PC Gaming being "held back" by Consoles says Crytek Boss - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Pandamox;26378558]Some of the main reasons why I like consoles more than PCs these days You can instantly put in a CD that you just bought from a store and play. You can rent games for a week instead of having to buy them / play a 30 minutes demo Easier to pick up and play I don't have to search for new parts every few years to make sure I can run the games well A few years ago when I wasn't working 70+ hours a week, I preferred PC gaming. But now when you're short on free time, I don't really like having to go through that extra hassle when I could just put the disc in and be playing with my friends in less than 2 minutes[/QUOTE] This is a good reason, it's sad that consoles are going down the installation path too, especially PS3. Look at MGS4 and GT5. The 360 has installation too but it's not mandatory, however it in most cases significantly decreases load times.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26379495]The next generation will likely be compatible with the same types of games, why wouldn't they be?[/QUOTE] Can you play Xbox games on your 360? I sure as hell can't play Sly Cooper on my PS3, I have to get the updated collection of all three. I have still have the original Megaman Legends CD that I never got to beat after my PS2 was traded in. It now sits there doing nothing and it pisses me off to no end. 360 and PS3 couldn't play those games because of the HD resolutions, HDD and Blu-Ray Disks. Since consoles are limited to what they're originally designed with, it would take a year to update a previous generation game to the current.

[QUOTE=waxrock;26378984]I only play consoles for a few reasons. 1) They're cheaper 2) All my friends play on them 3) It's far more relaxing to kick back on the couch/beanbag and play with your friends vs sitting in your chair and playing alone in your room 4) It's cheaper?[/QUOTE] 1) Not in the long run, especially compared to the 360. You might have to pay more for PC parts, but the games cost a lot more on consoles. On the 360 you gotta pay for online too. 2) Yeah, so do mine. I just can't be assed to turn on my 360 however, I haven't even touched it after I got bored with Reach (two weeks). Now I pretty much only play with online friends since none of my real friends own a gaming PC: 3) Semi-valid, it's true that you in most cases can't play with multiple people on PC, but the couch thing can be done with a long HDMI cable and ten minutes of time. 4) nope As it's pretty obvious by my posts, I'm almost 100% PC gamer. I play my PS1 occasionally, would play my PS2 as well but I was stupid and sold the games. The 360 has no games for me, and it costs way too much to play online. I just got a new video card since my old one had shit warranty, and this thing will be able to play probably every single multiplatform title until the next console generation. Not counting shoddily optimized games which I don't even bother buying.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;26344261]PC gaming is great if you have an indefinite source of money for you to spend on your pc, however not everyone wants to spend £2000 just to play the newest games with bearable graphics.[/QUOTE] A $US500 PC That Can Kick Crysis’ Ass [url]http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/04/a-500-pc-that-can-kick-crysis-ass/[/url] Add a monitor and a few extra bits here and there

[QUOTE=ashzu;26379618][url]http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/04/a-500-pc-that-can-kick-crysis-ass/[/url] Add a monitor and a few extra bits here and there[/QUOTE] And that's from almost two years ago. You could get a much better PC now for the same money, or pay much less for the same performance as in the link.

I read in a PC magazine (issue was two months old or something) you could build a $300AUD computer that could run Crysis on High, 1900x1080 resolution (unfortunately, Anti Aliasing turned off) but I couldn't find a similar article on google, so I just posted that.

[QUOTE=ashzu;26379737]I read in a PC magazine (issue was two months old or something) you could build a $300AUD computer that could run Crysis on High, 1900x1080 resolution (unfortunately, Anti Aliasing turned off) but I couldn't find a similar article on google, so I just posted that.[/QUOTE] You wouldn't need AA that at that res anyway.

[QUOTE=goon165;26379748]You wouldn't need AA that at that res anyway.[/QUOTE] I can tell from experience, you kinda do. The aliasing isn't as bad compared to 720p of course, but the jaggies are still noticeable since you usually sit pretty close to the screen. [editline]29th November 2010[/editline] Besides, running Crysis on High is pretty easy. If they showed a cheap build that can play in on Very High I'd be more impressed.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26378710]Though technically it's easier to just download it because you don't have to do ANYTHING except press download and press play when it's done (and install whatever else it'll want to install for some reason), it can take more time though, or it can even take a lot less time. It depends blah blah blah[/QUOTE] You know, in a lot of countries your download limit isn't very high and downloading a game can take a HUGE chunk out of your monthly allowance. I'm lucky that the ISP I'm with gives me unmetered downloads though Steam if I use this program called 'Steamwatch', but because like everyone on my ISP uses it it's slow as shit to download ('cos the servers to download through are always full). For other people though: downloading a game will take a huge chunk out of what they can download a month and it might just be infeasible for them to do it.

[QUOTE=sltungle;26380249]You know, in a lot of countries your download limit isn't very high and downloading a game can take a HUGE chunk out of your monthly allowance. I'm lucky that the ISP I'm with gives me unmetered downloads though Steam if I use this program called 'Steamwatch', but because like everyone on my ISP uses it it's slow as shit to download ('cos the servers to download through are always full). For other people though: downloading a game will take a huge chunk out of what they can download a month and it might just be infeasible for them to do it.[/QUOTE] That's a fault of the ISP's not Steam's. Games are only gonna get bigger.

[QUOTE=HolyCrusade;26338551]You know why PC gaming isn't a very profitable market? Piracy. [editline]27th November 2010[/editline] though all of you FREEDOM FIGHTERS are too blind to see it[/QUOTE] It's probably already been said by now, but you know you can easily pirate games for consoles. It's not hard to mod a console to run pirated games.

While it's true that PCs cost around the same as consoles, the amount of people out of one hundred that would build a computer by themselves could probably be counted on one hand.

[QUOTE=Hesychasmos;26361088]So you're implying that it would be impossible to adapt a motion sensor and wireless controllers to a personal computer[/QUOTE] No I wasn't implying that. But I don't wanna bring my computer down to the livingroom downstairs to be able to play these kinds of games with my friends. I'm not saying the PC can't do it, I'm just saying it'd be another thing.

Why not just...do it? Make a PC version that's living up to it's full potential and make a version that runs as best as it can on consoles.

[QUOTE=Memobot;26382809]Why not just...do it? Make a PC version that's living up to it's full potential and make a version that runs as best as it can on consoles.[/QUOTE] Because console games sell, pc games do not. Most devs just don't bother making better games for pc.

You all know Halo right? It used to be for the PC (Combat Evolved), and I think they should've sticked to the PC. You know Halo would be much, much better if it were.

[QUOTE=Recurracy;26384218]You all know Halo right? It used to be for the PC (Combat Evolved), and I think they should've sticked to the PC. You know Halo would be much, much better if it were.[/QUOTE] Halo was a mediocre FPS on the PC, the only reason why it did so well on the Xbox is because they ported it correctly.

It isn't that consoles are holding PC back, no one can blame the hardware. The developers are holding back the PC. Developers want money (it isn't a problem) so they're going to go where the market is the biggest and that is consoles. Most people who game these days want a cheap alternative vs paying thousands for a high end computer. Developers make a game for a console - this game in question is being released on all consoles and PC. So instead of developing or doing a proper port to the PC they do a half ass port with bugs up the asshole, shitty controls and broken graphics. Which isn't unusual, PC gamers get some nice games but that is rare, most of the time we get the shit end of the stick. Developers all push out more games on consoles then they do PC. Most of the highly anticipated games (Like duke nukem fucking forever - takes 10+ years of sweet development time for the ultimate PC experience.) As for the other topic of piracy - Don't even get me started with this shit. This argument is so fucking old and stupid it is ridiculous. There are no fucking statistic that can show "profit loss" - How can you lose money on a product that wasn't even stolen or taken (I.E still sitting on the shelf). Companies have to point the finger and blame piracy because they're fucking failures. If anything they lose sales because they make god awful games that don't deserve a 50 dollar price tag and when the customer does buy it they have to have a epic battle with DRM just to get the fucking game to work. To sum it up the only people holding back the PC market is the fucking companies and developers. We're here, we're a large market, so stop treating us like thieves and start treating us like customers.

[QUOTE=MR-X;26389926]paying thousands for a high end computer[/QUOTE] lol generalizing

Console War.

[QUOTE=Zezibesh;26379558]1) Not in the long run, especially compared to the 360. You might have to pay more for PC parts, but the games cost a lot more on consoles. On the 360 you gotta pay for online too. 2) Yeah, so do mine. I just can't be assed to turn on my 360 however, I haven't even touched it after I got bored with Reach (two weeks). Now I pretty much only play with online friends since none of my real friends own a gaming PC: 3) Semi-valid, it's true that you in most cases can't play with multiple people on PC, but the couch thing can be done with a long HDMI cable and ten minutes of time. 4) nope As it's pretty obvious by my posts, I'm almost 100% PC gamer. I play my PS1 occasionally, would play my PS2 as well but I was stupid and sold the games. The 360 has no games for me, and it costs way too much to play online. I just got a new video card since my old one had shit warranty, and this thing will be able to play probably every single multiplatform title until the next console generation. Not counting shoddily optimized games which I don't even bother buying.[/QUOTE] The thing is that PC games are starting to cost as much as console games. And while you have to pay for XBL, that's a lot of years of playing in order to even reach the price of a new PC. Don't get me wrong though. I still play on the PC and I love it. It's just too easy sometimes (lol).

[QUOTE=waxrock;26394046] It's just too easy sometimes (lol).[/QUOTE] [/quote] Play with only one arm then if you want harder.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;26394114] Play with only one arm then if you want harder.[/quote] Ehh, physically handicapping myself is no fun.

[QUOTE=waxrock;26394046]The thing is that PC games are starting to cost as much as console games. And while you have to pay for XBL, that's a lot of years of playing in order to even reach the price of a new PC. Don't get me wrong though. I still play on the PC and I love it. It's just too easy sometimes (lol).[/QUOTE] that depends on were you got your pc from cause mine cost less then a ps3 (when it first came out)

Crysis is unplayable for me because I have serious OSD when it comes to framerate. I'm willing to sacrifice eye-candy for a stable 60 fps. However, turning all settings to low in Crysis I couldn't get a stable 60 fps. The constant shifting from 40+ fps to 20 fps gave me motion sickness. It's practically unplayable.

[QUOTE=Bobv2;26395408]Crysis is unplayable for me because I have serious OSD when it comes to framerate. I'm willing to sacrifice eye-candy for a stable 60 fps. However, turning all settings to low in Crysis I couldn't get a stable 60 fps. The constant shifting from 40+ fps to 20 fps gave me motion sickness. It's practically unplayable.[/QUOTE] how much did you pay for your pc? also its not like your missing anything by not being able to play crisis

[QUOTE=imasillypiggys;26395475]how much did you pay for your pc? also its not like your missing anything by not being able to play crisis[/QUOTE] I have a Core 2 Quad Q9550 and a GTX 280. I can't play FC 2 either because the framerate dips below 60 too often and randomly. I can play BC2 just fine with nearly 60 fps all the time, and it looks good too.

[QUOTE=Bobv2;26395708]I have a Core 2 Quad Q9550 and a GTX 280. I can't play FC 2 either because the framerate dips below 60 too often and randomly. I can play BC2 just fine with nearly 60 fps all the time, and it looks good too.[/QUOTE] That's odd, my shitty 9800 GTX that can't run BC2 fine at all (or much anything that has better graphics than uh...whatever) can run FC2 just great

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26395736]That's odd, my shitty 9800 GTX that can't run BC2 fine at all (or much anything that has better graphics than uh...whatever) can run FC2 just great[/QUOTE] I have to set everything on medium and no AA or filtering to get a solid consistant 60 fps, if I turn it on and put everything to high it dips below during intense fights. By great do you mean 60fps+ at all times? That's sorft of what I'm after. The screen in FC2 moves around so much I pretty much feel like I'm going to puke if the framerate keeps having ADHD. EDIT: the screen moves around alot in BC2 but it never drops below the refresh rate, so it's all good. The lower framerates in FC2 and Crysis really make me feel sick when I'm trying to keep track of a lot of action at once, and trying to aim at enemies and ducking in and out of cover quickly, it kills the whole experience because I like to play on higher difficulties. The only reason I stopped playing Crysis is because of this problem, it simply wasn't enjoyable. Again, BC2 is very fun because I don't feel like the framerate is getting in the way, so it's probably has the most immersion. EDIT2: Even turning down Crysis to low and AA all the way off didn't seem to make any difference from running it on high.

[QUOTE=Ridge;26361621]So if Crytek thinks consoles are ruining gaming, then why the hell are they making console versions of the new Crysis?[/QUOTE] They need to make money some how. Admit it people, PC exclusives are doomed to bring in poor amounts of revenue, especially with all the idiot pirates saying "piracy isn't bad, we buy what we download". [editline]30th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Bobv2;26395708]I have a Core 2 Quad Q9550 and a GTX 280. I can't play FC 2 either because the framerate dips below 60 too often and randomly. I can play BC2 just fine with nearly 60 fps all the time, and it looks good too.[/QUOTE] Your monitor is crap or you have v sync on.