rather unoptimized for the pc counterpart. The graphical engines are purely designed for console hardware, and to just optimize that engine to run on current pc hardware, means a lot of potential lost to what current average pc gaming hardware can handle. The Cryengine 2 was made for high end pc hardware at that time, and that game looks much better then the best consoles could ever wish to offer. 2007 man, 5 years ago. If all the current consoles developers changed their platform to pc and would start developing engines for far more potential hardware, not only does it cost les money to optimize, profits could improve if multiplayer is unhackable with a good security. Company's do not realize their games are being illegally downloaded due to hardly investing in pc exclusive features. Consoles are holding the pc back, if you like it or not ;D
teun3sixty
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream starting price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo should always make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. A 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles(production costs reduced just by the sheer amount of sales). Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more. Your argument is very confused atm. This whole issue comes down to Chris Roberts wanting to release a game on both PC and the HD twins. The HD twins have a lot of users so this makes sense, and yet he criticizes those platforms for not being powerful enough. I'm just saying that it is just a silly statement. Either he wants those users or he doesn't. Not only that but if MS and Sony ditched the 360 and ps3 then he wouldn't have all that access to the mainstream since they would building all new userbases. If someone is forcing him away from PC then maybe he should be criticizing those people instead of 7 year old hardware. Roberts' statements-btw, to your side point, consoles aren't $400 and $600. They are half that price now if you're paying attention. Also, unlike PC at least with consoles if you buy a machine new at $500 you know that it will still be relevant technology in 5 years.
-btw, to your other side point, to your little speil on consoles: these arguments are not new. It seems every now and then PC gets a leg up and the future becomes all about how consoles will die off. Then, when new consoles come out, it becomes all about how PC gaming is dying. If we're talking about in the long run, those arguments have a fatal flaw as well. I doubt that console gaming will ever truly die, even if the consoles themselves disappear. The real danger is that computer tech will hit a wall of stagnation, perhaps when we hit perfect photorealism, and on that day PC gaming as a culture will die. The bro gamers will live on.
I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream starting price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo should always make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. A 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles(production costs reduced just by the sheer amount of sales). Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more. Your argument is very confused atm. This whole issue comes down to Chris Roberts wanting to release a game on both PC and the HD twins. The HD twins have a lot of users so this makes sense, and yet he criticizes those platforms for not being powerful enough. I'm just saying that it is just a silly statement. Either he wants those users or he doesn't. Not only that but if MS and Sony ditched the 360 and ps3 then he wouldn't have all that access to the mainstream since they would building all new userbases. If someone is forcing him away from PC then maybe he should be criticizing those people instead of 7 year old hardware. Roberts' statements[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]
[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]
I am aware of it but it all comes down to access to the mainstream through consoles. What makes consoles appealing to the mainstream is low cost. Low cost means less hardware potential. To say you want all the benefits of the pc platform and console platforms but none of the drawbacks of each is either really stupid or really arrogant. Pick one or deal with the awkwardness of accomodating both.
GunSmith1_basic
when did he say he wanted this on consoles?
Graphics, ugh huh. Yet, the gameplay remains the same. And the average gamers don't have to shell in $1000 for a PC just for it to be outdated within a couple of years.
Your argument is very confused atm. This whole issue comes down to Chris Roberts wanting to release a game on both PC and the HD twins. The HD twins have a lot of users so this makes sense, and yet he criticizes those platforms for not being powerful enough. I'm just saying that it is just a silly statement. Either he wants those users or he doesn't. Not only that but if MS and Sony ditched the 360 and ps3 then he wouldn't have all that access to the mainstream since they would building all new userbases. If someone is forcing him away from PC then maybe he should be criticizing those people instead of 7 year old hardware. Roberts' statements[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]
[QUOTE="teun3sixty"]I Really do not consider a console of either 400$ or 600$ a mainstream starting price. An intel HD4000 is playing games like skyrim on console settings, those laptops go for 500$ with a 15.6" HD panels, with 500gb hdd, and unlimited apps. Intel hd5000 will surpass the current consoles by a lot, and those come out next year. I believe nintendo should always make consoles as they innovate and redesign constantly, the wii U has enough power for it to receive pc ports. The current consoles try very hard to be like a very average computer, and the next generation from microsoft and sony will try even harder. A 7850, i5 3570k, 16gb ddr3 ram, mobo+psu+1tb hdd= 650$. Now this is a serious gaming pc capable of 55fps on bf3 ultra dx11 1920x1200 with 4x msaa. Now imagine a company rebranding this very hardware, and selling it for 500$ and they will make serious cash if they sell like consoles(production costs reduced just by the sheer amount of sales). Really, not arrogance, just true facts on paper which people do not realize. The mainstream should be more informed about hardware, because it is not that difficult to understand. Computers will take over everywhere, the old fashioned way of living will soon be no more.
lawlessx
when did he say he wanted this on consoles?
Quite the opposite... the chest-thumping "they're all against us" vibe was kind of off-putting (though not so much so that I passed on the opportunity to get a new Wing Commander successor).[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"] Your argument is very confused atm. This whole issue comes down to Chris Roberts wanting to release a game on both PC and the HD twins. The HD twins have a lot of users so this makes sense, and yet he criticizes those platforms for not being powerful enough. I'm just saying that it is just a silly statement. Either he wants those users or he doesn't. Not only that but if MS and Sony ditched the 360 and ps3 then he wouldn't have all that access to the mainstream since they would building all new userbases. If someone is forcing him away from PC then maybe he should be criticizing those people instead of 7 year old hardware. Roberts' statements
lowe0
when did he say he wanted this on consoles?
Quite the opposite... the chest-thumping "they're all against us" vibe was kind of off-putting (though not so much so that I passed on the opportunity to get a new Wing Commander successor).chest-thumping? really? all the man said was that he wished consoles weren't so limited and near total control over the industry.
Quite the opposite... the chest-thumping "they're all against us" vibe was kind of off-putting (though not so much so that I passed on the opportunity to get a new Wing Commander successor).[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="lawlessx"]
when did he say he wanted this on consoles?
lawlessx
chest-thumping? really? all the man said was that he wished consoles weren't so limited and near total control over the industry.
I was more thinking the web site... the whole "they said PC was dead" rhetoric.[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="lowe0"] Quite the opposite... the chest-thumping "they're all against us" vibe was kind of off-putting (though not so much so that I passed on the opportunity to get a new Wing Commander successor).lowe0
chest-thumping? really? all the man said was that he wished consoles weren't so limited and near total control over the industry.
I was more thinking the web site... the whole "they said PC was dead" rhetoric.you mean this?:P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DqIC2B9UVPM#!
i wont deny that he comes off as a fanboy,but he's on a mission to promote and fund a game to PC gamers.
I was more thinking the web site... the whole "they said PC was dead" rhetoric.[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="lawlessx"]
chest-thumping? really? all the man said was that he wished consoles weren't so limited and near total control over the industry.
lawlessx
you mean this?:P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DqIC2B9UVPM#!
i wont deny that he comes off as a fanboy,but he's on a mission to promote and fund a game to PC gamers.
Fanboys will be fanboys, but I'd prefer that he focus on his game instead.
[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Please, I am begging you make another Wing CommanderHarlockJC
wouldn't this game and a next gen wing commander be very similar? i mean after you take away the online portion of Star Citizen
I want more of the story. Wing Commander had a very deep story.You're going to have to ask EA very nicely for that, they own the IP these days. If it looks like Star Citizen is going to be a success they you can gaurantee there will be a Wing Commander release with in a year of SC coming out, EA will never pass up good money. However expect it to be multi-plat with the difficulty scaled right back so it doesn't scare the kiddies away, with a short single player game and a multiplayer deathmatch focus.
Actually the game looks like a huge evolutionary jump for it's genre. And it's not designed for "average gamer". It's designed for hardcore gamer that is willing to shell 1000$ for upgrades and that market is growing extremely fast.Graphics, ugh huh. Yet, the gameplay remains the same. And the average gamers don't have to shell in $1000 for a PC just for it to be outdated within a couple of years.
Mr_BillGates
Some guy who made a game thinks something. Of all the guys who made games that think something, this was apparantly notable.
Cool.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment