By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

On a tangent here, it's no secret that the PC has been falling behind in exclusive AAA content lately. That's because there really is no first party. In spirit it would be Blizzard, but with RTS and MMO they are basically stuck on PC until Mouse and Keyboard support hit the console, and also they make about 2 games a generation. :P

My point?

Well, SP focused games like Uncharted 2 are well received on consoles. People still love them there. With the PC gamers different gaming tastes, can a game like Uncharted 2 or MW2 survive on great SP campaigns alone?

Or, are console gamers simply willing to spend more money for less "value."

The online shooter has always been the social interaction, and the specifics of that game seen to take a backseat experience. If someone was an expert at CS, he's be an expert at MW2 very quickly. Much like rehashed console games, like Madden. CS is Madden 2k, and MW2 is Madden 2009, in my example. However, the engine that game was based off of, Half-Life, was a much different experience than any other shooter. That's not to say that rehashes can't be great. See Mario Galaxy. I'm implying that with FPS on PC, their SP is often the main differentiation, and not necessarily their MP, aside from the obvious, like map changes and graphics. Your friends are still your friends, no matter what game you play, and they are the main gameplay feature in online play for many folks. Do PC gamers require constant updates to that formula, or would they be willing to accept a game that left it out, and still pay full price?

I think a large amount of console gamers would still buy MW2(or Uncharted 2) without multiplayer at all. Would a large amount of PC gamers. With their differentiating tastes for freedom, we discussed earlier, are they satisfied with standard SP content from a good developer? Or do they require that MP experience?

It's ironic though...that most PC gamers(like myself) have spent well over 1000 dollars on their gaming rigs. I've setting right around 2k right now, for mine. However, it seems they are much more frugal when it comes to games and their value. How come a console gamer will pay 60 bucks for a nice 10 hour game, but a PC gamer(in my experience, like this thread) complains over paying less money for the same game, if it doesn't have certain multiplayer aspects that make it infinitely playable?

I guess I'm not very frugal, and I'm not that value oriented when it comes to gaming. I'd rather have 4 hours of new content, than a million hours of a repeated experience. I think a LOT of console gamers will be buying this game just for the single player.

My favorite PC exclusive over the last few years has definitely been The Witcher. It wasn't a AAA game, by any means, but it was a very fun game, and I had a great time with it. It was SP, I'm not sure it had MP. Was it worth the money, without an online element, to most PC gamers? Is that why it probably didn't get the sales it deserves? Is that MP element a main reason developers are afraid to put high budget SP games exclusively on PC?



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.