What a lot of PC gamers do not understand

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

Now name an iconic PC figure. Just one.......

MrYaotubo

Here´s one like you asked,beating every other iconic gaming hero in a contest with thousands of voters.

Not to mention that there´s quite a few others in there that originated from the PC.

Fail........

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

Now name an iconic PC figure. Just one.......

Benny_Blakk

Here´s one like you asked,beating every other iconic gaming hero in a contest with thousands of voters.

Not to mention that there´s quite a few others in there that originated from the PC.

Fail........

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

Now name an iconic PC figure. Just one.......

MrYaotubo

Here´s one like you asked,beating every other iconic gaming hero in a contest with thousands of voters.

Not to mention that there´s quite a few others in there that originated from the PC.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="megaspiderweb09"]

Blogit

MrYaotubo

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

I completely agree that PC has it's "greatness" for lack of a better term. For example, I'm not into shooters and call me "simple", but I still get a kick out of some classic RTS and PC has always delivered it the best. But that is off topic.

The argument that I've bought up (my apologies to the TC) is the perception of PC gamers have of PC gaming as it relates to the industry as a whole.

I must disagree about the "relevance" of FTP because the most relevant factor is sales. The intent behind my bringing up a comparison between making either sector "disappear" is to show it's true impact. Fact is that SONY alone has sold over a quarter billion Playstations! (1-3). Fact is that CONSOLES made gaming popular, not PC's! There have been movies, TV shows, constant music and cultural references center around console IP's, not PC. Fact is that Consoles are the basis of the gaming industry. 300,000,000 is a hell of a lot, don't you think?

Lucianu

But your argument is centered around retail/digital sales, if i'm understanding this right, and it's ignoring the FTP market, man. That market is gigantic and is a huge chunk of PC gaming. Hundreads upon hundreads of MMOs with thousands, millions of registered users on each one. The number of total users is simply impossible to comprehend, not to mention that new F2P games keeps poping up.

Though i can't disagree with your logic because it's a tricky subject, as far as how much of a greater impact would either the PC gaming or Console market have if one would cease to exist.

Free to play games don't equate to sales but rather sales potential.

The reason I even bought up this subject is because not only the "disappear" thing, but to provide an explanation as why many games are developed with console in mind first (for the closing gen, anyway). You have no idea how many PC gamers have been crying as to why that has been the case for so long. I don't think it's a stretch (to say the least) when I say that price is a factor when explaining userbase. And it is that userbase that publishers take into consideration.

Back to free to play, I've yet to read anything on how many of these millions of "registered users" are actually using, or better yet, actually making any type of purchase. At any rate, it doesn't constitute for PC gaming as a whole.

I live in the United States and while there are reports saying North America constitutes for a huge percentage of the gaming world, it is still not a representation of the gaming world altogether. There are places with terrible internet services and where PC gaming isn't even an afterthought. Yet, the video game industry is still world wide.

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

Here´s one like you asked,beating every other iconic gaming hero in a contest with thousands of voters.

Not to mention that there´s quite a few others in there that originated from the PC.

MrYaotubo

Fail........

Before your posting that link, I never even knew that character had a name. Nor was I high as a kite and thought that was even an icon. NOBODY (outside of geekville) would misconstrue the guy from.... (what game is that? HALF LIFE?) as a gaming icon. Especially in the context that I've been discussing all along.

(But it was a GAMESPOT bracket. How DARE I not take it as fact and the real world! Shame on me!!!!)

What a joke......

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

[QUOTE="Nanomage"] Wow,not only you´re really stupid but also really blind :lol:

MrYaotubo

Icon in the context I've mentioned numerous times (pop culture, TV, movies, music, etc) doesn't include ANYONE from PC. Never did. That is fact.

Mario, Link, Sonic....

and....

GORDON FREEMAN????

WHO???

Weirdos......

smh

And sonic was know many years ago,barely anyone without any affiliation to gaming has heard of it in the last few years,Mario is know but that´s pretty much the only one.

Not even worth keeping this conversation going,you´re clearly butthurt by the ownage and are getting a but agressive,take some pills sunshine and deep breaths.

Link or Zelda, it's the same franchise.

Sonic is still played today! What are you talking about? AND that doesn't change the fact that Sonic is a series that contributed to the gaming industry reaching a value worth billions of dollars. You can't say the same about a PC character.

You need to own a better sense of reality: I've clearly specified the common use and identification and you counter with GORDON FREEMAN. Then you get your panties in a bind when being exposed as a geektard because only such a person would have even made such a mention in the context of my point (popularity, commonality, culture, etc).

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]

skrat_01

Yes, making and or made. Games are still increasing in popularity, hence making. I'm not neglecting consoles, just like I'm not neglecting arcades - I'm stating that all these platforms have served a valuable purpose in expanding what games are, and to a wider audience - in a huge variety of ways. What's your point?

I can attribute the PC for what it has done for gaming in the last thirty years - the home computer has been around for a long longer then you're imagining. Again serving it's own purpose, and the games and legacy is all there to see - games didn't exist only in the console sphere; during Atari's heyday or today, that goes without saying. Either way this is me repeating my last point.

Excuses about what? Marketing = media exposure? That's a fact, I'm just pointing out that marketing exposure doesn't mean 'cultural relevance' which is fairly stupid thing to argue on your behalf. Hence why I pointed out 'angry birds is one of the most popular IPs at he moment but I doubt we would call it 'culturally relevant'. It's a silly thing for you to argue, common sense.

Sure, however you're missing the point that profit margins are entirely relative, and sales models aren't universal. Which is why you can have three very successful popular games e.g. Call of Duty, League of Legends or Angry Birds, and each have very different business models, yet have run at major profits. Nor am I talking about what's 'great' or not, I'm looking at what is actually going on in all these spaces.

And that's a pretty bad analogy? If any company closed the gap in the market would be filled like another. That's how the free market works.

Seriously, I'm baffled at what your point actually is and what you're trying to argue. That PC gaming isn't.... something? You want to dispute history? Okay you can if you want I don't really mind what's going inside of that head of yours, it isn't going to change anything.

I'm trying not to be rude, but having this discussion always results in digression of the extreme types to disuade from an already made (and very clear to anyone but those who don't want to accept it) point. Computers are important in the development of cars and airplanes, but we're not attributing their sales to Apple, are we? NO!

I've already pointed the importance of PC gaming, but for a PC pundit to acknowledge the impact and importance of Consoles is far too taxing. Sad......

Benny_Blakk

I'm saying 'relevance is entirely relative' and 'the games industry is a cosmopolitan one'. That's a pretty obvious fact.

Now if you had read my initial post in this thread, you would have caught my "point" which is that PC lovers (majority is the specific word that I used) do not speak (and I suspect do not see) the relevance that PC and Console both have played in the industry. I specified (numerous times in fact) that console is responsible for the industry reaching the level where it is worth billions of dollars (which I should have also mentioned handheld). As you've pointed out, PC has a special place in regards to gaming. And as a person who plays both, I can identify and acknowledge that. Now take a look at how the PC blowers respond to my pointing out that its the userbase that was key to console's success and also that it is console that was in the forefront of gaming reaching the level it has.

But of course, it's met with digression, disuasion, etc. Why take it as a personal attack is beyond me.

SO you want to use the development cycle of games being on computer as a credit to PC and falsely portray that as PC gaming actually being the core of the industry, but when the same kind of analogy is used to show how or why that isn't sound logic, now it is "bad"? Alrighty then.

(Note: If cultural relevance qualifies as "stupid" in your book, then I reccomend some type of college philosophy and to revisit that statement. I live in the United States and know far better than to say that gaming has had zero cultural impact)

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"][QUOTE="MrYaotubo"] Minecraft,been playing it for over two years now.lostrib

Tochlight, Torchlight 2, terraria, Natural selection 2, Hotline Miami, Garry's Mod

These plus Natural Selection 2,Killing Floor,Mount & Blade: Warband,FTL,etc.

There´s literally dozens of them.

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"][QUOTE="Quad4Life"] Gaming is a quality contest to me and indie titles typically aren't of any quality, you hermits will never admit this though. Name me one indie game you've played for atleast a month, good luck. LOLQuad4Life

Chivalry Medieval Warfare

Natural Selection 2

War of the Roses

Torchlight 2

FTL

Minecraft

Orcs Must Die

Blacklight Retribution

Hawken

Tribes Ascend

The Legend of Grimrock (because it has an amazing mod scene)

btw, I do see where you're coming from. Indie titles on consoles are often very poor quality or if they are good, are usually incredibly short experiences that pale in comparison to AAA games. What you need to understand though, is that the PC indie community is VERY different. There a ton of PC indie games like Natural Selection 2 that look better than 99% of console games, and of higher quality in terms of gameplay than most AAA games. 

Benny_Blakk

I really don't care about you and 'PC worshippers', or you out to attack/dispute them. I'm just pointing out the full picture here, and that the industry has reached the level it has due to absolutely everything that has happened. You can't pick or choose, because without one you don't have another; an industry doesn't evolve or develop in isolation of itself, especially one where ideas aren't restricted to the format they are delivered on.

I'm not talking about development being on the PC either, I'm talking about the markets themselves, and at the end of the day it boils down to 'yeah there's lots of popular gaming platforms, console, PC, arcades, phones, whatever, and there's plenty of profitable ones too'; it's a dicussion that can't get any more precise then just that because trying to isolate 'relevence' is neglecting everything else.

Consoles are important in their own way, so is the PC. Can't have one without the other if we're talking about games on a whole.

Please don't throw around undergraduate talk while we're at it, I'm stating that brand exposure and cultural relevence (or impact) are two different things, I'm not saying that they don't exist.

I'm not out to try and verbally drag you through the mud infront of 'PC worshippers' - as far as I can tell they're arguing points contrary to your own; both of which are well, pretty skewed in their own way. I'd rather point out the reality of things instead of platform **** waving.

The problem with this whole console vs PC debate is how very short-sighted it is...

What about the arcades? It was the arcades (not consoles or PC's) that gave birth to the video game industry in the early 70's. It was the arcades (not consoles) that first transformed video games into a multi-billion dollar industry in the early 80's (i.e. the golden age of arcade gaming). And it was the arcades (not consoles) that gave us the first cultural gaming icons, including the Space Invaders aliens, Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, and even Mario.

And what about other home computers not called the PC? If you wanted to play video games on a computer back in the 8-bit or 16-bit days, you'd get a gaming home computer like the Commodore 64, Amiga, Atari ST, PC-98, Sharp X68000, FM Towns, etc., which usually offered more power than the PC at the time as well as their own gaming libraries that rivalled both PC and consoles.

And what about handhelds? The Game Boy and Tetris were huge cultural icons. And by extension, what about smartphones and tablets? Angry Birds is pretty much like the Tetris of our era.

It's ridiculous how many fanboys act like consoles and PC are the only gaming platforms that matter.

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"]Dozens more of indie titles nobody really cares about. YeahQuad4Life

What does that have to do with anything? Whether they're indie or not, whether they're obscure or not, why would it matter? If the game is good, then that's all that matters. 

Or is gaming a popularity contest for you?  

I've ben playing Mount & Blade: Warband for.. about a year now.

Wen you hear the world 'indie' your mind probably thinks of short 2D games, or something that tries to be edgy, right? Indie games are games created by developers that aren't chained by a publisher. 

I want THE best gaming experience possible even if it is only 5% better so of course I play PC. It is that simple. When it comes to pure GAMING experience cost isn't a factor. When you're discussing the driving experience and capabilities of a Ferrari why would you bring up the cost? You don't because it has nothing to do with the driving experience. I'm all about GAMES so such things aren't a problem.

Frostbite24

In other words...

Consoles are like the more common mid-range Japanese cars.

PC's are like the less common high-end German cars.

"...if anything at all, be pleased with next gen consoles cause thats actually when developers would wana upgrade core game designs because the common denominator has moved a step up." 

No. You start out this blog stating that you're not trying to attack pc gamers which is exactly what you did albeit in a more political/indirect manner. As far as that quote of yours, why should we be pleased? Pleased that developers will finally be getting out of the stone ages and start to utilize current technology again? Pleased that their new machines will implement far more pc-like architecture? Or pleased because we know the hardware inside those machines will become dated just as quickly as it did in the current console gen?

You talk at length about how developers cater to the console market, a thing we pc gamers understand far better than you obviously do, and then belittle pc gaming as having no benefit to it besides "extra shinnies" aka better graphics. What you don't seem to grasp is the freedom of pc gaming. The freedom to advance alongside technology rather than stagnate for five to seven years. What you call 'shinnies' is the natural progression of visuals, physics engines, and game design in general that comes steadily for the pc platform rather than the few and far between chunks of console cycles. Having a huge modding community making good games great and extending the life of a game several-fold through user created content is also another thing that makes the pc so wonderful. On top of that there's larger game worlds that can support far more players at once, a massive indie dev community, decades worth of games at one's fingertips without the worry of backwards compatibility, cheaper games, less restrictions, so on and so forth. 

Consoles make things easy. Buy a box, turn on box, put disc in box - done. That's why there are so many console gamers out there. It's gaming made simple, but simple doesn't always mean better. When I get on my pc soapbox it's not to try to convert people over, but rather correct their misconceptions of pc gaming, like yours, that makes it seem that all we care about is graphics. I know this won't change anything in the ongoing war of pc vs consoles, and this was crazy wordy but I just wanted to put down my opinion on the matter. 

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"]Dozens more of indie titles nobody really cares about. YeahLucianu

What does that have to do with anything? Whether they're indie or not, whether they're obscure or not, why would it matter? If the game is good, then that's all that matters. 

Or is gaming a popularity contest for you?  

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"]Dozens more of indie titles nobody really cares about. YeahQuad4Life

What does that have to do with anything? Whether they're indie or not, whether they're obscure or not, why would it matter? If the game is good, then that's all that matters. 

Or is gaming a popularity contest for you?  

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"][QUOTE="Lucianu"]

What does that have to do with anything? Whether they're indie or not, whether they're obscure or not, why would it matter? If the game is good, then that's all that matters. 

Or is gaming a popularity contest for you?  

 

MrYaotubo

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"][QUOTE="Quad4Life"] Gaming is a quality contest to me and indie titles typically aren't of any quality, you hermits will never admit this though. Name me one indie game you've played for atleast a month, good luck. LOLQuad4Life

Tochlight, Torchlight 2, terraria, Natural selection 2, Hotline Miami, Garry's Mod

Are we seriously arguing the irrelevance of the PC as a platform when some of the most successful IPs of all time (WarCraft, StarCraft, Diablo, The Sims, Civilization, League of Legends, etc) are all PC based?

Are we seriously arguing the irrelevance of the PC as a platform when competitive gaming as we know it is at its biggest on PC (League of Legends, StarCraft, Counter-Strike)?

Are we seriously arguing the relevance of the PC market by downplaying F2P games when DOTA and League of Legends exist, and the relevance of MMOs when World of WarCraft is probably the single most profitable game of all time?

I mean, really?

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"] Minecraft is the exception, how about you name me 2 more titles? Good luck.MrYaotubo

Tochlight, Torchlight 2, terraria, Natural selection 2, Hotline Miami, Garry's Mod

These plus Natural Selection 2,Killing Floor,Mount & Blade: Warband,FTL,etc.

There´s literally dozens of them.

"...if anything at all, be pleased with next gen consoles cause thats actually when developers would wana upgrade core game designs because the common denominator has moved a step up." 

No. You start out this blog stating that you're not trying to attack pc gamers which is exactly what you did albeit in a more political/indirect manner. As far as that quote of yours, why should we be pleased? Pleased that developers will finally be getting out of the stone ages and start to utilize current technology again? Pleased that their new machines will implement far more pc-like architecture? Or pleased because we know the hardware inside those machines will become dated just as quickly as it did in the current console gen?

You talk at length about how developers cater to the console market, a thing we pc gamers understand far better than you obviously do, and then belittle pc gaming as having no benefit to it besides "extra shinnies" aka better graphics. What you don't seem to grasp is the freedom of pc gaming. The freedom to advance alongside technology rather than stagnate for five to seven years. What you call 'shinnies' is the natural progression of visuals, physics engines, and game design in general that comes steadily for the pc platform rather than the few and far between chunks of console cycles. Having a huge modding community making good games great and extending the life of a game several-fold through user created content is also another thing that makes the pc so wonderful. On top of that there's larger game worlds that can support far more players at once, a massive indie dev community, decades worth of games at one's fingertips without the worry of backwards compatibility, cheaper games, less restrictions, so on and so forth. 

Consoles make things easy. Buy a box, turn on box, put disc in box - done. That's why there are so many console gamers out there. It's gaming made simple, but simple doesn't always mean better. When I get on my pc soapbox it's not to try to convert people over, but rather correct their misconceptions of pc gaming, like yours, that makes it seem that all we care about is graphics. I know this won't change anything in the ongoing war of pc vs consoles, and this was crazy wordy but I just wanted to put down my opinion on the matter. 

ZetA_LatA

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]skrat_01

I really don't care about you and 'PC worshippers', or you out to attack/dispute them. I'm just pointing out the full picture here, and that the industry has reached the level it has due to absolutely everything that has happened. You can't pick or choose, because without one you don't have another; an industry doesn't evolve or develop in isolation of itself, especially one where ideas aren't restricted to the format they are delivered on.

I'm not talking about development being on the PC either, I'm talking about the markets themselves, and at the end of the day it boils down to 'yeah there's lots of popular gaming platforms, console, PC, arcades, phones, whatever, and there's plenty of profitable ones too'; it's a dicussion that can't get any more precise then just that because trying to isolate 'relevence' is neglecting everything else.

Consoles are important in their own way, so is the PC. Can't have one without the other if we're talking about games on a whole.

Please don't throw around undergraduate talk while we're at it, I'm stating that brand exposure and cultural relevence (or impact) are two different things, I'm not saying that they don't exist.

I'm not out to try and verbally drag you through the mud infront of 'PC worshippers' - as far as I can tell they're arguing points contrary to your own; both of which are well, pretty skewed in their own way. I'd rather point out the reality of things instead of platform **** waving.

Consumers speak with their wallet. True or false?

That is billions in revenue generated by one brand alone. True or false?

I specifically said consoles (and corrected myself by adding handheld) are attributed for turning it into a multibillion dollar industry, and that still stands. Smartphones, tablets, and even PC gaming's becoming more commonplace are recent events. It was already a billion dollar industry before they even arrived (late) to the party.

TRUE OR FALSE?

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

lowe0

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

[QUOTE="ZetA_LatA"]

"...if anything at all, be pleased with next gen consoles cause thats actually when developers would wana upgrade core game designs because the common denominator has moved a step up." 

No. You start out this blog stating that you're not trying to attack pc gamers which is exactly what you did albeit in a more political/indirect manner. As far as that quote of yours, why should we be pleased? Pleased that developers will finally be getting out of the stone ages and start to utilize current technology again? Pleased that their new machines will implement far more pc-like architecture? Or pleased because we know the hardware inside those machines will become dated just as quickly as it did in the current console gen?

You talk at length about how developers cater to the console market, a thing we pc gamers understand far better than you obviously do, and then belittle pc gaming as having no benefit to it besides "extra shinnies" aka better graphics. What you don't seem to grasp is the freedom of pc gaming. The freedom to advance alongside technology rather than stagnate for five to seven years. What you call 'shinnies' is the natural progression of visuals, physics engines, and game design in general that comes steadily for the pc platform rather than the few and far between chunks of console cycles. Having a huge modding community making good games great and extending the life of a game several-fold through user created content is also another thing that makes the pc so wonderful. On top of that there's larger game worlds that can support far more players at once, a massive indie dev community, decades worth of games at one's fingertips without the worry of backwards compatibility, cheaper games, less restrictions, so on and so forth. 

Consoles make things easy. Buy a box, turn on box, put disc in box - done. That's why there are so many console gamers out there. It's gaming made simple, but simple doesn't always mean better. When I get on my pc soapbox it's not to try to convert people over, but rather correct their misconceptions of pc gaming, like yours, that makes it seem that all we care about is graphics. I know this won't change anything in the ongoing war of pc vs consoles, and this was crazy wordy but I just wanted to put down my opinion on the matter. 

lowe0

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

:lol: Steam isn't like the app store guy :lol:

Alright, then, back to the previous discussion. Picking up from here:

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

clyde46

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

As I stated, the standard experience would be what comes from the developer, implemented using the platform stack (or something like Steam Works, in the PC's case). If that experience is what you're looking for, then things like community servers actually remove value, as they fragment the player base from the standard game. 3rd party voice is another good example, as it separates those using in game chat from those on the external server. By removing choice and coalescing around a standard, ease of use is enhanced.

To extend one step further, consider matchmaking. Why should there ever be a less than full game when an algorithm can dynamically allocate players to a server based on skill, connection, and open slots? Relying on players to self-organize is sub-optimal.

Alright, then, back to the previous discussion. Picking up from here:

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="lowe0"] Because if they want something outside the standard experience, then that's a necessary compromise. But if you're not interested in anything outside of that standard experience, then it's unnecessary baggage that adds no value to the individual in question.

 

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

lowe0

As I stated, the standard experience would be what comes from the developer, implemented using the platform stack (or something like Steam Works, in the PC's case). If that experience is what you're looking for, then things like community servers actually remove value, as they fragment the player base from the standard game. 3rd party voice is another good example, as it separates those using in game chat from those on the external server. By removing choice and coalescing around a standard, ease of use is enhanced.

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

Tochlight, Torchlight 2, terraria, Natural selection 2, Hotline Miami, Garry's Mod

Quad4Life

These plus Natural Selection 2,Killing Floor,Mount & Blade: Warband,FTL,etc.

There´s literally dozens of them.

You were doing so good by admitting ownage, and then you decided to troll some more

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

Rocker6

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

.

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

lowe0

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

Oh look, another one of these.

Also, how is gaming on PC a "standard experience"? Its anything but that, as you get to customise everything, I would say that consoles offer a standard experience. clyde46

[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

Tochlight, Torchlight 2, terraria, Natural selection 2, Hotline Miami, Garry's Mod

Quad4Life

These plus Natural Selection 2,Killing Floor,Mount & Blade: Warband,FTL,etc.

There´s literally dozens of them.

[QUOTE="clyde46"] Also, how is gaming on PC a "standard experience"? Its anything but that, as you get to customise everything, I would say that consoles offer a standard experience. parkurtommo

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

lowe0

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

When you put things that way, I honestly can't understand why would you invest so much money into a powerful gaming PC. Judging by your description, for you PC gaming basically boils down to only better graphics and performance over consoles, nothing else. Are those things worthy of paying for a multi-monitor setup with 3-SLI 670s?

Sounds like consoles are a perfect platform for your needs and preferences, it's puzzling why you bother with a PC at all, especially with a top of the line one.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/04/10/pc-shipments-mark-biggest-decline-in-nearly-20-years

While it may not be directly linked to the thread in question, i found an interesting article about PC hardware market

megaspiderweb09

The PC gaming market is a subset that is largely independant of influence from total PC sales. These are standalone PC units, sold to average users and businesses. That being said, not all gaming PC's are built from the ground up by users, but it's hardly worth ignoring.

In terms of gaming divisions for larger manufacturers, you may see total dips in the overall shipments, but Dell's Alienware (as an example) division may also be growing.

It seems you are trying to apply blanket reasoning, where it isn't necessarily applicable.

That also includes laptops, which are being murdered by tablets.DarkLink77

Something that slipped my mind, but is hella worth noting.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

clyde46

As for me, specifically? I avoid those parts of the PC experience. I don't use mods, I try to stick to publisher-run servers (or, if that fails, to servers run by ISPs or hardware vendors), I skip voice chat if it's not built into the game, and I don't get into the other community-driven aspects of PC gaming.

I'm referring to what's provided by the developer as a standard experience. In the case of consoles, this would also include the platform middleware stack.

I have gone through most of the answers since i first posted (crazy escalation) and it was a good read, overall i learnt a lot of new perspectives. However a lot of PC gamers still refuse to acknowledge the part where i mentioned Core Design of games (Consoles holding gaming back) will not change untill consoles get an upgrade. That goes to show where the common denomenator is, most developers make games focused for consoles these days so at the end of the day the core game remains the same except for a few extra perks that the PC hardware can display (not necesarily a bad thing).

Really appreciate the amount of feedbacks :D

megaspiderweb09

Your entire premise rests on you being correct. Games are already proving you wrong. As an example, Crysis 3.

Games are not going to get this massive jump in content and graphics had consoles not existed. They do set a limit, but so do a multitude of other things, such as budget/talent/amount of developers/etc.

Prove that most developers make games focussed around consoles. You keep saying things, with little to back you up, or anything at all. I'm not saying you are 100% incorrect, but simply think through what is being said, and if it's actually happening.

----

You clearly aren't being a complete douchebag, which I commend you on. So many idiots on this forum.

 Because if they want something outside the standard experience, then that's a necessary compromise. But if you're not interested in anything outside of that standard experience, then it's unnecessary baggage that adds no value to the individual in question.

 

lowe0

Aw f*ck, i see this thread was lowe0'd to oblivion. Should have posted sooner.. 

[QUOTE="Quad4Life"][QUOTE="Lucianu"]

What does that have to do with anything? Whether they're indie or not, whether they're obscure or not, why would it matter? If the game is good, then that's all that matters. 

Or is gaming a popularity contest for you?  

 

Lucianu

I've ben playing Mount & Blade: Warband for.. about a year now.

Wen you hear the world 'indie' your mind probably thinks of short 2D games, or something that tries to be edgy, right? Indie games are games created by developers that aren't chained by a publisher. 

Aw f*ck, i see this thread was lowe0'd to oblivion. Should have posted sooner.. 

Lucianu

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

Aw f*ck, i see this thread was lowe0'd to oblivion. Should have posted sooner.. 

lowe0

All of them

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Lucianu"]

Aw f*ck, i see this thread was lowe0'd to oblivion. Should have posted sooner.. 

lostrib

All of them

Indeed.  Nothing but cognitive dissonance or just flat or irrelevant points.  Yawn/10

I respect your opinion but there are some things that I don't agree with, first off voice chat. Now you mention that by using a 3rd party service like Mumble or TS you suggest that you are spliting the community, now I can see where you are going with this but you are overlooking the fact that XBL has a party chat feature that normally overrides game comms, isn't that the same as using a 3rd party voice chat service? By removing the end users choice, you are stuck with what the developer wants and that is not always what is best for the game. When I join a TS server, I expect most people in said server are going to be commited to playing the game in question. The same cannot be said for joining a game on say XBL where you are expect the whole barnyard of creatures so to be speak who may not be focused on playing the game, instead are more content to shout abuse at each other.

 

Lastly, you talk about matchmaking based on skill, connection and open slots. The latter two are be done on a end user level, it doesn't take a genius to navigate a server browser to find a game based on ping and open slots. About skill, matchmaking based on skill from past experience is very hit and miss for me. A maths based algorithm can be fudged by players as we've seen in past games. Most PC servers have auto-leveling enabled that will balance the teams to ensure a good spread of people.

clyde46

As for your response on matchmaking, if end users can fill games as well as an algorithm, then why don't they? Self-organization is sub-optimal. You end up with servers with a handful of people trying to attract enough players for a game, when a matchmaker could consolidate them into a single game. If you painstakingly search the browser for a game populated by players of roughly equal skill, there's nothing stopping any other player from showing up and upsetting the balance. And "it can be fudged in some circumstances" isn't a good reason to discard the entire system, instead of working to eliminate said fudging.

Or it makes the communities stronger by giving them more customization options that allows them to play in the groups that like to play the way they do?  Rather than being forced into the overall pool of immature idiots?  We can play the glass is half full, half empty game all day.  I would much rather have that choice and work a little bit harder than have no choice at all.

menes777

As with clyde's comment above, I haven't really had all these negative experiences you're referring to on consoles. On the other hand, it's to the point where I half expect a negative experience every time I join a PC server. And before you say it's my fault, I'm a relatively inoffensive player - I don't run out into a hail of gunfire forcing people to revive me, I use health and revives if I have them unlocked, and unless I have something of relevance to the game to say, I keep my mouth shut.

I want THE best gaming experience possible even if it is only 5% better so of course I play PC. It is that simple. When it comes to pure GAMING experience cost isn't a factor. When you're discussing the driving experience and capabilities of a Ferrari why would you bring up the cost? You don't because it has nothing to do with the driving experience. I'm all about GAMES so such things aren't a problem.

No matter how many times you say the same game played at 720p and 30fps with no possible choice of M/KB is the same experience as playing it in 1080p+ and 60fps with your choice of controller, won't make it true.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

Rocker6

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

Freedom comes with downsides too. Without a firm hand in charge, the user experience quickly degrades into an incoherent mess.

Frostbite24

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"][QUOTE="Rocker6"]

If the PC platform was an incoherent mess, why would anyone waste their time on it?

Better yet, why would you waste time on it?

lowe0

You were there, shouldn't you know?