Cliffy B is teh hater.

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Console games on their consoles and ported titles on their PC. What kind of stupid fucking question is this?

Why WOULD you play games on the PC if a console can deliver the same experience with less Q/A and support headaches? Right now, consoles can't, but if at some indeterminant point in the future they can, and we no longer need the PC for gaming, who gives a shit? The experience *I* receive as the gamer is no different, and I couldn't give less of a damn which platform I'm using.

I'm sure all this stuff matters to people in the industry, because it affects their livelihood, but it's very easy for me, working in another industry, to say "You should've worked in another fucking field."... and so I do. Not my goddam problem if PC Gaming happens to die and somebody out there has to deal with unfortunate consequences.

Your not worth the time a reply would take.

Read: You've got nothing and you're giving up?

BTW: "You're".

No, you resorted to using profanity.
The hallmark of the immature.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Console games on their consoles and ported titles on their PC. What kind of stupid fucking question is this?

Why WOULD you play games on the PC if a console can deliver the same experience with less Q/A and support headaches? Right now, consoles can't, but if at some indeterminant point in the future they can, and we no longer need the PC for gaming, who gives a shit? The experience *I* receive as the gamer is no different, and I couldn't give less of a damn which platform I'm using.

I'm sure all this stuff matters to people in the industry, because it affects their livelihood, but it's very easy for me, working in another industry, to say "You should've worked in another fucking field."... and so I do. Not my goddam problem if PC Gaming happens to die and somebody out there has to deal with unfortunate consequences.

Your not worth the time a reply would take.

Read: You've got nothing and you're giving up?

BTW: "You're".

No, you resorted to using profanity.
The hallmark of the immature.

Actually, it was profanity and obscenity.

I'll let you google up the difference.

:waits:

OK, now that we're past that, puh-leeeeeeze...That's the best attempt you could make to deflect the topic from the fact that you have no satisfactory rebuttal to my arguments? It's not my fault I was forced into using uncouth language to accurately describe the low quality of your claims.

Try harder.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Console games on their consoles and ported titles on their PC. What kind of stupid fucking question is this?

Why WOULD you play games on the PC if a console can deliver the same experience with less Q/A and support headaches? Right now, consoles can't, but if at some indeterminant point in the future they can, and we no longer need the PC for gaming, who gives a shit? The experience *I* receive as the gamer is no different, and I couldn't give less of a damn which platform I'm using.

I'm sure all this stuff matters to people in the industry, because it affects their livelihood, but it's very easy for me, working in another industry, to say "You should've worked in another fucking field."... and so I do. Not my goddam problem if PC Gaming happens to die and somebody out there has to deal with unfortunate consequences.

Your not worth the time a reply would take.

Read: You've got nothing and you're giving up?

BTW: "You're".

No, you resorted to using profanity.
The hallmark of the immature.

Actually, it was profanity and obscenity.

I'll let you google up the difference.

:waits:

OK, now that we're past that, puh-leeeeeeze...That's the best attempt you could make to deflect the topic from the fact that you have no satisfactory rebuttal to my arguments?
Try harder.

Actually I feel sorry for you.
You can't debate a topic without making personal attacks.
Seek professional help.
That much anger can't be good for you.

Adding the below to place the blame on others for your own behaviour just proves the point further.

It's not my fault I was forced into using uncouth language to accurately describe the low quality of your claims.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
You can argue the details all you want, but you can't name a current console game that's making the kind of money the big PC games have made. OWNED.

That's a pretty dumb point though. Pointing to two series and saying, "Look at all the money!". So what if Blizzard pulls in hundreds of millions, how does that help anyone else out? The numbers that really matter were posted by Modelworks earlier (Consoles in 2007 brought in $8.8 billion , pc brought in $790 million.). That's a much bigger pie for a dev to take a piece of. The PC pie is much smaller and the bulk of said pie is dominated by a couple of titles.

Anyway, I personally don't think PC gaming is going anywhere anyway. Even if most games are ported to or from consoles there will still be PC releases. I'm just tired of all the PC-only gamers whining about consoles and blaming all their problems on them. It's a stupid scapegoat and nothing more.

 

[GundamSonicZeroX]

Originally posted by: Modelworks


Go into ebgames or gamestop and look how much of the shelf space is there for pc games.
Now go back about 5 years to the same stores.
The difference is huge.

The main reason we see GameStops and EBGames cutting back on their PC games is because those businesses make the bulk of their money from used games. If there was a way for trade-ins to work for PC games, we'd see many more PC games in those stores.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Actually I feel sorry for you.
You can't debate a topic without making personal attacks.
Seek professional help.
That much anger can't be good for you.

Adding the below to place the blame on others for your own behaviour just proves the point further.

That's almost better, trying to turn it around on me that way, but it still doesn't change the fact that you have completely failed to make any counterpoints to my very valid arguments, and until you do, you lose the thread.

Also, for someone who is not worth the time a response would take, you're responding an awful lot.

 

[IdaGno]

Originally posted by: maxster
No, the PC is not dead.

No. The PC is not dead, but the people that made PC gaming what it was in its heyday are dead to PC gaming.

Warren Spector, 17 December 2007

well, this is another way I'm going to be annoying all the hardcore guys, but I don't even want to play - let alone make - a 20-hour game anymore. Heresy! I want every person who plays my game to finish them. Not twenty or forty percent. Every person. There's so much competition for attention and dollars and everything else, if you make a great 6-12 hour game, you've provided great value for money. And you can really focus on making that experience spectacular. Now, we're still, as an industry - especially thanks to price points - we're at a point where you better be at the top end of that range. I don't think you can get away with a six-hour game. Ico was a six-hour game, which didn't do so well... and was an actual genius game. But I think there's a sweet spot in there

Garriot's doing nothing but MMORPG & all the world is trying to duplicate the success of WOW. That & very, very, short games that more will play to completion.

Game over, man. Game over.

 

[0roo0roo]

i remember seeing the sims ruling the top 10 pc game sales charts way too much over the years.
and well, the reality is sales aren't something you can argue with, they either make money or they don't.
pirating wow is basically impossible, so that thrives.
ut... well theres only one ut every couple years, not a massive market there. maybe a crysis as well.

and no, i don't care if a game has 50 hours of gameplay. i never finish a game thats too long. i expect more production value if its short of course.

not being able to rent pc games is also a real cramper. no real way around that of course.

course the pc graphics still charging ahead which is good. online shooter play is still slightly superior on the pc. i hate mmporgs though. so pointless.

pc's not dead, but its certainly getting less special. maybe as we charge ahead in graphics the difference between a pc version and a ps3/360 will widen and the thrill will come back.
maybe with ati using a more rational naming scheme for its grpahics cards and stuff may make the market more consumer friendly. so many outrageously overpriced cards at big box stores these days with indecipherable stats on the box make it so joe shmoe is probably gonna buy a overpriced underpowered card and get a lousy gaming experience. the industry needs to work together to make things more consumer friendly. vistas also dragging the pc down as well bah. stupid botch os release.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: IdaGnoGame over, man. Game over.

Sorry, but buying over simplified crap catering to the least intelligent in the world will hardly make you seem anymore older than some 11 year old with a case.

 

[shingletingle]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: ja1484

Console games on their consoles and ported titles on their PC. What kind of stupid fucking question is this?

Why WOULD you play games on the PC if a console can deliver the same experience with less Q/A and support headaches? Right now, consoles can't, but if at some indeterminant point in the future they can, and we no longer need the PC for gaming, who gives a shit? The experience *I* receive as the gamer is no different, and I couldn't give less of a damn which platform I'm using.

I'm sure all this stuff matters to people in the industry, because it affects their livelihood, but it's very easy for me, working in another industry, to say "You should've worked in another fucking field."... and so I do. Not my goddam problem if PC Gaming happens to die and somebody out there has to deal with unfortunate consequences.

Your not worth the time a reply would take.

Read: You've got nothing and you're giving up?

BTW: "You're".

No, you resorted to using profanity.
The hallmark of the immature.

Actually, it was profanity and obscenity.

I'll let you google up the difference.

:waits:

OK, now that we're past that, puh-leeeeeeze...That's the best attempt you could make to deflect the topic from the fact that you have no satisfactory rebuttal to my arguments?
Try harder.

Actually I feel sorry for you.
You can't debate a topic without making personal attacks.
Seek professional help.
That much anger can't be good for you.

Adding the below to place the blame on others for your own behaviour just proves the point further.

It's not my fault I was forced into using uncouth language to accurately describe the low quality of your claims.

Modelworks, give up. You got owned and now you're using the lame "you're not worth the time" rebuttal. (Which is strange, because even that simple response requires providing him with some of your time.) I don't see where he made any personal attacks. You simply can't think of anything to say back.

 

[TehMac]

This whole topic sucks, and all you guys are total retards. Epic managed to sell a linear game with nice bloom effects, and Cliffy B is bitching that PC Gamers don't fall for his crap fests of games because you know...maybe we want something original that isn't a load of bollocks. Meanwhile, Valve says PC Gaming is fine. See the difference? One developer with a shrinking hold on the PC trying to make excuses for slipping into making oversimplified crap games, while another company which has made the PC its stronghold, is flourishing and making intelligent games.

It's amazing how everyone gets all upset about this, all the consolers are known to be tools, so whatever.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: TehMac
This whole topic sucks, and all you guys are total retards. Epic managed to sell a linear game with nice bloom effects, and Cliffy B is bitching that PC Gamers don't fall for his crap fests of games because you know...maybe we want something original that isn't a load of bollocks. Meanwhile, Valve says PC Gaming is fine. See the difference? One developer with a shrinking hold on the PC trying to make excuses for slipping into making oversimplified crap games, while another company which has made the PC its stronghold, is flourishing and making intelligent games.

It's amazing how everyone gets all upset about this, all the consolers are known to be tools, so whatever.

Valve launched the Orange Box across all platforms. While their development remains PC-centric, and is a strong testament to the fact that the PC isn't going anywhere, sales is still the #1 factor on the business end, and there has been an industry-wide shift towards consoles this generation. Epic has always been one of the best run businesses in the games industry, which is why they are so incredibly successful.

Denying that is just denying numbered facts.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TehMac
This whole topic sucks, and all you guys are total retards. Epic managed to sell a linear game with nice bloom effects, and Cliffy B is bitching that PC Gamers don't fall for his crap fests of games because you know...maybe we want something original that isn't a load of bollocks. Meanwhile, Valve says PC Gaming is fine. See the difference? One developer with a shrinking hold on the PC trying to make excuses for slipping into making oversimplified crap games, while another company which has made the PC its stronghold, is flourishing and making intelligent games.

It's amazing how everyone gets all upset about this, all the consolers are known to be tools, so whatever.

Valve launched the Orange Box across all platforms. While their development remains PC-centric, and is a strong testament to the fact that the PC isn't going anywhere, sales is still the #1 factor on the business end, and there has been an industry-wide shift towards consoles this generation. Epic has always been one of the best run businesses in the games industry, which is why they are so incredibly successful.

Denying that is just denying numbered facts.

Nobody is denying anything Mr. Ja1484, I'm pointing out the irony. TF2 sucks on the xbox 360. It's a lag ridden fiasco. Everybody on the consoles is obsessed with fancy graphics and dumbed down gameplay.

Try denying that eh? Why is it that such mediocre crap fests like Halo do so poorly on the PC when they do well on the Xbox? Because of a different, less mature audience, most likely like yourself, who can't sit down long enough to enjoy a challenging, mentally stimulating game.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: TehMac
This whole topic sucks, and all you guys are total retards. Epic managed to sell a linear game with nice bloom effects, and Cliffy B is bitching that PC Gamers don't fall for his crap fests of games because you know...maybe we want something original that isn't a load of bollocks. Meanwhile, Valve says PC Gaming is fine. See the difference? One developer with a shrinking hold on the PC trying to make excuses for slipping into making oversimplified crap games, while another company which has made the PC its stronghold, is flourishing and making intelligent games.

It's amazing how everyone gets all upset about this, all the consolers are known to be tools, so whatever.

You're such a dumbass. Always making posts putting down people who play consoles, yet completely oblivious to the fact that between both the console and PC gaming forums you are far and away the most childish poster.

Originally posted by: TehMac
Try denying that eh? Why is it that such mediocre crap fests like Halo do so poorly on the PC when they do well on the Xbox? Because of a different, less mature audience, most likely like yourself, who can't sit down long enough to enjoy a challenging, mentally stimulating game.

That's a piss poor argument. There are highly praised PC games, like FEAR (overrated crap, BTW), that come to consoles and don't enjoy much success. So how about you back your shit up? What PC shooters do you think qualify as "mentally stimulating". I mean, I see numerous tools on this forum claiming games, usually FPS, are dumbed down for consoles, yet I've been involved with both PC and console gaming for a long time and I haven't seen this. And I'm not talking about stupid shit like whining how the textures aren't good enough, I want specific examples of this "dumbing down" as it relates to your claim of "mentally stimulating" and how that can be blamed directly on consoles.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TehMac
This whole topic sucks, and all you guys are total retards. Epic managed to sell a linear game with nice bloom effects, and Cliffy B is bitching that PC Gamers don't fall for his crap fests of games because you know...maybe we want something original that isn't a load of bollocks. Meanwhile, Valve says PC Gaming is fine. See the difference? One developer with a shrinking hold on the PC trying to make excuses for slipping into making oversimplified crap games, while another company which has made the PC its stronghold, is flourishing and making intelligent games.

It's amazing how everyone gets all upset about this, all the consolers are known to be tools, so whatever.

Valve launched the Orange Box across all platforms. While their development remains PC-centric, and is a strong testament to the fact that the PC isn't going anywhere, sales is still the #1 factor on the business end, and there has been an industry-wide shift towards consoles this generation. Epic has always been one of the best run businesses in the games industry, which is why they are so incredibly successful.

Denying that is just denying numbered facts.

Nobody is denying anything Mr. Ja1484, I'm pointing out the irony. TF2 sucks on the xbox 360. It's a lag ridden fiasco. Everybody on the consoles is obsessed with fancy graphics and dumbed down gameplay.

Try denying that eh? Why is it that such mediocre crap fests like Halo do so poorly on the PC when they do well on the Xbox? Because of a different, less mature audience, most likely like yourself, who can't sit down long enough to enjoy a challenging, mentally stimulating game.

A pretty poor troll, but I'll bite anyway:


I wouldn't know how Orange Box fared on consoles, because I bought for the PC, which is where shooters should be played anyway.

As for why gamers have their preferences, I'm not naive enough (unlike yourself) to make blanket statements about people who play on only one platform. Personally, I think it's kind of silly to limit yourself to a single platform anyway. There are excellent titles out there for every system right now (with the possible exception of the PS3), and engaging in some kind of tribal warfare is only hurting yourself.

Halo's success has nothing to do with gameplay anymore. The first Halo was really the first true shooter that a console had ever seen, and thus it spread like wildfire. 2 and 3 were pretty much riding its coattails. If it makes you feel any better, I waited until the first came out for the PC before buying it and never bothered with the two sequels.

As for you talking about maturity, that's just comedy gold.

 

[450R]

Originally posted by: TehMacWhy is it that such mediocre crap fests like Halo do so poorly on the PC when they do well on the Xbox? Because of a different, less mature audience, most likely like yourself, who can't sit down long enough to enjoy a challenging, mentally stimulating game.

Challenging, mentally-stimulating games? How about complex flight simulators like Lock On: Modern Combat? How about Deus Ex? How about OFP and Armed Assault? Half-Life 2? Company of Heroes? STALKER? SWAT 3 and 4? Fallout 1 and 2? And Portal?

Surely we can agree that these are great examples of "mature" PC games. I play them all -- and a lot more -- and I loved Halo on the XBox, as well as Gears of War on the 360. It has nothing to do with maturity; sometimes I like to sit down on my couch, relax and have some fun ... even if I can't stand the controllers. Friends can sit next to me and watch or even join in.

I personally think it has less to do with the audience and more to do with the environment. Ask yourself why people are still paying $12 (YMMV) to see a movie in a crowded theater when they could watch it at home in comfort for much cheaper. The atmosphere, the environment.

So it's not the audience. Try again.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: 450RSo it's not the audience. Try again.

Oh but it is. Why is it that these games you mentioned are much more appreciated and do much better on the PC? Yeah, flung that back in your face, mate.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Oh but it is. Why is it that these games you mentioned are much more appreciated and do much better on the PC? Yeah, flung that back in your face, mate.

Ummm... some of those games aren't even on consoles and a game like Portal which was on consoles was highly appreciated there. Give it up. You're a clueless idiot that has no experience with games on consoles.

 

[450R]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Oh but it is. Why is it that these games you mentioned are much more appreciated and do much better on the PC? Yeah, flung that back in your face, mate.

The only thing you flung in my face is your immaturity. Post something with substance that backs up your claims and we can continue the discussion; otherwise, have a nice day.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: TehMac
Oh but it is. Why is it that these games you mentioned are much more appreciated and do much better on the PC? Yeah, flung that back in your face, mate.

Ummm... some of those games aren't even on consoles and a game like Portal which was on consoles was highly appreciated there. Give it up. You're a clueless idiot that has no experience with games on consoles.

Yeah, playing Halo 1/2/3 and getting Halo 2 the Saturday the same week it came out...that's no experience at all. :roll:

Originally posted by: 450R

Originally posted by: TehMac
Oh but it is. Why is it that these games you mentioned are much more appreciated and do much better on the PC? Yeah, flung that back in your face, mate.

The only thing you flung in my face is your immaturity. Post something with substance that backs up your claims and we can continue the discussion; otherwise, have a nice day.

I did. You're just running the gauntlet now, big boy.

 

[ja1484]

Eh, quit feedin' him fellas. He doesn't even have any good bait left.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Eh, quit feedin' him fellas. He doesn't even have any good bait left.

Why does it have to boil down (or up) to a flame war?
Now that I think about it, you're in the same position modelworks was in on page 3. It's just your dumbed down bull shit versus sophisticated games like Company of Heores...oh I'm sorry, I forgot, did Company of Heroes come out for the consoles?


Hrmm, I had to research that and uh...well the answer was no. I wonder why...maybe the audience just can't handle the intensity, the graphics, and the gameplay.



Which reminds me...did Total War, another sophisticated game come out for the consoles?


Hrmm let me see here....oh I'm sorry, no it didn't.

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: ja1484
The first Halo was really the first true shooter that a console had ever seen, and thus it spread like wildfire.

gb2goldeneye

How in the world would Rome:Total War or CoH would be successful on consoles? You can't use games that require an extremely high number of keys/inputs for proper play. The RTS genre will never be great on a console controller, yet this doesn't make the game 'sophisticated'.

Saying the console audience can't handle 'the intensity, the graphics, and the gameplay' is retarded. The first too are overly ambiguous. What gamer sits down, plays, and then quits from thinking 'Oh, this game is to intense for me." or "I can't handle these graphics." Also, the third points is highly debatable.

The Call of Duty series, and rather, most FPSs in general, something PC gamers seem to cling to, have extremely simplified and straightforward gameplay that is a cinch to handle. In no way do I fault FPSs for this, but you seem to equate complexity of gameplay to the richness of a title's worth, when this is no way true.

There are tons of great games for consoles that are no way dumbed down. Honestly, I haven't played Company of Heroes as I've been busy with work, but I'm sure I would enjoy it. I would, however, also enjoy games I find just as 'sophisticated' which are on the PC. Console games tend to be more developed in other ways that PC games seem to lack now, including art, atmosphere, dialog and other potentially absorbing attributes.

Of course when you look at only gameplay, the PC will seem more complex, simply to the versatility of a kb+m. However, this doesn't necessarily make or break a game. Also, there are some complex console games that I hate to imagine playing on a PC (ex: fighting games in general). I don't think there are enough cons to rule out any gaming platform, which you basically stated.

 

[skace]

It doesn't really matter if the PC loses exclusives, it will always be a license-free platform for anyone to jump on. Because of that, it will always have the upstarts who can't afford massive deals.

Fighting games are fine on the PC, unless you've forgotten that an Xbox360 controller can connect directly into a PC. Oh and in "Games for Windows" it will automatically be detected and configured.

It also doesn't really matter if lots of PC gamers currently play WoW. Lots of console gameres currently play Halo3. There is always going to be a game currently dominating the attention of the gamer you are trying to win over when you release a game. Sure MMOs might make it different, but just like WoW proved when it stole the attention of EQ1 gamers, it can be done. People stopped playing WoW long enough to enjoy the hell out of TF2 also. If I was a game developer, I'd damn well be looking at PC Gaming. WoW has basically created a 10 million strong addiction army, all I have to offer them is the next decent fix and I'm rolling in cash. However, offering the next decent fix has been a pretty difficult task for recent developers who keep creating garbage.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: ja1484

Eh, quit feedin' him fellas. He doesn't even have any good bait left.

Why does it have to boil down (or up) to a flame war?

You're the one who started flamin', skippy. Go apply all that intellectualism to your posts, and you might be able to pick up on that.

Now that I think about it, you're in the same position modelworks was in on page 3. It's just your dumbed down bull shit versus sophisticated games like Company of Heores...oh I'm sorry, I forgot, did Company of Heroes come out for the consoles?

Completely different discussion - we were talking about what the games industry is factually verifiably doing, and the monetary reasons for them doing so. The difference there would be he no longer had any rebuttal to my points, whereas you aren't even making points. No rebuttal is necessary, because there is nothing to rebut - you are wrong by default in everyone's view but your own delusion.

You're trying to argue opinion, which *can't* be backed up with facts. But hey, why not keep on? At least you're some good (if somewhat too easy) target practice to keep me sharp.

Your claim regarding the "intellectualism" and "maturity" of PC games is laughable. You act as though a game is suddenly "mature and intellectually stimulating" because it requires a keyboard to operate. There are plenty of incredibly complex/mentally challenging titles available for consoles. In fact, consoles are generally a more popular venue for high-profile puzzle titles and platformers because the control scheme tends to lend itself better to that type of gameplay.

And: You thought Company of Heroes was good? BWAHAHA.

Which reminds me...did Total War, another sophisticated game come out for the consoles?

I find it funny you mention this, as its simplistic control scheme and limited scope made it one of the shallowest games, especially strategy games, I've seen in years, and severely limited the tactical possibilities. It's almost like you're *trying* to contradict yourself.


Now, listen - you can admit you're a fanboy and you don't want to hear reason, that you just want to hear yourself talk. It's ok - we've seen plenty of you before. Just don't get into the mistaken opinion that because you prattle on about one platform, you're actually making cogent, meaningful points.