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

Forums - PC - 2 things that will keep pc gaming alive for many more years

Kenryoku_Maxis said:
Mendicate Bias said:
I agree the PC is a better platform for Indy developers but what garcian said is that there have been no profitable or good indie games for the consoles which is just wrong. Flower, Fat Princess, Dishwasher, Undertow, Braid, Splosion Man, Geometry Wars were all great games and were all released on consoles. So yea PC is the better platform for indie developers but you can still have a big hit with amazing profits on the consoles too.

And actually, there's the argument that you can make more potential profits, even with a small indie game, on consoles over PC.

Of course, it depends on the genre and how you release it.  A independent SRPG probably won't do well on XBL or WiiWare and fare better on PC.  However, many SHUMPS, action games and especially puzzle and platformers have done AMAZINGLY well on XBL and WiiWare when they probably would have hardly been noticed in the sea of indie self published and freeware on PCs.

Like with any game genre, from the very biggest to the smallest, like these, it all comes down to advertising and hype.  And since XBL and WiiWare markets the games for you on a worldwide console distribution service....

Steam.



Wii/PC/DS Lite/PSP-2000 owner, shameless Nintendo and AMD fanboy.

My comp, as shown to the right (click for fullsize pic)

CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3.2 GHz
Video Card: XFX 1 GB Radeon HD 5870
Memory: 8 GB A-Data DDR3-1600
Motherboard: ASUS M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
Primary Storage: OCZ Vertex 120 GB
Case: Cooler Master HAF-932
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Extra Storage: WD Caviar Black 640 GB,
WD Caviar Black 750 GB, WD Caviar Black 1 TB
Display: Triple ASUS 25.5" 1920x1200 monitors
Sound: HT Omega Striker 7.1 sound card,
Logitech X-540 5.1 speakers
Input: Logitech G5 mouse,
Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 keyboard
Wii Friend Code: 2772 8804 2626 5138 Steam: jefforange89
Around the Network
vlad321 said:
Mendicate Bias said:
jefforange89 said:
"They will always have uniform system specs"

People always say this as a downside to PC gaming, but it really isn't. In fact, it's one of the biggest advantages to PC gaming.

Want to spend a token few hundred dollars to play games moderate settings? You're allowed to.
Want to spend a little bit more for a PC with much more power than the HD twins could ever dream of having? Go right ahead.
Want to drop three grand on a system with two 5970s powering six 1600p monitors playing games at such a resolution? You're more than welcome!

But with PS360, you're locked in with the same, old, underpowered, outdated hardware for as long as Sony and Microsoft want you to be.

Which also means that developers have to take the time and make sure the game runs flawlessly with every possible hardware setup out there. Now I'm not a game developer but I would imagine it is far simpler to code for one set of hardware than it is to code for 50 different combinations of hardware.

Or if you want to show your mettle in doing amazing stuff with hardware ( like Carmack) then it's a blessing that you aren't restricted to the same old games and looking like everyone else.

True but even with a single hardware format developers continue to learn tricks and optimize their codes so while the graphical jump over a five year span for the consoles won't theoretically be as large as the ones for the PC that jump will still be there. Just look at games like Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, Alan Wake, GoW2, GT5, Forza 3 and Heavy Rain and compare them to games 2-3 years ago and you see the difference.

Theres also the fact that first party titles get major financial backing and big advertisement campaigns from their console manufacturers allowing the developers to spend more money and time pushing the graphical boundaries for the game which is a resource PC games sorely lack in.



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Mendicate Bias said:
vlad321 said:
Mendicate Bias said:
jefforange89 said:
"They will always have uniform system specs"

People always say this as a downside to PC gaming, but it really isn't. In fact, it's one of the biggest advantages to PC gaming.

Want to spend a token few hundred dollars to play games moderate settings? You're allowed to.
Want to spend a little bit more for a PC with much more power than the HD twins could ever dream of having? Go right ahead.
Want to drop three grand on a system with two 5970s powering six 1600p monitors playing games at such a resolution? You're more than welcome!

But with PS360, you're locked in with the same, old, underpowered, outdated hardware for as long as Sony and Microsoft want you to be.

Which also means that developers have to take the time and make sure the game runs flawlessly with every possible hardware setup out there. Now I'm not a game developer but I would imagine it is far simpler to code for one set of hardware than it is to code for 50 different combinations of hardware.

Or if you want to show your mettle in doing amazing stuff with hardware ( like Carmack) then it's a blessing that you aren't restricted to the same old games and looking like everyone else.

True but even with a single hardware format developers continue to learn tricks and optimize their codes so while the graphical jump over a five year span for the consoles won't theoretically be as large as the ones for the PC that jump will still be there. Just look at games like Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, Alan Wake, GoW2, GT5, Forza 3 and Heavy Rain and compare them to games 2-3 years ago and you see the difference.

Theres also the fact that first party titles get major financial backing and big advertisement campaigns from their console manufacturers allowing the developers to spend more money and time pushing the graphical boundaries for the game which is a resource PC games sorely lack in.

Oh I absolutely agree, but also keep in mind that in those 5 years the graphics jump is far more significant than if it was just on a static piece of hardware. As I always said, build a PC about 6-12 months into a generation and you will be able to handle ALL games the consoles can manage plus any future PC games.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Kenryoku_Maxis said:
STEKSTAV said:
Kenryoku_Maxis said:

You're talking about your personal opinion of why you think certain genres of games play better on PCs (mostly all of them apparently).  This thread, and the original points brought up, were that PC dominated certain genres and only needed those genres to survive.  Neither is true, as console games are heavily invested in those genres and many of those genres, console games sell way better than PC (such as RPGs).

Your personal opinion on PCs being 'superior' aside, you need to look at the big picture.  Just because you like games on PC doesn't mean they are selling well or better on PC.  Because they aren't.

Question 1: The OP claimed that two genres would keep the PC alive.. two game genres that is hard for developers to make decent on Consoles, right? Why? Because they wouldn't sell well, or because they wouldn't play well?

Question 2: Why do you feel that PC control the the FPS genre? Why? Because they sell well, or because they play well?

The OP claimed that two generes plays better on PCs than consoles and such the PC will stay alive due to consoles inability to recreate a decent game within those genres. 

Question 3: So by now you've most likely written "Because they play better". So if the PC have more RPGs (MMORPGs alike), and controls that plays better within that genre. How come consoles have the upper hand?

Im not saying that Console RPGs like Fable etc would play better on PCs, or that the difference between PC RPGs and Console RPGs are as big as PC RTS and Console RTS. But i find it somewhat contradicting to say that something that within the RPG gener has a the bigger quantity of games aswell as quality, would be "inferior" to something that is second in just that. Dosen't add up. Even more so when you yourself said that FPS is a PC genre when Console FPS are far bigger and closer to PCs than Console RPGs.

I would say I contradicted myself, but simply by saying one word wrong.  Instead of saying 'control', I should have said PC has better 'support' of FPS.  Though obviously, as you said, FPS on consoles are selling much better.  But since many of the FPS are being developed for both PC and then being put on the consoles at the same time (same game for both platforms), that's kind of the reason FPS are still more of a PC genre.  Not to mention many of the biggest FPS developers develop mostly PC games.

Also, both the genres the OP stated can and have been made on consoles well.  I don't think games like FFXI, Phantasy Star Online or Monster Hunter Tri lack anything that makes them a viable MMO.  RTS however can be debated as being better played on a PC, though there are console games which have used the setup, such as Pikmin and Little King's Story.  And put their very own spin on it.

But no matter how you slice it, whether you're looking at RPGs by their sales, 'support' or just plain number of titles released, consoles outnumber PC RPGs.  Its been that way ever since the mid 90s.  Heck, even the major innovators and game series which STARTED RPGs on PC (games like Wizardry and Ultima) moved to consoles in the mid 90s, mostly to increase their sales as the PC market is just smaller than that of the console market.  So unless you take into account those small, independantly developed PC RPGs, then console RPGs outnumber them.

Okay, that didn't really add anything besides name dropping a few games that did it well. So yet again, back to topic.. why are we here? Why do the OP, and most people, feel that certain genres are PC oriented?

There are more successful MMOs on PCs than on Consoles.
There are more successful RTS on PCs than on Consoles.
There are more successful RPGs on PCs than on Consoles.
There are basicly the same amount of successful FPSs on PCs as on Consoles.

Yet FPS is a PC genre, while RGPs aren't? I mean, World of Warcraft basicly earns more money than all combined RPGs on Consoles each year.

Any modern day FPS game is also on consoles. Heck, consoles even have big exclusives like Killzone 2, Halo 3 and The Conduit. How does that relate to PCs having more support? Might it be because the genre have better gameplay when on PC?



STEKSTAV said:
Kenryoku_Maxis said:
STEKSTAV said:
Kenryoku_Maxis said:

You're talking about your personal opinion of why you think certain genres of games play better on PCs (mostly all of them apparently).  This thread, and the original points brought up, were that PC dominated certain genres and only needed those genres to survive.  Neither is true, as console games are heavily invested in those genres and many of those genres, console games sell way better than PC (such as RPGs).

Your personal opinion on PCs being 'superior' aside, you need to look at the big picture.  Just because you like games on PC doesn't mean they are selling well or better on PC.  Because they aren't.

Question 1: The OP claimed that two genres would keep the PC alive.. two game genres that is hard for developers to make decent on Consoles, right? Why? Because they wouldn't sell well, or because they wouldn't play well?

Question 2: Why do you feel that PC control the the FPS genre? Why? Because they sell well, or because they play well?

The OP claimed that two generes plays better on PCs than consoles and such the PC will stay alive due to consoles inability to recreate a decent game within those genres. 

Question 3: So by now you've most likely written "Because they play better". So if the PC have more RPGs (MMORPGs alike), and controls that plays better within that genre. How come consoles have the upper hand?

Im not saying that Console RPGs like Fable etc would play better on PCs, or that the difference between PC RPGs and Console RPGs are as big as PC RTS and Console RTS. But i find it somewhat contradicting to say that something that within the RPG gener has a the bigger quantity of games aswell as quality, would be "inferior" to something that is second in just that. Dosen't add up. Even more so when you yourself said that FPS is a PC genre when Console FPS are far bigger and closer to PCs than Console RPGs.

I would say I contradicted myself, but simply by saying one word wrong.  Instead of saying 'control', I should have said PC has better 'support' of FPS.  Though obviously, as you said, FPS on consoles are selling much better.  But since many of the FPS are being developed for both PC and then being put on the consoles at the same time (same game for both platforms), that's kind of the reason FPS are still more of a PC genre.  Not to mention many of the biggest FPS developers develop mostly PC games.

Also, both the genres the OP stated can and have been made on consoles well.  I don't think games like FFXI, Phantasy Star Online or Monster Hunter Tri lack anything that makes them a viable MMO.  RTS however can be debated as being better played on a PC, though there are console games which have used the setup, such as Pikmin and Little King's Story.  And put their very own spin on it.

But no matter how you slice it, whether you're looking at RPGs by their sales, 'support' or just plain number of titles released, consoles outnumber PC RPGs.  Its been that way ever since the mid 90s.  Heck, even the major innovators and game series which STARTED RPGs on PC (games like Wizardry and Ultima) moved to consoles in the mid 90s, mostly to increase their sales as the PC market is just smaller than that of the console market.  So unless you take into account those small, independantly developed PC RPGs, then console RPGs outnumber them.

Okay, that didn't really add anything besides name dropping a few games that did it well. So yet again, back to topic.. why are we here? Why do the OP, and most people, feel that certain genres are PC oriented?

There are more successful MMOs on PCs than on Consoles.
There are more successful RTS on PCs than on Consoles.
There are more successful RPGs on PCs than on Consoles.
There are basicly the same amount of successful FPSs on PCs as on Consoles.

Yet FPS is a PC genre, while RGPs aren't? I mean, World of Warcraft basicly earns more money than all combined RPGs on Consoles each year.

Any modern day FPS game is also on consoles. Heck, consoles even have big exclusives like Killzone 2, Halo 3 and The Conduit. How does that relate to PCs having more support? Might it be because the genre have better gameplay when on PC?

Whatever guys, think what you want.  I'm rather tired and you guys just keep trying to drag this out based on your perceptions of what is more 'successful' and 'better' but based on completely hypocritical measuring systems and cancelling out any examples I give.  And I'm talking about completely different things such as the amount of RPGs produced on each platform, which you twist into absolute statements and turn into a completely different argument.

So nevermind, think what you want.



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

Around the Network
Kenryoku_Maxis said:
shio said:

You have said so many wrong things I don't even.... first, there are literally HUNDREDS of RPGs coming out on PC every year, HUNDREDS!

Second, we are strictly talking about PC vs Consoles (domestic consoles). Handhelds are a different beast and doesn't come into equation. If you want to pit it with something, go do a Handhelds vs Mobilbe phones, which makes more sense.

Third, MMO is NOT a genre!! MMO is the technology! There are MMOFPS, MMOAdvs and, you guessed it, MMORPGs, which is are from the RPG GENRE! All MMORPGs are RPGs.

Fourth, PC has by far the greatest lineup of RPGs. And in recent times it has become even more evident. Let's compare the best RPGs of 2008 between platforms:

PC:
WoW: Wrath of the Lich King
Fallout 3
King's Bounty: The Legend
Mass Effect
LoTR Online: Mines of Moria
Warhammer Online
The Witcher Enhanced Edition
Mount & Blade
Neverwinter Nights 2: Storm of Zehir
Sacred 2
Atlantica Online
Everquest 2: The Shadow Odissey
Pirates of the Burning Sea

Xbox 360:
Fallout 3
Fable 2
Tales of Vesperia
Lost Odissey

PS3:
Fallout 3
Valkyria Chronicles
Eternal Sonata

Wii:
Final Fantasy Fables: Chocobo Dungeon
Monster Lab
Tales of Symphonia: DotNW

 

PC has freaking more good RPGs released in 2008 than all consoles combined. Hell just look at it:
Best 2008 RPG: Fallout 3 (I don't personally agree, but most seem to believe this)
Best 2008 MMORPG: Warhammer Online
Best 2008 RPG expansion: Wrath of the Lich King
Best SRPG: King's Bounty (even won a few GOTY awards)
Best Combat: Mount & Blade (so true, by far the most refreshing combat in years)

PC also got an improved version of Mass Effect, an improved version of The Witcher (2007 RPGOTY), a great F2P MMORPG in Atlantica Online, and a decent ARPG in Sacred 2.

Again, like Stekstav, you are confusing 'good' with 'more games'.  And your perception of good.  Secondly, you are limiting your perception to just games released in America and under one year.  Sure, I can say PC did better than consoles in one genre in one year as well.  But over the grand scheme of things, consoles are releasing WAY more games in most genres than PC.  Lastly, more awards don't always equal more sales.  I'm talking about SALES.  Not how GOOD you perceive a game to be.  And again, that hits on your limiting your view to just games released in America under one specific time frame yadda yadda.

Heck, multiple of the games you put under PC are also on the 360 (more than just Fallout 3) and many RPGs on the 360 are soon to be on the PS3, etc. etc.  Not to mention all the RPGs for Wii never released here or soon to be released like Arc Rise Fantasia, Monando, Fragile, Tales of Graces, etc.

One compounding bit of evidence you could say that makes the PC have more RPGs than consoles however is the literally thousands of small studio and independently made RPGs on PC.  Much of these are, once again, made in Japan and are either Anime or Hentai based and some making their way to handhelds.  But its up to you if you are going to count those.

Also, MMOs are considered a genre now.  I have no idea what this 'technology' nonsense is.  That's like saying 'Strategy' is a technology because it can be attributed to multiple sub-genres like tactical and real time.  MMO is a genre with multiple sub-genres.

Seriously, you must do some research - There are far more games coming out on PC than in all consoles combined.

Even basing strictly on sales, RPGs on PC have far, far more success than console RPGs. PC has MMORPGs, which are enough to trump consoles in revenue (and yes, MMORPGs ARE RPGs). Even only considering non-MMO RPGs, PC has far more of those games, many of those very successful. The Witcher has sold over 1.2 millions and counting, King's Bounty sold well enough for devs to release a prequel this month. Mount & Blade definitely sold alot because it appeared in Steam, D2D and Gamersgate top charts + Retail sales. It's possible it has reached 500k (which is amazing for an indie game). Fallout 3 should be selling millions on PC. Most is just guesstimation because numbers aren't released.

One thing we do know is that games like Mount & Blade and King's Bounty probably did not have anywhere near the budget of console RPGs, meaning that need far less sales to make the same profit.

Dude, there are MMORPGs, MMOStrategy, MMOAdventure, MMOAction, etc... MMO is Tech, not a genre. MMORPGs and MMOStrategy games couldn't be any more different from each other than they already are.

Kenryoku_Maxis said:
Mendicate Bias said:
I agree the PC is a better platform for Indy developers but what garcian said is that there have been no profitable or good indie games for the consoles which is just wrong. Flower, Fat Princess, Dishwasher, Undertow, Braid, Splosion Man, Geometry Wars were all great games and were all released on consoles. So yea PC is the better platform for indie developers but you can still have a big hit with amazing profits on the consoles too.

And actually, there's the argument that you can make more potential profits, even with a small indie game, on consoles over PC.

Of course, it depends on the genre and how you release it.  A independent SRPG probably won't do well on XBL or WiiWare and fare better on PC.  However, many SHUMPS, action games and especially puzzle and platformers have done AMAZINGLY well on XBL and WiiWare when they probably would have hardly been noticed in the sea of indie self published and freeware on PCs.

Like with any game genre, from the very biggest to the smallest, like these, it all comes down to advertising and hype.  And since XBL and WiiWare markets the games for you on a worldwide console distribution service....

First, there are very little indie games on PSN/WiiWare/XBL because console manufacturers are controlling it alot. Second part is that alot of those small games in console services are from publishers. Infact, there are far less sindie games on consoles than what you'd expect. If an indie dev is lucky enough to get his game released on consoles, then he'll no doubt do profit, but the problem is that only a tiny amount of indie devs will ever be in that position. The vast majority of indie devs will never be able to release games on consoles. That's where PC comes in.

Pc on the other hand, everyone can jump in. However this causes alot of competition (There's too many games cannibalizing each other on PC), which no doubt affects sales.

So how is it for indie devs? Try their luck on consoles and probably not going to see their game being sold (and spend more money on the budget), or sell on PC which has a staggering amount of competitiors but has a lower development cost and you don't need to pay fees to console manufacturers?