What a lot of PC gamers do not understand

[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

Any of your posts in there are more than sufficient to identify you as a troll by your own admission. You're welcome.

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

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.

Jag85

In other words...

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

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

[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?

Thank you for your concern, but no worries, I know what I'm getting myself into! :P

[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?

Rocker6

Thank you for your concern, but no worries, I know what I'm getting myself into! :P

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

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.

Exactly. Mid-range cars and high-end cars are both targetted towards different markets: the former towards the common folks looking for something affordable yet reliable, and the latter towards the folks looking for something more luxurious.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]Don't even engage in conversation with him. The last PC thread he was in he admitted he was just a troll when came to discussing the platform. Literally, I'm not even making it up. Frostbite24

Any of your posts in there are more than sufficient to identify you as a troll by your own admission. You're welcome.

No, where's the specific post where I state that I'm a troll?

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]Quote and link?

lowe0

Any of your posts in there are more than sufficient to identify you as a troll by your own admission. You're welcome.

No, where's the specific post where I state that I'm a troll?

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?

DarkLink77

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29369025/why-does-the-cost-of-a-gaming-pc-matter-only-fanboys-know.?page=0

 

Any of your posts in there are more than sufficient to identify you as a troll by your own admission. You're welcome.

Frostbite24

No, where's the specific post where I state that I'm a troll?

You said "by your own admission". So yes, you're going to need a specific quote to back up your accusation.

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

No, where's the specific post where I state that I'm a troll?

lowe0

You said "by your own admission". So yes, you're going to need a specific quote to back up your accusation.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

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?

Jag85

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]Why are you so convinced that there is only one post. I'm being serious when I say ALL of the posts you made in that thread identified you as a troll especially the last few pages if you really want to isolate some of your more troll posts.clyde46

You said "by your own admission". So yes, you're going to need a specific quote to back up your accusation.

But we have to debate everything! EVERYTHING!

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

No, where's the specific post where I state that I'm a troll?

lowe0

You said "by your own admission". So yes, you're going to need a specific quote to back up your accusation.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Jag85"]

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

Ly_the_Fairy

WoW is actually the most successful game ever made across any system to date.

Not that Pacman, and Space Invaders didn't make billions of dollars, but "estimates" put them both at around $7-$8 billion each at 2012 inflation whereas WoW has surpassed $10 billion.

But even then this thread is more about relevance in today's market. Success of arcades in the 80s isn't really telling of their success today.

As for Space Invaders and Pac-Man, the $7-8 billion (with inflation) estimate each are for the arcade versions alone. If you include the console ports, it easily comes up to over $9 billion each (again, with inflation). It's only when you exclude inflation that WOW comes out on top. It's a bit like how Avatar is the highest-grossing movie of all time without inflation, yet in reality it's Gone With the Wind that's the highest-grossing movie of all time with inflation (interestingly, the highest-grossing movies earned much lower revenues than the highest-grossing games).

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

You said "by your own admission". So yes, you're going to need a specific quote to back up your accusation.

lostrib

But we have to debate everything! EVERYTHING!

Except the coming generation will be PC focused due to the similarity in hardware architecture of the next gen consoles compared to PC. This means a developer can make a game for PC and dumb it down for consoels using nothing more than the built in scalability of the game features. Well, of course with a few things needing to be ported to specifically fit the consoles hardware, but overall PC is having a resurgence on games.

crysis 2 system requirements say it needs 2 ghz intel core duo or athlon 62 x2. Yet it's running perfectly goddamn smooth on a 2 ghz athlon single core.Consolessuck187

I see heewee got a new account, again

[QUOTE="Consolessuck187"]crysis 2 system requirements say it needs 2 ghz intel core duo or athlon 62 x2. Yet it's running perfectly goddamn smooth on a 2 ghz athlon single core.lostrib

I see heewee got a new account, again

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

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

[QUOTE="clyde46"] You're skipping out on the things that make the PC different from consoles. Community driven servers, better 3rd party voice chat and mods that improve game experience. 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. Frostbite24

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.

Yes. It may not be what you'd choose, but is it universally wrong? I just spent my day writing software to perform other people's tasks; why shouldn't I let other people's software perform mine?

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

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?

DarkLink77

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

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.

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.

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.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Jag85"] Actually, arcade games like Space Invaders and Pac-Man are the highest-grossing games of all time... but otherwise, online PC games like World of Warcraft, and more recently the Korean F2P FPS game CrossFire, have clearly grossed more revenues than any console game to date (excluding bundled console packages, of course).

Jag85

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] I said, "single most profitable." Blizzard has about 10 million subscribers paying $15 a month to play WoW, on top of the price of the game and its expansions. Do the math on that. The numbers are insane. That's not arguable. We can argue highest-grossing all day, but WoW makes more money than just about anything, possibly excluding League of Legends.DarkLink77

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

[QUOTE="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.

lowe0

Yes. It may not be what you'd choose, but is it universally wrong? I just spent my day writing software to perform other people's tasks; why shouldn't I let other people's software perform mine?

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.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Jag85"]

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

Jag85

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]So your point is more options means worse overall experience? Yikes.

menes777

Yes. It may not be what you'd choose, but is it universally wrong? I just spent my day writing software to perform other people's tasks; why shouldn't I let other people's software perform mine?

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.

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="Ly_the_Fairy"]

WoW is actually the most successful game ever made across any system to date.

Not that Pacman, and Space Invaders didn't make billions of dollars, but "estimates" put them both at around $7-$8 billion each at 2012 inflation whereas WoW has surpassed $10 billion.

But even then this thread is more about relevance in today's market. Success of arcades in the 80s isn't really telling of their success today.

Ly_the_Fairy

As for Space Invaders and Pac-Man, the $7-8 billion (with inflation) estimate each are for the arcade versions alone. If you include the console ports, it easily comes up to over $9 billion each (again, with inflation). It's only when you exclude inflation that WOW comes out on top. It's a bit like how Avatar is the highest-grossing movie of all time without inflation, yet in reality it's Gone With the Wind that's the highest-grossing movie of all time with inflation (interestingly, the highest-grossing movies earned much lower revenues than the highest-grossing games).

I agree that WoW's revenue can't be calculated by multiplying 15 million subscribers (which is wrong) with $15 a month

But I disagree with the idea that that's the only form of revenue for WoW because it's not. The game has always raked in $1-$1.5 billion a year through digital channels.

And if you want to add software sales into it then just imagine how many copies of WoW have been sold. It's not simply 10-12 million copies of WoW + its expansions. The game is always losing some customers, and gaining new ones. I wish I could find the link, but I do recall Blizzard once mentioning that WoW sells about three times as many games as current subscribers due to the gaining/losing of subscribers on a consistent basis.

According to Activision Blizzard, WOW has been grossing just over $1 billion annually in total (though all channels, including subscriptions and digital & retail sales) from 2008 though to 2011, but their 2012 revenues fell well below $1 billion (with Korean PC game CrossFire now overtaking it as the new annual revenue king).

In total, WOW's revenues come up to about $7 billion at most. In a few years, it's possible that WOW might eventually catch up to Space Invaders or Pac-Man, but that's only if it doesn't continue declining at its current rate.

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

[QUOTE="megaspiderweb09"]

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

lundy86_4

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. You can see total dips in the overall shipments, but Dell's Alienware 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="DarkLink77"]That also includes laptops, which are being murdered by tablets.lundy86_4

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

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]That also includes laptops, which are being murdered by tablets.DarkLink77

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

Exactly. If anything, I see a market that'll be largely growing and shrinking. At the end of the day, consoles and PC hold a significant market. Nothing to stick one's nose up at.

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

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] I said, "single most profitable." Blizzard has about 10 million subscribers paying $15 a month to play WoW, on top of the price of the game and its expansions. Do the math on that. The numbers are insane. That's not arguable. We can argue highest-grossing all day, but WoW makes more money than just about anything, possibly excluding League of Legends.DarkLink77

I've already done the maths, and it's nowhere near as much as you think. The majority of WOW subscribers are from China, and yet China only accounts for a small percentage of WOW's revenues, with most of those Chinese revenues going towards the local Chinese provider. In reality, WOW's gross revenues are about half as much as what you think it is, and it's profit margin even lower than that. Also, WOW's annual revenues are declining, and it has recently been overtaken by CrossFire (that Korean F2P FPS game I was referring to above) in terms of annual online revenues (most of which comes from China). As for League of Legends, that doesnt' generate anywhere near as much revenues as WOW or CrossFire.

Anyway, my point is that, during the arcade golden age of the early 80's, Space Invaders and Pac-Man had annual revenues exceeding a billion dollars every year. With inflation, they are quite easily the highest-grossing video games of all time. That's not to take anything away from WOW, which has clearly out-grossed every (non-bundled) console game ever made, but this is just another example of that short-sightedness I was referring to above, where console and PC gamers keep ignoring other gaming platforms (arcades, handhelds, phones, tablets, and non-PC computers).

WoW is actually the most successful game ever made across any system to date.

Not that Pacman, and Space Invaders didn't make billions of dollars, but "estimates" put them both at around $7-$8 billion each at 2012 inflation whereas WoW has surpassed $10 billion.

But even then this thread is more about relevance in today's market. Success of arcades in the 80s isn't really telling of their success today.

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

Obviously, you're going to set limit at the weakest hardware and port a game from there. There's a reason why Wii is missing alot of multiplates...

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

Consoles holding gaming back is true for sure, at the moment. But I think most would agree this gen has gone on too long.

I think some PC gamers having anti-console behaviour is because they are not happy with the fact that consoles and their userbases ruin games (as known as consolisation or casualisation). PC gamers want the best for their games. They paid for their hardware only to have consoles knocking essential PC optimisation off. That pisses them off. Developers jumping to consoles, e.g. Crytek, also hurts the PC - Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 have awful menus and user interfaces that irritates users with keyboard and mouse. Again, that increases the brutal hate towards consoles to the point where they want consoles to go out of existence. Harsh, but true.

I think some PC gamers having anti-console behaviour is because they are not happy with the fact that consoles and their userbases ruin games (as known as consolisation or casualisation). PC gamers want the best for their games. They paid for their hardware only to have consoles knocking essential PC optimisation off. That pisses them off. Developers jumping to consoles, e.g. Crytek, also hurts the PC - Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 have awful menus and user interfaces that irritates users with keyboard and mouse. Again, that increases the brutal hate towards consoles to the point where they want consoles to go out of existence. Harsh, but true.

Cyberdot

I think some PC gamers having anti-console behaviour is because they are not happy with the fact that consoles and their userbases ruin games (as known as consolisation or casualisation). PC gamers want the best for their games. They paid for their hardware only to have consoles knocking essential PC optimisation off. That pisses them off. Developers jumping to consoles, e.g. Crytek, also hurts the PC - Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 have awful menus and user interfaces that irritates users with keyboard and mouse. Again, that increases the brutal hate towards consoles to the point where they want consoles to go out of existence. Harsh, but true.

Cyberdot

[QUOTE="Ly_the_Fairy"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Interesting. I did not know that. I'm not ignoring the other platforms. I'm just saying writing off the PC is asinine. Jag85

WoW is actually the most successful game ever made across any system to date.

Not that Pacman, and Space Invaders didn't make billions of dollars, but "estimates" put them both at around $7-$8 billion each at 2012 inflation whereas WoW has surpassed $10 billion.

But even then this thread is more about relevance in today's market. Success of arcades in the 80s isn't really telling of their success today.

As for Space Invaders and Pac-Man, the $7-8 billion (with inflation) estimate each are for the arcade versions alone. If you include the console ports, it easily comes up to over $9 billion each (again, with inflation). It's only when you exclude inflation that WOW comes out on top. It's a bit like how Avatar is the highest-grossing movie of all time without inflation, yet in reality it's Gone With the Wind that's the highest-grossing movie of all time with inflation (interestingly, the highest-grossing movies earned much lower revenues than the highest-grossing games).

I agree that WoW's revenue can't be calculated by multiplying 15 million subscribers (which is wrong) with $15 a month

But I disagree with the idea that that's the only form of revenue for WoW because it's not. The game has always raked in $1-$1.5 billion a year through digital channels.

And if you want to add software sales into it then just imagine how many copies of WoW have been sold. It's not simply 10-12 million copies of WoW + its expansions. The game is always losing some customers, and gaining new ones. I wish I could find the link, but I do recall Blizzard once mentioning that WoW sells about three times as many games as current subscribers due to the gaining/losing of subscribers on a consistent basis.

Blog it.clyde46

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

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?

Jag85

it is almost worrysome that some PC want consoles to die off and everyone should start gaming on PC or something.

megaspiderweb09

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Benny_Blakk"]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.

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?