Jump to content



Photo

PC To Beat Consoles In Game Sales By 2014

nvidia sales pc consoles

  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#61 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,971 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:50

PC game sales are not "predicted" to rise. They are increasing, and there are facts to prove that.


It's -20 outside now, yesterday it was -8 ish. So in a week it'll be - 90 outside here. Damn my heating bill will go up...


#62 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 10 December 2012 - 15:33

The biggest thing holding PC gaming back though IMO has been, and will probably continue to be, the elitist attitude. I know it doesn't apply to all PC gamers, but my impression (even when I was one myself) has always been that they don't appreciate the amount of effort it takes to develop a game and instead moan about "problems" that are largely created by themselves. Theyarecomingforyou alluded to this kind of issue in the Far Cry 3 thread.


I disagree completely. In fact I'd go so far to say the "games are hard to make so you cannot criticise" types of logic are actually is what is holding back PC gaming. It is all too often invoked by (Not accusing you here) fanboys and people that don't encounter any issues to try and excuse developers from adding essential options to their games - such as FoV.

You have to remember in most cases we're talking about large corporations with huge investment budgets and high profit margins, they don't care if their games are good or bad; just that they make money. They're not interested in some people criticising them on a forum, except when they need a scapegoat for their shoddy workmanship.

#63 Buio

Buio

    Neowinian

  • 955 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 09
  • Location: Sweden

Posted 10 December 2012 - 22:34

It's -20 outside now, yesterday it was -8 ish. So in a week it'll be - 90 outside here. Damn my heating bill will go up...

Yeah yeah, I get it. You try to be funny commenting my language errors. Next time try to post a comment worth reading instead.
-----

On topic: It will be interesting to see what Valve is planning.

#64 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,971 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:02

Yeah yeah, I get it. You try to be funny commenting my language errors. Next time try to post a comment worth reading instead.
-----

On topic: It will be interesting to see what Valve is planning.


Actually it had nothing to do with language and more to do with the logical fallacy you proposed.

And any game that involves messaging, like first-person shooters or MMOs. Typing a message on a controller is so torturous that I've heard it's been approved for use by the CIA.


Chatpad, though I've never seen a game that needs or requires messaging, not even MMO's, especially not on 360 since they all have headsets, thou I don't generally chat with the people I play with anyway, in any way.



#65 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,971 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:10

Are you implying that because a controller was designed for gaming, it's better than a keyboard (and mouse)? If so, then you're wrong. A mouse and keyboard is undeniably better than a controller for first-person shooters and real-time strategy games.


Well that's not necessarily true, some FPS games work as well with a controller, but arguably, a keyboard and mouse is also a sub optimal controller for them.

As for RTS games. While I generally agree that they need a mouse, this is not universally true.the much under appreciated Halo wars showed that not only can RTS games be done on a controller, they can be done damn well, in some ways better than kb/m. Still a large scale strategy game like TA and SupCom, not so much.

There are of course other games where controllers are universally better than kb/m, like pretty much any third person game, Diablo like games with the right controls would be better than kb/m. Racing games are of course far better on a controller, and equally much better on a wheel(with certain exceptions like TrackMania where you pretty much need a gamepads controller to compete, and kb second while you can't possibly drive with a wheel).

#66 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • 5,391 posts
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 11 December 2012 - 06:28

Well that's not necessarily true, some FPS games work as well with a controller, but arguably, a keyboard and mouse is also a sub optimal controller for them.

It is far more optimal, as it doesn't require the developer add autoaim to counteract its natural weakness.

But yes, it could be improved.

Realistically, this is why all the yapping about NUI stuff (natural user interface...voice, Move, Kinect, Wii, whatever) now...because neither of them is really a great option...they're just the best ones we have for certain types of games.

#67 vetFourjays

Fourjays

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,013 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 05
  • Location: Staffordshire, UK

Posted 11 December 2012 - 10:42

I disagree completely. In fact I'd go so far to say the "games are hard to make so you cannot criticise" types of logic are actually is what is holding back PC gaming. It is all too often invoked by (Not accusing you here) fanboys and people that don't encounter any issues to try and excuse developers from adding essential options to their games - such as FoV.

I didn't say you can not criticise developers. I do it all the time when the need arises. I said PC gamers have a unique ability of inventing "problems". They claim things to be necessary or a basic requirement when they are little more than a preference, would provide no observable benefit or don't fit the artistic direction. And when this happens they don't just explain what is wrong and why, they behave like a whining 3 year old and start blaming consoles even if there is no connection whatsoever. Some games are "terrible" simply because they are released on console as well as PC.

#68 duddit2

duddit2

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,796 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 10
  • Location: Manchester UK
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro

Posted 11 December 2012 - 11:15

We're on the low end of console refresh, once the new consoles are out people will be in love with the consoles again as the graphics will be PC grade once again.

#69 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 11 December 2012 - 17:46

I didn't say you can not criticise developers. I do it all the time when the need arises. I said PC gamers have a unique ability of inventing "problems". They claim things to be necessary or a basic requirement when they are little more than a preference, would provide no observable benefit or don't fit the artistic direction. And when this happens they don't just explain what is wrong and why, they behave like a whining 3 year old and start blaming consoles even if there is no connection whatsoever. Some games are "terrible" simply because they are released on console as well as PC.


Problem is how do you define what is a preference and what isn't? A feature like FoV could be argued to be a preference by many, but for those that suffer with motion sickness - it's completely essential.

It's all too easy to be quick and say something is just a preference or has no observable benefit such as engine tickrates, vsync policy, ingame UI, etc. Complaints don't generally magic themselves out of nowhere.

And let's be honest here, whether people like to admit it or not; consoles have had an impact on game development, and that doesn't mix well with profit-centric studios for PC games.

#70 vetFourjays

Fourjays

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,013 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 05
  • Location: Staffordshire, UK

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:59

Problem is how do you define what is a preference and what isn't?

Using a bit of common sense. That some game doesn't work with a uber-edition mouse, or an 8-monitor setup or some such seems perfectly reasonable to me as they are special cases and not the norm. But those are technical issues, of which there are many that are technically sound requests (editing the keyboard mappings, support for popular controllers, vsync on/off, etc).

The ones that really irk me are those that are gameplay related. Things like regenerative health, cutscenes, button-press sequences, smaller/less-complicated maps and such are moaned about and blamed on consoles. These are an artistic choice, not down to consoles. PC gamers treat them like massive problems though.

Then there are things like mod support. Why is this supposedly a requirement? It is nice to have, but why do PC gamers treat it like some sort of god-given right? Mod support is developer time and I think it is perfectly reasonable for a developer not to implement it if they don't want to (sometimes there are other reasons, such as keeping a level-playing field for MP).

A feature like FoV could be argued to be a preference by many, but for those that suffer with motion sickness - it's completely essential.

I've never seen an option to change it in a PC game, even when they were supposedly not influenced by consoles. I have had console games that give me motion-sickness though due to their FoV or camera angle - I just don't play them.


And let's be honest here, whether people like to admit it or not; consoles have had an impact on game development, and that doesn't mix well with profit-centric studios for PC games.


What impact is that?

#71 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 12 December 2012 - 23:35

Using a bit of common sense. That some game doesn't work with a uber-edition mouse, or an 8-monitor setup or some such seems perfectly reasonable to me as they are special cases and not the norm. But those are technical issues, of which there are many that are technically sound requests (editing the keyboard mappings, support for popular controllers, vsync on/off, etc).

The ones that really irk me are those that are gameplay related. Things like regenerative health, cutscenes, button-press sequences, smaller/less-complicated maps and such are moaned about and blamed on consoles. These are an artistic choice, not down to consoles. PC gamers treat them like massive problems though.


Those aren't purely artistic choices; smaller and less populated maps can be due to restricted memory budgets, QTEs arguably exist due to limited number of inputs in a controller vs a keyboard and even cutscenes have been used because of limitations.

Then there are things like mod support. Why is this supposedly a requirement? It is nice to have, but why do PC gamers treat it like some sort of god-given right? Mod support is developer time and I think it is perfectly reasonable for a developer not to implement it if they don't want to (sometimes there are other reasons, such as keeping a level-playing field for MP).


Mod support isn't developer time, it's not locking your game down by encrypting configuration files, removing developer consoles etc. It does not take much effort to make a modding community flourish. Nor does mod support have to have an impact on MP.

I've never seen an option to change it in a PC game, even when they were supposedly not influenced by consoles. I have had console games that give me motion-sickness though due to their FoV or camera angle - I just don't play them.


When PC game development was not influenced by consoles, most people were using 4:3 CRT monitors or early LCDs, FoV was not a huge concern. "Just don't play them" isn't really helpful for people that have already bought the game.

What impact is that?


As I touched on above, limited resources in console such as memory cause maps to be smaller and less populated to conserve precious system memory, texture resolution is sacrificed and shader masks are less used. AI can also be impacted with a limited number of CPU cycles. Plus the whole 30 vs 60 tickrate thing.

#72 vetFourjays

Fourjays

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,013 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 05
  • Location: Staffordshire, UK

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:55

Those aren't purely artistic choices; smaller and less populated maps can be due to restricted memory budgets, QTEs arguably exist due to limited number of inputs in a controller vs a keyboard and even cutscenes have been used because of limitations.

How does that work for all the open world games, that are getting bigger and better than ever before? Surely GTAV should have a 10cmx10cm map due to the PS3's low memory? I personally think it is a combination of broadening a game's appeal (not everyone wants to spend hours getting lost) and the amount of effort required to make it. This is the point I was making earlier about how it is taken for granted how hard it is. The amount of detail demanded on a map now for a console game is at least 20 times that of a PC game from 10 years ago. At the same time, they need to make the games on a smaller timescale (impatient publishers/gamers who want the sequel within 2 years) and the price of the game has remained the same. It seems perfectly logical to me that maps would get smaller. It is no surprise then that open world games not only take longer to develop, but then have considerably less detail, animations and scripting than more linear games.

QTEs... I'll admit I'm not always a fan of them (they can be used to good effect), but "exist due to limited number of inputs"? I really don't know what you are trying to get at here. By that logic shouldn't all console games consist of QTEs alone? I think it is more down to developers wanting to make some of the previously animation-only sequences more interactive. Whether they work or not is debatable.

Mod support isn't developer time, it's not locking your game down by encrypting configuration files, removing developer consoles etc. It does not take much effort to make a modding community flourish. Nor does mod support have to have an impact on MP.

That'd be fair enough if all people wanted was to "mod" the game files directly, ala modding of old. Except now it requires programs/tools for decompressing/making new maps/models, support for them to be loaded by the game as extras or overrides, in some cases scripting capabilities, etc. Even then there are potential legal implications of any third-party/proprietary technology used (of which there is a lot nowadays).


"Just don't play them" isn't really helpful for people that have already bought the game.

Play the demo first. If there isn't a demo, watch gameplay videos and read reviews. If you can't judge from those, don't take the risk unless you are prepared to lose out.

#73 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 13 December 2012 - 18:50

How does that work for all the open world games, that are getting bigger and better than ever before? Surely GTAV should have a 10cmx10cm map due to the PS3's low memory? I personally think it is a combination of broadening a game's appeal (not everyone wants to spend hours getting lost) and the amount of effort required to make it. This is the point I was making earlier about how it is taken for granted how hard it is. The amount of detail demanded on a map now for a console game is at least 20 times that of a PC game from 10 years ago. At the same time, they need to make the games on a smaller timescale (impatient publishers/gamers who want the sequel within 2 years) and the price of the game has remained the same. It seems perfectly logical to me that maps would get smaller. It is no surprise then that open world games not only take longer to develop, but then have considerably less detail, animations and scripting than more linear games.


Sandbox games manage by having a lower detail density than a linear game, and by streaming level data from disk as it's needed.

As for "taking it for granted" goes, that's completely irrelevant. As I said before, these are big profit-centric corporations and they're making these games for business, not for pleasure. I would agree with you if we were talking about an indie dev/studio, or one of the smaller studios like Double Fine/Obsidian that want to make good games first; but for big Triple-As? No sympathy.

QTEs... I'll admit I'm not always a fan of them (they can be used to good effect), but "exist due to limited number of inputs"? I really don't know what you are trying to get at here. By that logic shouldn't all console games consist of QTEs alone? I think it is more down to developers wanting to make some of the previously animation-only sequences more interactive. Whether they work or not is debatable.


I'm not really sure how you think it's logical to take that to absurdity. The point I was getting at is controllers have fewer inputs than a keyboard, so where you could throw a few more keys at a scenario to make it work, consoles don't have that luxury. So instead of using key combos or additional controls, you get button mashing.

That'd be fair enough if all people wanted was to "mod" the game files directly, ala modding of old. Except now it requires programs/tools for decompressing/making new maps/models, support for them to be loaded by the game as extras or overrides, in some cases scripting capabilities, etc. Even then there are potential legal implications of any third-party/proprietary technology used (of which there is a lot nowadays).


Incorrect. Other than the more recent trend of encrypting certain files, games have used compressors/decompressors since Doom. Have you forgotten WAD files?

The only difference now is the ugly trend of encrypting certain game files, thankfully something that is becoming less common.

Play the demo first. If there isn't a demo, watch gameplay videos and read reviews. If you can't judge from those, don't take the risk unless you are prepared to lose out.


Or developers could just have integrity and surface the ability to alter the FoV as standard with a PC release, rather than hide it away. And before you say anything about development time, every game uses FoV calculations, so it's just a matter of adding a UI widget to adjust a pre-existing variable.

#74 vetFourjays

Fourjays

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,013 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 05
  • Location: Staffordshire, UK

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:49

Sandbox games manage by having a lower detail density than a linear game, and by streaming level data from disk as it's needed.

As for "taking it for granted" goes, that's completely irrelevant. As I said before, these are big profit-centric corporations and they're making these games for business, not for pleasure. I would agree with you if we were talking about an indie dev/studio, or one of the smaller studios like Double Fine/Obsidian that want to make good games first; but for big Triple-As? No sympathy.

The technology exists, so why don't they do the same thing to have larger linear levels then? Choice. Not because of consoles, but choice.

Just because there is a big profit-centric corporation at the top of the chain doesn't mean the developers don't care about doing a good job. Regardless of the people at the top, developers slog it out - it is no secret that many people in the industry work extremely long hours and not for as much money as one would expect (although both points are supposedly improving at the moment).

I'm not really sure how you think it's logical to take that to absurdity. The point I was getting at is controllers have fewer inputs than a keyboard, so where you could throw a few more keys at a scenario to make it work, consoles don't have that luxury. So instead of using key combos or additional controls, you get button mashing.

You could have tonnes of key combos on a controller. Using the right-hand buttons of a PS3 or Xbox 360 controller alone have at least 14(? figured it out in my head visually) different combinations. Add the d-pad and there is another 14, more if combined with the previous buttons. Then the triggers and (arguably) the analog stick buttons... loads of combinations are possible. The question is why don't they use them then? My guess would be that learning too many key combinations for the majority of people becomes counter-productive to enjoyment.

If anything, the PC has more of an argument for using QTEs than consoles. It is an extreme example, but you could quite easily press X, left D-pad, R1, L1 and R2 on the PS3 controller, but try pressing W, F, X, C and Ctrl on a keyboard (with your right hand on the mouse initially). It is possible, but requires much more hand twisting and you certainly wouldn't be able to do it in a hurry. Realistically though, three buttons at once is probably the limit for both (excluding mouse/analog sticks) and console controllers are more than capable of this.

Incorrect. Other than the more recent trend of encrypting certain files, games have used compressors/decompressors since Doom. Have you forgotten WAD files?

The only difference now is the ugly trend of encrypting certain game files, thankfully something that is becoming less common.

I think we are talking about two different kinds of modding. I'll accept that in many cases it can be as straight forward as decompressing map/model/texture, editing it and recompressing (although there could still be legal issues). I'm thinking more of the modding in games such as Sim City 4, where there can be scripting mods, building replacements, building additions, etc. It requires the game to be specifically designed around the idea in the first place, and it is the kind of modding I see "demanded" most often.

Or developers could just have integrity and surface the ability to alter the FoV as standard with a PC release, rather than hide it away. And before you say anything about development time, every game uses FoV calculations, so it's just a matter of adding a UI widget to adjust a pre-existing variable.

To be honest, I have no idea why they wouldn't add it. Clearly the devs don't see it as an important enough issue, or maybe aren't even aware of it (given that it is a new issue). Even so, they don't owe you anything. They made the game and if you don't like it, don't buy it. Gaming is a luxury, not a right.

Anyway, I'm going to leave it there because this will go on forever.

I quite frankly think this is the golden age of gaming. Sure, many of the old franchises I enjoyed are now utterly ruined (C&C, R6, CoD, MoH) but that is down to the respective publishers who have milked them to death - not a specific platform. But for every "dead" franchise, there is another one to take its place, and in some cases, old franchises that have found new life. Never have I been happier as a gamer.

#75 torrentthief

torrentthief

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,728 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 06

Posted 14 December 2012 - 11:08

Pc's and laptops are pretty cheap nowadays, you can get a decent computer for £200 and a decent laptop for £350. Also pc games are usually cheaper than console games in order to combat rampant piracy. Another reason may be that AMD and Intel apu's are starting to get usable graphics therefore removing the need for a gpu for the casual gamer.