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

Forums - PC - PC Gamers are delusional (controversial opinion)

Conina on 02 December 2013
Kane1389 said:

Not that any PC users care for EA (PC community only cares about Valve and Blizzard, the 2 sole companies keeping PC gaming alive), they just pirate the crap out of their games

Funny, PC is (by far) the platform with the greatest revenue for EA the last quarters:



Around the Network
Kane1389 on 02 December 2013
Conina said:
Kane1389 said:

Not that any PC users care for EA (PC community only cares about Valve and Blizzard, the 2 sole companies keeping PC gaming alive), they just pirate the crap out of their games

Funny, PC is (by far) the platform with the greatest revenue for EA the last quarters:

Which game generted so much revenue for PC?

EDIT: Also, PS360 are 8-7 years old machines with next gen already starting...



Conina on 02 December 2013
Kane1389 said:

Also, PS360 are 8-7 years old machines with next gen already starting...

Yeah, the younger systems (WiiU, 3DS, Vita) seem to be real cash cows for EA ;)



Nem on 02 December 2013

"The argument being PC's are far ahead of what the new PS4 and XBox One are capable of, and yes your right. But they forget the most important thing, we ARE CONSOLE gamers. "

That hits the nail in the head. Console gamers and PC gamers have different habits. The console gamer likes to sit in the couch with a controller in his hand and his big TV to play games.
The PC gamer doesnt mind that he has to stand in a confy chair, that just will never be as confy and relaxing as a couch and will be playing with a smaller screen and a complicated operative system, keyabord and mouse combo. Mantaining a PC and upgrading it require vast ammounts of know-how to pull off sucessfully aswell.

The acessability on both models are completely different. The PC gamer sacrifices time, acessability and confort to have acess to a more complex string of programs and more power. Its comprehensable that the majority of gamers are not willing to make that concessions just to have more powerful graphics and varied applications (wich many already use on their own PC for those purposes).
The console gamer, makes his gaming a ritual of relaxation and acessability. PC's will never be able to get that type of consumer on that type of gaming.

The PC setup on the other hand is quite helpful for other types of games that benefit from the keyboard and mouse combo, like RTS and MMO's. Thats where much of the PC revenue comes from nowadays.



zarx on 02 December 2013
deskpro2k3 said:
Pemalite said:
deskpro2k3 said:

If developers are willing to cater to ultra performing PCs only, they will likely not see profits at all.


Tell that to Star Citizen, I think they missed that memo.

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/76653/

Creator of Star Citizen.

Christopher Roberts:
As far as consoles go Star Citizen will never be on the PS3 or Xbox 360. As for the next gen consoles, PS4 and Xbox One, we have NO CURRENT PLANS, but my stance remains open and is consistent with the many interviews I’ve given -

IF the platform holders (Sony & Microsoft) allow us to update the code and data without restrictions and odious time consuming QC procedures, IF they allow our community to openly interact with each other across platforms then I would CONSIDER supporting them.

 

Knowing Sony being open and not restrictive, I'd say there is a pretty good chance Star Citizen might come to PS4.

For your other questions. I can't elaborate any clearer that.


You realise he is esentially trolling there right? You know Planetside 2 that SOE developed FPSMMO that is coming to PS4 well it was going to have cross play between PC and PS4 but Sony wouldn't let them simulpatch on PS4 so they had to axe the feature. If sony won't even let their own studios do it what makes you think they will make an exception for SC?

 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Around the Network
deskpro2k3 on 02 December 2013
zarx said:
deskpro2k3 said:
Pemalite said:
deskpro2k3 said:

If developers are willing to cater to ultra performing PCs only, they will likely not see profits at all.


Tell that to Star Citizen, I think they missed that memo.

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/76653/

Creator of Star Citizen.

Christopher Roberts:
As far as consoles go Star Citizen will never be on the PS3 or Xbox 360. As for the next gen consoles, PS4 and Xbox One, we have NO CURRENT PLANS, but my stance remains open and is consistent with the many interviews I’ve given -

IF the platform holders (Sony & Microsoft) allow us to update the code and data without restrictions and odious time consuming QC procedures, IF they allow our community to openly interact with each other across platforms then I would CONSIDER supporting them.

 

Knowing Sony being open and not restrictive, I'd say there is a pretty good chance Star Citizen might come to PS4.

For your other questions. I can't elaborate any clearer that.


You realise he is esentially trolling there right? You know Planetside 2 that SOE developed FPSMMO that is coming to PS4 well it was going to have cross play between PC and PS4 but Sony wouldn't let them simulpatch on PS4 so they had to axe the feature. If sony won't even let their own studios do it what makes you think they will make an exception for SC?

 


Because they do it with Square Enix. Final Fantasy XIV:ARR is cross platform with PC, PS3, and soon PS4. Warframe will also have crossplatform play soon with PS4 and PC.



Hynad on 02 December 2013
Pemalite said:
deskpro2k3 said:

Some PC only gamers think they're a master race.

They seem insecure. I've seen these comments on youtube, and on gaming websites. They post "PC master race" on articles about consoles.

 

Its consoles what brought gaming into the mainstream.

 

So it's the consoles fault they're full of quick-time events and "Press A to win" and dumbed down gameplay to appease for the lowest common denominator? :P

This speaks for itself.


I won't argue that consoles assisted in making gaming more mainstream and helped with targeting games more towards casuals, but that's not always a good thing either, not to mention Steam didn't exactly take a backseat with that revolution either.

I remember the days where you needed a phone-book sized game manual just to fly a plane in a game or a spaceship, the complexity was astounding back then and when you mastered it you felt like a million bucks.
Not to mention that developers used to be more bold and would even create new genre's, when was the last time you played/saw a game like Battlezone 2 or Sacrifice that blended Real-Time Strategy and First/3rd person action? It's been a long time. - The closest I have seen anyone get was with Sanctum that blended Tower Defense and First Person Shooting, but even that's a far-cry to the games of old.

The sad reality is, people complain when a campaign is too long or the game is too hard these days, so that's brought us the horrible and short and simple campaigns in games like Call of Duty and Battlefield where it's flashy explosions over actuall gameplay substance.
I personally think it will get even worse with this new generation as developers figure out ways to take even more control away from players so all they end up doing is pointing and pressing a button or two and not actually interacting with the world.

That from my perspective is what consoles have done to gaming due to pushing for more mainstream acceptance.

Thankfully the PC has tons of exclusives with actuall depth and replayability, granted such games aren't for everyone that all comes down to personal tastes and opinions as everyone is different.

I'm part of the PC gaming master race for one simple reason. - I don't like compromises in image quality or gameplay.

This car analogy is shit. To say the least. Most performance cars have poor handling, among other things that more affordable cars excel at in comparison.

Now, as for your complaint about console gaming, it's the pursuit of ever more realistic and intricate graphics that is killing the industry. Not the consoles. If developers didn't have to make their games ever more flashy to attract people to their games, they would still make games that take risks on the gameplay side of things. Sadly, people ask for sequels more than for entirely new game concepts. If they want to push these new concepts, they have to make a successful IP, then tweak it titles after titles, increasing the complexity gradually. This is sad, yeah, but that's the state of the entire videogame industry. The PC games you mention are niche titles at best. The PC games that have sold the most through history have been the ones with simpler control schemes and concepts. 

But sure... blame it all on the consoles. -__-



Mummelmann on 02 December 2013
Hynad said:
Pemalite said:
deskpro2k3 said:

Some PC only gamers think they're a master race.

They seem insecure. I've seen these comments on youtube, and on gaming websites. They post "PC master race" on articles about consoles.

 

Its consoles what brought gaming into the mainstream.

 

So it's the consoles fault they're full of quick-time events and "Press A to win" and dumbed down gameplay to appease for the lowest common denominator? :P

This speaks for itself.


I won't argue that consoles assisted in making gaming more mainstream and helped with targeting games more towards casuals, but that's not always a good thing either, not to mention Steam didn't exactly take a backseat with that revolution either.

I remember the days where you needed a phone-book sized game manual just to fly a plane in a game or a spaceship, the complexity was astounding back then and when you mastered it you felt like a million bucks.
Not to mention that developers used to be more bold and would even create new genre's, when was the last time you played/saw a game like Battlezone 2 or Sacrifice that blended Real-Time Strategy and First/3rd person action? It's been a long time. - The closest I have seen anyone get was with Sanctum that blended Tower Defense and First Person Shooting, but even that's a far-cry to the games of old.

The sad reality is, people complain when a campaign is too long or the game is too hard these days, so that's brought us the horrible and short and simple campaigns in games like Call of Duty and Battlefield where it's flashy explosions over actuall gameplay substance.
I personally think it will get even worse with this new generation as developers figure out ways to take even more control away from players so all they end up doing is pointing and pressing a button or two and not actually interacting with the world.

That from my perspective is what consoles have done to gaming due to pushing for more mainstream acceptance.

Thankfully the PC has tons of exclusives with actuall depth and replayability, granted such games aren't for everyone that all comes down to personal tastes and opinions as everyone is different.

I'm part of the PC gaming master race for one simple reason. - I don't like compromises in image quality or gameplay.

This car analogy is shit. To say the least. Most performance cars have poor handling, among other things that more affordable cars excel at in comparison.


All topic aside, just taste that sentence for a bit. Are you claiming that regular cars have better handling than performance cars? You do know that the term "performance" in this setting has nothing to with appearing on a stage but actual increased performance?

On another note; have you ever driven one and what the hell was wrong with it?!



Hynad on 02 December 2013
Mummelmann said:
Hynad said:
Pemalite said:
deskpro2k3 said:

Some PC only gamers think they're a master race.

They seem insecure. I've seen these comments on youtube, and on gaming websites. They post "PC master race" on articles about consoles.

 

Its consoles what brought gaming into the mainstream.

 

So it's the consoles fault they're full of quick-time events and "Press A to win" and dumbed down gameplay to appease for the lowest common denominator? :P

This speaks for itself.


I won't argue that consoles assisted in making gaming more mainstream and helped with targeting games more towards casuals, but that's not always a good thing either, not to mention Steam didn't exactly take a backseat with that revolution either.

I remember the days where you needed a phone-book sized game manual just to fly a plane in a game or a spaceship, the complexity was astounding back then and when you mastered it you felt like a million bucks.
Not to mention that developers used to be more bold and would even create new genre's, when was the last time you played/saw a game like Battlezone 2 or Sacrifice that blended Real-Time Strategy and First/3rd person action? It's been a long time. - The closest I have seen anyone get was with Sanctum that blended Tower Defense and First Person Shooting, but even that's a far-cry to the games of old.

The sad reality is, people complain when a campaign is too long or the game is too hard these days, so that's brought us the horrible and short and simple campaigns in games like Call of Duty and Battlefield where it's flashy explosions over actuall gameplay substance.
I personally think it will get even worse with this new generation as developers figure out ways to take even more control away from players so all they end up doing is pointing and pressing a button or two and not actually interacting with the world.

That from my perspective is what consoles have done to gaming due to pushing for more mainstream acceptance.

Thankfully the PC has tons of exclusives with actuall depth and replayability, granted such games aren't for everyone that all comes down to personal tastes and opinions as everyone is different.

I'm part of the PC gaming master race for one simple reason. - I don't like compromises in image quality or gameplay.

This car analogy is shit. To say the least. Most performance cars have poor handling, among other things that more affordable cars excel at in comparison.


All topic aside, just taste that sentence for a bit. Are you claiming that regular cars have better handling than performance cars? You do know that the term "performance" in this setting has nothing to with appearing on a stage but actual increased performance?

On another note; have you ever driven one and what the hell was wrong with it?!


A Ferrari Modena. And it was awesome. But I didn't get to test it all that much since it was in a closed environment. That being said, I read car review mags and yearly books, and that's always a detail that comes out, for most of them. 




ListerOfSmeg on 02 December 2013

This seems like such a silly argument to me and to claim you have a high end PC but cannot see the justification in them is laughable and easy to see its a lie.

I multi task every day. You have a high end PC but never use multi tasking? No

Why is a PC better?
The online is free so its cheaper in the long run
I can do a lot more than just play games on it. Granted you can on a PS4/X1 but its limited.
Games are better
Graphics are better
Controls are better
More Options for games
Cheaper prices for games
While I do own a console, I wont act like its superior to my PC. I only own it because its library is vastly different to my PC and I can play it while I am sitting at my PC.
With consoles, especially PS4 and X1, you are paying more, for an inferior experience. I can build a PC superior to the mobile parts in PS4 for around 500.00
Now if I paid 400 for a PS4 I would also need to pay to access online. That is over 1000.00 spent over 10 years.
500.00 more for less in every way. Less options, less power, less games.