OXM: Dear PC graphics snobs - you're holding gaming back

[Reasonable]

greenmedic88 said:

Reasonable said:

I know all that.  That's kind of my point - the low risk/high reward focus on consoles is for sure more limiting to gaming evolution than PC.

It all boils down to increased development costs. The days when one guy produce an entire game himself are pretty much done as far as major publisher releases go, or more specifically, physical media retail releases.

Thanks to DD, there are plenty of outlets for independently developed games to be published and bought. The only problem is that they are small niche games that rarely create much more than a ripple in the industry.

But there were games like Limbo, Braid and Everyday Shooter that were developed by one guy or a very small team working independently; each generating a degree of interest for their originality. It's just a little unrealistic to expect many independent developers to use pre-existing game development tools like UE or Cryengine or Source to create a larger scope project that is genuinely unique and pushes boundaries yet manages to appeal to a large enough audience that the costs of paying for the development tools and development staff don't result in a one time project. Zeno Clash (Source Engine game published on Steam, independently developed by Ace) comes to mind even though that was more different than unique.

Anyway, consoles aren't any more limiting in that respect as Limbo, Braid and Everyday Shooter were all available on console through XBL and/or PSN. There are a lot of these types of titles available, only with lesser degrees of success. Other than PSN, XBL or Steam (don't know the approval process for getting published on Steam), independent developers have iOS and Android to publish on. Other than Steam, none of those are tied to PC gaming which is really Windows gaming. I won't even go into Linux gaming which is a tiny niche.

Consoles are definately more limiting due to the publishing restrictions and demands.  I'm not saying bad - but they are less open.  For me the big recent example would be Minecraft - that would have been impossible in the console model and is only going to console now it's "finished" - and even then I believe MS have agreed to bend the rules to allow for more frequent updates than with other titles.

Then there are the numerous flash game sites outside of Steam and the channels you mention.  Hell on PC I could write a game and sell it myself through my own website if I wanted.  PC is fully open platform at the end of the day vs the closed console enviroment.  So long as that remains the case a developer will always have more freedom (whether needed or not) on PC.

I was more talking to larger games or games like Minecraft than very small indie titles.  On console the mass market nature of the devices coupled with the closed environments seriously affects the balance of invovation vs risk to a higher degree than PC.

Both are fine platforms for games - but there is zero way PC gaming and platform is somehow holding gaming back as the article states.  There are PC graphic snobs of course - just as there are console anti-graphic snobs - but that aspect for sure isn't impacting games.  If anything, on console the demand for better visuals on 360/PS3 with the limited power has surely driven developers to sacrifice AI, phyics and other elements to produce a certain level of visuals within their power constraints.

TBH I just can't abide wholesale arrant nonsense which this article absolutely is.