PC Gaming is losing its purpose and advantage.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Dark_sageX
#201 Edited by Dark_sageX (3420 posts) -
@knight-k said:
@Dark_sageX said:
@knight-k said:
@scatteh316 said:

Zaryia's numbers are wrong, and all you have to do it see how wrong they are is to spend 25 minutes on Metacritic and count the game scores up yourself.

I've done that and it shows that since PS4 release is has the most AAA/AAAE games available.

I've not cheated like Zaryia has, my numbers are easily vertified as being correct by vissiting metacritic yourself.

And all of sudden hermits are happy streaming console games at 720p/30fps with high input lag? Amazing how double standards drop when ownage is trying to be claimed.

But you are correct that 9+ score is not the only high quality level... the high quality level around here is 'AA' or above which starts at 8+

Oh man indeed, look at those double standards. I thought the master race only played games at 60 fps?

Why does that matter all of a sudden? or are you admitting that 30fps is garbage? if thats the case why even bring up consoles exclusives as an argument against PCs?

You guys like to prance around about how PC gamers are missing out on console exclusives, we point out it will be streamable eventually at the same (garbage) console quality, and then you back peddle by telling us they are not good quality games? make up your mind, are console exclusive great or not?

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

LOOOOL, then tell me ,why does the Pro and X1X exist again? hhhhmm? or why even have next gen consoles?

Also You didn't answer the question, are console exclusives great or not? and should we as PC gamers cry in our beds at night about not being able to play god of War or RDR2? because if the answer is yes. Then you can't give the 30fps argument, because that would be contradictory to believing they are great games.

Anyway what we "hermits" think or care about doesn't matter, if those games are streamable on PC then by default that makes the PC the better platform because that takes away the last "advantage" console has over PC, the streamed games being at the same level as consoles isn't even a factor, its just you moving the goal post like a pussy but you are desperately trying to win an argument.

and btw RDR2 is coming to PC, so yeah..fail harder.

Avatar image for GarGx1
#202 Posted by GarGx1 (10928 posts) -
@nfamouslegend said:

@warmblur: the money is just not there in PC gaming for developers to go out of there way to maximize it. Just like ray tracing, it will only take off once consoles can support it.

Where did you dig that nonsense up from?

GDC planned platform survey (source)

Gaming revenue (source)

Console market makes 25% of the total revenue (that's all consoles combined) PC makes 24% of the market on its' own. I'm sure you're intelligent enough to deduce from that, that PC dwarfs the revenue for any of the 3 major console manufacturers individually. Just to add NewZoo regards VR as a console, increasing console market share by around $1.8 billion, even though Vive and Rift can only be used on a capable PC.

No need to go into the gaming hardware data because that would probably just make you cry and I'm not wanting to upset you.

Avatar image for imperator7
#203 Edited by Imperator7 (78 posts) -

Purpose? Never, PC will always serve the purpose of being the open-source, best spot to play gaming with the biggest, most diverse and best overall library of games you could have. Free online/multiplayer is nice too :). For me, it has lost some of the advantages it used to have that would have swayed me from current gen consoles back to PC gaming. I love indie games/rogue-likes-rogue-lites (Hollow Knight, Dead Cells, Enter the Gungeon, Darkest Dungeon, Bad North, Celeste etc...) And I have been very happy with the fact that consoles this gen, especially PS4 has done a great job of getting games that would previously only be playable on PC to get a console release.

Avatar image for AdobeArtist
#204 Posted by AdobeArtist (25160 posts) -

The purpose of PC has always been freedom & flexibility for the player to choose their hardware configuration and specs according to their own budget. To set their own priorities of resolution, graphics, and performance (fps), completely open ended options in input type and custom key mapping. And the advantage has always been having the best visuals available (again by budget) and the best performance, not being limited to 30 fps.

And these are far from being lost. It's always be what truly sets PC apart from the confined ecosystems of consoles.

@knight-k said:

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And that's why we never see graphics arguments between Playstation and Xbox for three generations already? Even going all the way back to Nintendo vs Sega. You need to be way more self aware before throwing around "hypocrite."

But I also need to point out that frame rate isn't about graphics, it's about performance. The difference between how pretty a game looks and how smoothly it looks in motion.

And the only reason you're "fine" with 30 fps is because you have to convince yourself of that when you have no other option. When you've experienced 60 fps and above first hand, there's no denying that higher frame rate is an objectively better gameplay experience. Not "just for shooters and racers", for all action oriented gameplay; fighters, hack n' slash, sports, platforming, fighters both 3D and 2D... it benefits both the visual experience (character animations, environment scrolling) and the input responsiveness.

Moving the goal posts can only give you the reality you want to see, not reality for what it actually is.

Avatar image for Litchie
#205 Edited by Litchie (24024 posts) -

@AdobeArtist: Don't expect to get a response from him on that. You used way too much logic. But who knows, maybe you'll get the good ol' "30 fps is better because more cinematic" response or something..

Avatar image for XVision84
#206 Posted by XVision84 (16210 posts) -

Those bolded words, @AdobeArtist's fired up xD

Avatar image for brah4ever
#207 Posted by Brah4ever (1672 posts) -
@knight-k said:
@kali-b1rd said:
@knight-k said:
@scatteh316 said:
@knight-k said:

AAA exclusives. That's what I asked, where are all those AAA exclusives for PC?

It's a much used term, so I can hardly imagine you don't know what it means. But I'll enlighten you. AAA games are big budget games like god of war, last of us, gta, red dead, call of duty,...

So I ask where are those AAA PC exclusives? I can only think of Star Citizen.

Which is actually classed as Vapourware

Vapourware

noun

software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.

Lol, that's true.

Except the software is playable already LOL.

Warhammer 1/2 are AAA games, but since you clowns decided that only metacritic matters against the old system wars rules, those games don't exist anymore.

the meta died long ago.

Funny though that to this day a 6/10 game (league of legends) is still far more played than any of these 9+ games. Let alone 2004 GOTY still outlasting everything else.

Keep sticking to those scores only relevant to thier specific genre though!

Yeah most people also play garbage on their smartphone, and there aren't many exclusives on PC so no wonder you hermits have no choice.

Meanwhile we'll play the best game of this gen, RDR 2. Have fun with your moba and indie garbage though hermit LOL

Facts
Facts

Avatar image for brah4ever
#208 Posted by Brah4ever (1672 posts) -
@scatteh316 said:
@xantufrog said:

You guys don't have to like PC gaming. But if you aren't a PC gamer, you really don't have a right to say it is losing its purpose. Because you don't understand its purpose. All I ever read from Cows on here is AAA budget, sales, and cinematic graphics. It's pathetic.

Regardless of what you say, it's not the same as it was and is a shadow of it's former self....... the era of Half Life 2, Doom 3 and games around that time period are the peak of its dominance and something that it'll more then likely never see again.

It's a sad shadow of its former technology and industry pushing self.

Avatar image for brah4ever
#209 Edited by Brah4ever (1672 posts) -
@AdobeArtist said:

The purpose of PC has always been freedom & flexibility for the player to choose their hardware configuration and specs according to their own budget. To set their own priorities of resolution, graphics, and performance (fps), completely open ended options in input type and custom key mapping. And the advantage has always been having the best visuals available (again by budget) and the best performance, not being limited to 30 fps.

And these are far from being lost. It's always be what truly sets PC apart from the confined ecosystems of consoles.

@knight-k said:

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And that's why we never see graphics arguments between Playstation and Xbox for three generations already? Even going all the way back to Nintendo vs Sega. You need to be way more self aware before throwing around "hypocrite."

But I also need to point out that frame rate isn't about graphics, it's about performance. The difference between how pretty a game looks and how smoothly it looks in motion.

And the only reason you're "fine" with 30 fps is because you have to convince yourself of that when you have no other option. When you've experienced 60 fps and above first hand, there's no denying that higher frame rate is an objectively better gameplay experience. Not "just for shooters and racers", for all action oriented gameplay; fighters, hack n' slash, sports, platforming, fighters both 3D and 2D... it benefits both the visual experience (character animations, environment scrolling) and the input responsiveness.

Moving the goal posts can only give you the reality you want to see, not reality for what it actually is.

lolwut?

The purpose of PC gaming indeed yes been the flexibility and freedom it provides but you are missing one thing. The lack of big budget titles to push the hardware diminishes most of its benefits. Where are the Half Life 2's, Crysis, Battlefield 2/2142, UT2K4, Doom 3, etc. PC destroying games that used to exist in the past? Games that were built with the PC player in mind and had a game designed around the advantages of the PC ecosystem. Games that blew away everything else from a technical standpoint in their eras. Now its as if consoles have surpassed and caught up and the only advantage PC has the ability to apply anti aliasing and up the resolution per game.

Ever heard of something called, mod tools? It's rare for games to include them despite back then them being common place to allows communities to grow and build the pre-existing game.

Since you sound like a younger and relatively inexperienced PC gamer, peer 2 peer and multiplayer and paying for map packs wasn't always the defacto of PC gaming, it was dedicated servers ran by players passionate about the games.

Now it's all about homogenized version of titles that basically import console specific game design and interface to the PC ecosystem, awesome right? There used to be two different version of the same game developed both very different than one another but each taking advantage of their platform. Example, Battlefield 2 vs Battlefield Modern Combat or Rainbow Six 3 Raven Shield vs Rainbow Six 3 (consoles) or even Unreal Tournament 2004 vs Unreal Championship II. The PC versions were built to the benefits of the platform in more ways than just graphics but in terms of design and scope.

Also 30 fps with a controller sitting 6ft+ away from the screen is a much different experience than 30 fps with a mouse sitting 2 feet from the screen.

If you would like to gain more knowledge on the history of PC gaming, feel free to ask.

Avatar image for with_teeth26
#210 Posted by with_teeth26 (9545 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
@AdobeArtist said:

The purpose of PC has always been freedom & flexibility for the player to choose their hardware configuration and specs according to their own budget. To set their own priorities of resolution, graphics, and performance (fps), completely open ended options in input type and custom key mapping. And the advantage has always been having the best visuals available (again by budget) and the best performance, not being limited to 30 fps.

And these are far from being lost. It's always be what truly sets PC apart from the confined ecosystems of consoles.

@knight-k said:

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And that's why we never see graphics arguments between Playstation and Xbox for three generations already? Even going all the way back to Nintendo vs Sega. You need to be way more self aware before throwing around "hypocrite."

But I also need to point out that frame rate isn't about graphics, it's about performance. The difference between how pretty a game looks and how smoothly it looks in motion.

And the only reason you're "fine" with 30 fps is because you have to convince yourself of that when you have no other option. When you've experienced 60 fps and above first hand, there's no denying that higher frame rate is an objectively better gameplay experience. Not "just for shooters and racers", for all action oriented gameplay; fighters, hack n' slash, sports, platforming, fighters both 3D and 2D... it benefits both the visual experience (character animations, environment scrolling) and the input responsiveness.

Moving the goal posts can only give you the reality you want to see, not reality for what it actually is.

lolwut?

The purpose of PC gaming indeed yes been the flexibility and freedom it provides but you are missing one thing. The lack of big budget titles to push the hardware diminishes most of its benefits. Where are the Half Life 2's, Crysis, Battlefield 2/2142, UT2K4, Doom 3, etc. PC destroying games that used to exist in the past? Games that were built with the PC player in mind and had a game designed around the advantages of the PC ecosystem. Games that blew away everything else from a technical standpoint in their eras. Now its as if consoles have surpassed and caught up and the only advantage PC has the ability to apply anti aliasing and up the resolution per game.

Ever heard of something called, mod tools? It's rare for games to include them despite back then them being common place to allows communities to grow and build the pre-existing game.

Since you sound like a younger and relatively inexperienced PC gamer, peer 2 peer and multiplayer and paying for map packs wasn't always the defacto of PC gaming, it was dedicated servers ran by players passionate about the games.

Now it's all about homogenized version of titles that basically import console specific game design and interface to the PC ecosystem, awesome right? There used to be two different version of the same game developed both very different than one another but each taking advantage of their platform. Example, Battlefield 2 vs Battlefield Modern Combat or Rainbow Six 3 Raven Shield vs Rainbow Six 3 (consoles) or even Unreal Tournament 2004 vs Unreal Championship II. The PC versions were built to the benefits of the platform in more ways than just graphics but in terms of design and scope.

Also 30 fps with a controller sitting 6ft+ away from the screen is a much different experience than 30 fps with a mouse sitting 2 feet from the screen.

If you would like to gain more knowledge on the history of PC gaming, feel free to ask.

again, the only real argument i'm seeing against PC in this thread is that it lacks big AAAE games.

there are countless posts detailing the other advantages it has in here. you are just choosing to ignore them because you can't really counter them.

not much else to say really. consolites got shit on in this thread and thats pretty much that

Avatar image for ironbrigador
#211 Posted by IronBrigador (113 posts) -

Majority of these threads are always started by console peasants.

Which is telling...because PC gamers are too busy actually playing games while the conso-lites are waiting till their MS/Sony overlords decide to take pity and let them play a new game.

lol.

Avatar image for Midnightshade29
#212 Posted by Midnightshade29 (5997 posts) -

@brah4ever: You are right. I just bought an nvidia 1060gtx after my amd 7870 died. I wasn't in the market for a video card, but this card a mid range card makes all my old games maxed, nothing I have really pushes it at 1080p (have a 24" 1080p monitor).

I remember buying a voodoo 5 for unreal tornament and quake 2/3, theif, tomb raider etc.. A GeForce 3 for morrowind, kotor and neverwinter nights, vampire the masquerade, half-life 2, farcry, nolf, etc.. A GeForce 6800gt for Oblivion, a 8800gts for the witcher, neverwinter nights 2, stalker and crisis. Then a 9800gt when that died. The 7870 got me to ps4 level. Now with the 1060gtx the benchmarking was fun for a few days but there is no exclusives really that showcase that gen of cards.

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead). Where is a new Quake, or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse. It seems that most games on pc these days are indies, or multiplayer free to play crap like fortnight or some other millennial trend game, or games I like on pc that don't even require high end graphics (roguelikes and strategy games).

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

For controller games, I play on ps4, because my tv is huge and games like RDR2, GOW etc, aren't' on pc.

Avatar image for brah4ever
#213 Edited by Brah4ever (1672 posts) -
@Midnightshade29 said:

@brah4ever: You are right. I just bought an nvidia 1060gtx after my amd 7870 died. I wasn't in the market for a video card, but this card a mid range card makes all my old games maxed, nothing I have really pushes it at 1080p (have a 24" 1080p monitor).

I remember buying a voodoo 5 for unreal tornament and quake 2/3, theif, tomb raider etc.. A GeForce 3 for morrowind, kotor and neverwinter nights, vampire the masquerade, half-life 2, farcry, nolf, etc.. A GeForce 6800gt for Oblivion, a 8800gts for the witcher, neverwinter nights 2, stalker and crisis. Then a 9800gt when that died. The 7870 got me to ps4 level. Now with the 1060gtx the benchmarking was fun for a few days but there is no exclusives really that showcase that gen of cards.

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead). Where is a new Quake, or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse. It seems that most games on pc these days are indies, or multiplayer free to play crap like fortnight or some other millennial trend game, or games I like on pc that don't even require high end graphics (roguelikes and strategy games).

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

For controller games, I play on ps4, because my tv is huge and games like RDR2, GOW etc, aren't' on pc.

Well said
Well said

Avatar image for brah4ever
#214 Edited by Brah4ever (1672 posts) -
@ironbrigador said:

Majority of these threads are always started by console peasants.

Which is telling...because PC gamers are too busy actually playing games while the conso-lites are waiting till their MS/Sony overlords decide to take pity and let them play a new game.

lol.

Yeah....no....been PC gaming for a very long time and was a diehard PC fanboy.

Having a bit too much fun with the indies and f2p's aren't we? How about you leave this discussion to the big boys. kthxbai
Having a bit too much fun with the indies and f2p's aren't we? How about you leave this discussion to the big boys. kthxbai

Avatar image for samfisher56
#215 Posted by samfisher56 (771 posts) -

@xantufrog said:

I feel like this debate comes up once a month, but I'll type it out again

Reasons I game on PC:

Play games any way I want (M&K, controller, joystick, etc).

Play games with whatever features I want (mods, or no mods, don't care - depends on the game and what I want. I can have it).

Retro gaming - I spent my weekend playing Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines and Medieval II: Total War. I don't need another box to do this. I just can. And before you "lol old games" - these are GOOD games. Like, really good games. Like, some of the best games ever made. I don't care how old a game is, I just want to play good ones. And these are games I've never played before - they are new to me. There are thousands of classics - a lifetime - for me to chip away at. If these things don't matter to you, that's your preference to deal with, not my problem. It's hugely important to me. If I like it, I'll play it, and PC lets me do that. I have a stack of old consoles to do this for console games; and I hate it. Literally one of the best parts of the early PS3 was you could play almost any PS game along with the new ones. Then it died... so I had to unbox my PS2 and buy a PS3 slim and now I have 3 Playstations under my TV like some hoarder.

Indies. I don't understand why people don't like them. When I was a kid, there was basically no such thing as AAA. I didn't care - most games were little experimental fringe efforts and I loved it. There's nothing wrong with AAA games - HZD and BOTW are some of my favorite games in ages. But one of the reasons I prefer PS over XBox is not the mainstream stuff. Spiderman? Give me a break. One of the best games PS4 has to offer is The Last Guardian, and nobody talks about that masterpiece. TLG isn't technically an indie, but that kind of quirky and unique experience is becoming too rare on consoles and I love that you can play weird unique shit 24/7 on PC. Kerbal Space program rules.

Strategy games. I love them. They are one of my favorite genres. Maybe my favorite.

Point and click puzzle adventure games. Some of these fall into the point about retro gaming, but some are brand new like Obduction. Shit, that almost counts as AAA in my eyes, and the graphics are great, but the marketing whores on here probably don't even know about it - legendary development team behind Myst and Riven. These games are too rare on console.

Multiplats. Yes, I said it. I don't know what goes on in peoples' heads around here, but newsflash: most AAA games are not exclusives. In fact, consoles have steadily lost AAA game exclusivity to PC. Its fallen to a handful per year. Most of the big budget games you claim to love are on PC. And when I play them on PC, I get to play them typically for cheaper and any way I want (see points 1 and 2).

You say there's no reason to own PC? For me, there are fewer and fewer reasons to own consoles now - especially given that last point. I literally only own a PS4 for its handful of exclusives.

You guys don't have to like PC gaming. But if you aren't a PC gamer, you really don't have a right to say it is losing its purpose. Because you don't understand its purpose. All I ever read from Cows on here is AAA budget, sales, and cinematic graphics. It's pathetic.

the last guardian is a colossal bore

Avatar image for ariochmel
#216 Posted by Ariochmel (9 posts) -

One important thing I have learned reading this forum: many of the more elitist pc gamer are just recent pc gamer or relatively recent pc gamer. People that have gamed on pc since many years knows the real pro and cons of each platform.

Bra4ever nailed exatly this.

Avatar image for hekarim
#217 Edited by Hekarim (21 posts) -

I prefer eSports. I have been playing Dota2 for a long time. And only from recent times, thanks to the guys from GNation , we have entered a new stage in the development of this kind of sport. This is a very advanced community thanks to which cybersport is flourishing. You can see for yourself, there is a lot of useful information in this community. These guys collaborate with professional players and give the opportunity to simple beginners in the past, move to a higher level and become same professional players.

Avatar image for bellicliberty
#218 Edited by BellicLiberty (9 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: What ? How the console era is dying ? You have any proof of what you are saying?

Avatar image for xantufrog
#219 Posted by xantufrog (11503 posts) -

@samfisher56: if its controls werent so janky, it would be one of the best games to ever come from Sony, IMO. Better than SotC

Avatar image for bellicliberty
#220 Posted by BellicLiberty (9 posts) -

@mazuiface: I still play GTA IV Online from 2008 one PS3, and there's enough people playing it to enjoy, and the same for COD games, you can easily find a LOT of people

And those are not the only games

Avatar image for samfisher56
#221 Posted by samfisher56 (771 posts) -

@xantufrog said:

@samfisher56: if its controls werent so janky, it would be one of the best games to ever come from Sony, IMO. Better than SotC

didnt like it at all. Way behind ico and sotc for me

Avatar image for GarGx1
#222 Posted by GarGx1 (10928 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
@AdobeArtist said:

The purpose of PC has always been freedom & flexibility for the player to choose their hardware configuration and specs according to their own budget. To set their own priorities of resolution, graphics, and performance (fps), completely open ended options in input type and custom key mapping. And the advantage has always been having the best visuals available (again by budget) and the best performance, not being limited to 30 fps.

And these are far from being lost. It's always be what truly sets PC apart from the confined ecosystems of consoles.

@knight-k said:

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And that's why we never see graphics arguments between Playstation and Xbox for three generations already? Even going all the way back to Nintendo vs Sega. You need to be way more self aware before throwing around "hypocrite."

But I also need to point out that frame rate isn't about graphics, it's about performance. The difference between how pretty a game looks and how smoothly it looks in motion.

And the only reason you're "fine" with 30 fps is because you have to convince yourself of that when you have no other option. When you've experienced 60 fps and above first hand, there's no denying that higher frame rate is an objectively better gameplay experience. Not "just for shooters and racers", for all action oriented gameplay; fighters, hack n' slash, sports, platforming, fighters both 3D and 2D... it benefits both the visual experience (character animations, environment scrolling) and the input responsiveness.

Moving the goal posts can only give you the reality you want to see, not reality for what it actually is.

lolwut?

The purpose of PC gaming indeed yes been the flexibility and freedom it provides but you are missing one thing. The lack of big budget titles to push the hardware diminishes most of its benefits. Where are the Half Life 2's, Crysis, Battlefield 2/2142, UT2K4, Doom 3, etc. PC destroying games that used to exist in the past? Games that were built with the PC player in mind and had a game designed around the advantages of the PC ecosystem. Games that blew away everything else from a technical standpoint in their eras. Now its as if consoles have surpassed and caught up and the only advantage PC has the ability to apply anti aliasing and up the resolution per game.

PC gaming is not "lacking" big budget titles, where the hell do you get that from? I can only imagine it's because Sony have made a tiny handful of decent exclusives that are not on any other platform, be it console or PC. Every single big budget multi-platform game comes to PC and more often than not on the same day as the consoles, RDR 2 will be no exception. Every single Xbox "exclusive" is coming to PC (with free Xbox Live I may add) and there's nothing to suggest that MS will go back on this. The most laughable part of all though, will when all of those PS4 exclusives are available on PC through PS Now. I'll ask again, In what way is this "lacking"?

Star Citizen is a thing, if you've seen the most recent Squadron 42 trailer then you'll see that there is nothing on console that even comes close in the graphics department (or any other department for that matter) and it's still in development. Unreal Tournament is in playable open alpha right now and again it blows consoles out the water with its' graphics. One console, the one with the least sales, almost comes close to a high end PC with it's capabilities but it's still limited to 30fps and a mid range GPU. Just have a look at some of @NoodleFighter's game posts to see some of the high quality PC games coming in the near future.

Do you honestly believe that the only thing consoles aren't doing as well as PC is anti-aliasing and resolution? What about performance (i.e. frame rate), control options, communication options, pricing of software and games etc. (this list could get really long so I'll leave it there).

Ever heard of something called, mod tools? It's rare for games to include them despite back then them being common place to allows communities to grow and build the pre-existing game.

The mod scene is thriving, have you seen GTA V modded? Have you seen Battlefront modded? Both of those games come from developers/publishers who don't particularly support modding, yet the community still mods and improves them far beyond the original scope. Just go have a look at Nexus to get a handle on how vibrant the modding scene is, even my 11yr old twin girls are running a pile of mods for Sims 4 and Minecraft.

Since you sound like a younger and relatively inexperienced PC gamer, peer 2 peer and multiplayer and paying for map packs wasn't always the defacto of PC gaming, it was dedicated servers ran by players passionate about the games.

Mainstream focus and console gamers are entirely to blame for pumping so much money into horrible anti-consumer practices

Now it's all about homogenized version of titles that basically import console specific game design and interface to the PC ecosystem, awesome right? There used to be two different version of the same game developed both very different than one another but each taking advantage of their platform. Example, Battlefield 2 vs Battlefield Modern Combat or Rainbow Six 3 Raven Shield vs Rainbow Six 3 (consoles) or even Unreal Tournament 2004 vs Unreal Championship II. The PC versions were built to the benefits of the platform in more ways than just graphics but in terms of design and scope.

OK, so your post is entirely focused on the AAA budget developers who are catering almost entirely to the lowest common denominator of the weakest systems and mainstream gamers. The mainstream multi-platform games market makes up only a fraction of the PC gaming library, as apposed to 90% of the console library. Additionally most multi-platform games come with graphical setting options which surpass the console presets, controller options that you would never see on a console, for example I sometimes play Gears of War 4 with my mates, split screen on my living room TV, one using an Xbox 360 controller and the other using a Dual Shock 4 controller, you sure as hell can't do that on an Xbox One X. Variable native resolutions. Then we have the new boy, real time Ray Tracing, which is being supported right off the bat in big budget titles like Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Metro Exodus and Battlefield V etc. etc. (again, another potentially big list) How, exactly, are those features not taking advantage of PC architecture? Did I mention that the new Unreal Tournament is a PC exclusive?

Also 30 fps with a controller sitting 6ft+ away from the screen is a much different experience than 30 fps with a mouse sitting 2 feet from the screen.

You know what's better that 30fps, 6ft from a TV? 60+ fps, better quality graphics, 6ft from my 65" TV with my wireless mouse and keyboard on a very comfortable lapboard or if I feel like any of my controllers. Don't know about you but I don't like to settle with acceptable, I want exceptional. Also the days of PC gamers being locked in the basement are long gone.

If you would like to gain more knowledge on the history of PC gaming, feel free to ask.

If you had continued to grow with the system you wouldn't be stuck in the past. By the way, before you try to accuse me of being "new" to PC gaming as well, I've been gaming since 1975, my first "PC" was a ZX81 and I built my first IBM compatible in 1990. So I'm more than experienced and old enough to know what I'm talking about.

What a load of nonsense and drivel you posted.

Avatar image for xantufrog
#223 Posted by xantufrog (11503 posts) -

@samfisher56: see, I think it combined the best mechanical and puzzle parts of Ico and SotC, but improved the emotional engagement/storytelling

Avatar image for RyviusARC
#224 Posted by RyviusARC (5709 posts) -
@Midnightshade29 said:

@brah4ever: You are right. I just bought an nvidia 1060gtx after my amd 7870 died. I wasn't in the market for a video card, but this card a mid range card makes all my old games maxed, nothing I have really pushes it at 1080p (have a 24" 1080p monitor).

I remember buying a voodoo 5 for unreal tornament and quake 2/3, theif, tomb raider etc.. A GeForce 3 for morrowind, kotor and neverwinter nights, vampire the masquerade, half-life 2, farcry, nolf, etc.. A GeForce 6800gt for Oblivion, a 8800gts for the witcher, neverwinter nights 2, stalker and crisis. Then a 9800gt when that died. The 7870 got me to ps4 level. Now with the 1060gtx the benchmarking was fun for a few days but there is no exclusives really that showcase that gen of cards.

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead). Where is a new Quake, or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse. It seems that most games on pc these days are indies, or multiplayer free to play crap like fortnight or some other millennial trend game, or games I like on pc that don't even require high end graphics (roguelikes and strategy games).

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

For controller games, I play on ps4, because my tv is huge and games like RDR2, GOW etc, aren't' on pc.

I have a PC with a 1080ti and a PS4 Pro.

People gush about the graphics of consoles but I popped in Red Dead 2 and I had to do a double take because I thought the game was running at 720p with how blurry it was.

The Witcher 3 is over 3 years older and looks better than Red Dead 2.

Avatar image for zaryia
#225 Edited by Zaryia (8939 posts) -
@scatteh316 said:
@kali-b1rd said:

Zaryia has already done the hard work, I'l let him copy pasta.

Zaryia's numbers are wrong, and all you have to do it see how wrong they are is to spend 25 minutes on Metacritic and count the game scores up yourself.

  • PC has over 100 more high scoring games (8 and up) at MC, vs PS4.
  • PC has over 100 more high scoring games (8 and up) at Gamespot, vs PS4.
  • The above games that intersect (most PS4 games) are objectively almost all better experienced on PC, minus a few PS PLUS titles.

Those are the current facts. PC is doing quite well. This is no minor lead, it would be what you call a "landslide win" in any other gen of SW. This one is no exception.

Avatar image for zaryia
#226 Edited by Zaryia (8939 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
@Midnightshade29 said:

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

Well said
Well said

But those games still come to PC. The issue with your arguments is that PC is getting more AAA budget games than ever before (more than any other system), and all systems have exponentially less exclusives than in the past due to how the things works now (XB1 is nearly at 0 by default, and the other 2 are at handfuls). Those games that would have been classically PC exclusive still get made and put on PC, but also happen to be made for other systems for quick and easy non competitive profit. On the flip side, games that classically would never come to PC get made for it on droves and are usually best on it this gen.

How does this negatively effect the PC gamer? Whether or not they are playable on other system(s) doesn't impact the actual result for the gamer. Why would I care if CDPR, Feraxis, Obsidian, or Blizzard decide to also put it on console this gen? They get to make bigger budget and more games with the increased profit.

It's how the Industry simply works now. There isn't any reason to keep something like Witcher 3, Divinity, Pillars, Overwatch. Diablo 3, etc. PC only. Just like how XB has nearly no exclusives now. And barely even PS. Making a console version is huge profit and doesn't negatively effect the PC gamer. Just like more console games than ever before come to PC now as well, huge profit. Every system has less exclusives than ever before (Especially XB1, and even Nintendo if you count emulation - both nearly at 0), it's just how the industry is now. It's better to look at which system most non indy devs also make their games for, and PC comes out on top every single time.

If the net result is more AAA budget (and total) games than ever before for the pc gamer, who cares if they no longer stay exclusive due to the industry shifts?

@knight-k said:

PC just doesn't have any interesting, compelling AAA exclusives. And especially no mainstream AAA exclusives in development.

Well ignoring the fact you think Total War, Star Citizen, Civilization, and huge MMOs do not exist, that's because there is no reason to keep most of them on PC only. PC doesn't compete with the other systems, a quick and easy port is quick and easy profit. Just like how XB1 doesn't really have any exclusives either.

The thing is, for the gamer, It's getting more big budget games than any other system and wins at GS/MC. These games not being all exclusive doesn't actually impact the gamer. It's not all of a sudden a bad time to be a PC gamer because some of your significantly superior library than "Old school PC" happens to also be playable on different systems.

Avatar image for kali-b1rd
#227 Edited by Kali-B1rd (2182 posts) -

In away I agree with Brah but only as a surface level.

Gone are the days of pushing the boundaries with exclusives (graphically speaking) and gone are the days where modding was the "norm". That was the inevitable when all devices started become more alike.. and the market matured and money over development passion is the industry focus.

HOWEVER.

In 2018 we are at the point where the only Console games that are being pushed are graphical ones to sell the system itself. Only God of War stands up completely in all regards (imo) the rest are casual little movie games that just goes to show the limits of the consoles CPU. Most of the graphic power houses on consoles are small minded games (don't mistake that for open world... you can be open world while barely displaying more than 10 enemies EVER.)

The only exclusives coming out of the big three are the same old franchises, if not the same old franchises, similar style games (*cough horizon, Bloodborne, Forza, Halo etc) with a new coat of paint, no boundaries are pushed beyond graphics.

Meanwhile in the last 10-15 years PC gave birth to the most popular game genres around (MOBA/Battle Royale) and without this platform, many smaller studios would not have had the chance to make many great games, that may not have AAA polish, but are still amazing.

Also, at the end of the day, 99.9% of games on the market, and 99.9% of the best versions is nothing to sneeze at... and almost perfect backwards compatibility.

Yea sure, Star Citizen for example has taken 6+ years and still in Alpha... but there is NOTHING in development even close to it in ambition on consoles...

Consoles are just overall more limited, adding a few pretty games... I can coutn on one hand after 5 years of market dominance won't change that.

the PS4 is the best "budget" device to have for a jack of all trades with a few shiny movie games, but my PC and Switch get far more playtime.... it just does nothing BEST.

Avatar image for ariochmel
#228 Edited by Ariochmel (9 posts) -

@zaryia: It impact pc gaming because if you make a game eith only pc in mind you can go further with graphic, phisics and so on. Because you dont have to keep in consideration the console market. In the "old days" was like this. Nowadays vast majority of few games that are made with pc in mind are indie games that dont have the funding to give to pc hardware what they'd deserve.

Flip side, many consoles games are now on pc( mainly japanese) and japanese game have often these 2 or 3 problem: they dosen'tlook better or significantly better on pc,they use Denuvo drm, they have often some problems on pc.

If you think that fallout 76 or civilization 6(a mass market 4x also on ipad)or battlefield 1 are pc games I think you are just a recent pc gamer. If you post numbers of metacritic I dont think you undertand that every good game is an unique game untradable with other.

Avatar image for Dark_sageX
#229 Posted by Dark_sageX (3420 posts) -
@ariochmel said:

One important thing I have learned reading this forum: many of the more elitist pc gamer are just recent pc gamer or relatively recent pc gamer. People that have gamed on pc since many years knows the real pro and cons of each platform.

Bra4ever nailed exatly this.

Please do elaborate, what are the pros of consoles?

Avatar image for zaryia
#230 Posted by Zaryia (8939 posts) -
@ariochmel said:

@zaryia: It impact pc gaming because if you make a game eith only pc in mind you can go further with graphic, phisics and so on. Nowadays vast majority of few games that are made with pc in mind are indie games that dont have the funding to give to pc hardware what they'd deserve.

Flip side, many consoles games are now on pc( mainly japanese) and japanese game have often these 2 or 3 problem: they dosen'tlook better or significantly better on pc,they use Denuvo drm, they have often some problems on pc.

If you think that fallout 76 or civilization 6(a mass market 4x also on ipad)or battlefield 1 are pc games I think you are just a recent pc gamer. If you post numbers of metacritic I dont think you undertand that every good game is an unique game untradable with other.

This is all subjective. I posted facts.

PC gets more AAA games than any other system, and more than any other gen it used to get. These games are almost all better played on PC. You're talking about game design, and it's your opinion. Overwatch was designed for PC gamers, yet is vastly different game design than prior gens. PC gamers changed too.

Avatar image for ariochmel
#231 Edited by Ariochmel (9 posts) -
@Dark_sageX said:
@ariochmel said:

One important thing I have learned reading this forum: many of the more elitist pc gamer are just recent pc gamer or relatively recent pc gamer. People that have gamed on pc since many years knows the real pro and cons of each platform.

Bra4ever nailed exatly this.

Please do elaborate, what are the pros of consoles?

For me console and pc are not comparable in many ways but I try to be obejctive in the answer.

Console pros:

Standard hardware with a closed system software that make inerenthly the consoles more plug and play and majority of game optimezed for said hwardare, that are cheaper than pc. Ratio hardware\cost is favorable for the console.

exlusives games(the same pro is for pc exlusive games but with some difference), and if you like some of them, you buy a console for them because every good titles that you like is untradable with others ( you can't say "ah you play persona 5, you could just play dragon quest 11 on pc" ). Firts party titles, expecially sony and nintendo, are generally quality games and often unique experiences (astro bot for ps4 or splatoon 2 for nintendo, just 2 examples)

They have great market share with the same standard hawdare,so many games are made with them in mind, with pc the mass is on medium,low pc, you can't make a game with a 1080ti in mind. Yes engines scaling but you can't say that one game is optimized for a 1080ti (expecially with nvidia "problem" with latest drivers and windows 10 that seems to want to fight gsyinc). More you spend on pc more the ratio cost\optimization fall off. If you dont play specific pc games and want a more plug and play experience than pc console is favorable. the same is if the games you play cant benefit from pc (if you like bindinc of isaac, nier automata, hollow knight and so on, the pc power is useless)

Pc has pro and cons but you asked about consoles:P

Subjective speaking, I play on pc for exlusive pc games and on console for exclusive console games or for games that dont get any advantage from a pc or little advantage (and in this case I like them more on console for plug and play:P). basically i play on pc only if its exlusive to pc(4x and strategy games) or if the game have huge advantage over console version.

So I play stellaris,total war warhammer 2, age of wonders 3, rimowrld, doom, on pc. Mario,zelda,xenoblade, binding of isaac, hollow knight,splaton 2 on switch. Blood borne, persona 5, nier automata, dragon quest 11, astro bot, last of us, the last guardian, disgaea 5, nioh, monster hunter on ps 4 pro. Just some example.

@Zarya for me games designed for pc gamers are quake champion, escape from tarkov, crusader kings2, rimworld, eve online, and so on. Nowadays i dont see specific pc games the same caliber they had in the past, not many. we had masterpieces designed for pc, now dont know. Overwatch is good, but multyplayer games are different, and the most famous and esport centric games are "old"concept\games , like dota 2,counter strike and starcraft 2.

I also posted facts about why games that are not pc exlusives can be a problem for pc gamers. Not awalys, but often.

Avatar image for kali-b1rd
#232 Edited by Kali-B1rd (2182 posts) -
@ariochmel said:

@zaryia: It impact pc gaming because if you make a game eith only pc in mind you can go further with graphic, phisics and so on. Because you dont have to keep in consideration the console market. In the "old days" was like this. Nowadays vast majority of few games that are made with pc in mind are indie games that dont have the funding to give to pc hardware what they'd deserve.

Flip side, many consoles games are now on pc( mainly japanese) and japanese game have often these 2 or 3 problem: they dosen'tlook better or significantly better on pc,they use Denuvo drm, they have often some problems on pc.

If you think that fallout 76 or civilization 6(a mass market 4x also on ipad)or battlefield 1 are pc games I think you are just a recent pc gamer. If you post numbers of metacritic I dont think you undertand that every good game is an unique game untradable with other.

We all get that. If I had any say in a games development and I wanted my company to stay afloat, I would avoid being exclusive altogether. Everything has streamlined since the early days. The only reason the handful of graphically impressive Sony/MS games exist is because they are fronting the bill to sell the machines. PC obviously doesn't have that... except the gamers, which consolites shit on for crowd funding.

People here say gaming has never been better, and that all the polished/refined games we get these with online matchmaking, little to no mod support, no cheats ... no expansions .... far less risks taken... I disagree... the early days where "Engagement, money, DLC and "polish the game until it looks perfect, but is shallow as shit" were not a factor was better.

People say Matchmaking is better than Server Browsers "because its easier and quicker" are full of shit... sort by ping and pick, if you liked it add to your favourites! Matchmaking is mindless NPC drone cancer.

Consoles are now heavily west focused, and a Japanese company is pumping out more Western Action Shooters (Sony) than anyone else, while completely failing with its original Japanese mix. Most of the popular games outside of the 1st party games are PC to Console genres popularised with the 10 year-late online support and refining of shooter controls (which still suck)

Doesn't change the bottom line though. all these platforms are merging into the lowest common denominator heap, but only one plays 99% of the games the best, plays the most games, has the most high quality games, has the most genres etc etc yadda yadda.

Avatar image for ariochmel
#233 Edited by Ariochmel (9 posts) -
@kali-b1rd said:
@ariochmel said:

@zaryia: It impact pc gaming because if you make a game eith only pc in mind you can go further with graphic, phisics and so on. Because you dont have to keep in consideration the console market. In the "old days" was like this. Nowadays vast majority of few games that are made with pc in mind are indie games that dont have the funding to give to pc hardware what they'd deserve.

Flip side, many consoles games are now on pc( mainly japanese) and japanese game have often these 2 or 3 problem: they dosen'tlook better or significantly better on pc,they use Denuvo drm, they have often some problems on pc.

If you think that fallout 76 or civilization 6(a mass market 4x also on ipad)or battlefield 1 are pc games I think you are just a recent pc gamer. If you post numbers of metacritic I dont think you undertand that every good game is an unique game untradable with other.

We all get that. If I had any say in a games development and I wanted my company to stay afloat, I would avoid being exclusive altogether. Everything has streamlined since the early days. The only reason the handful of graphically impressive Sony/MS games exist is because they are fronting the bill to sell the machines. PC obviously doesn't have that... except the gamers, which consolites shit on for crowd funding.

People here say gaming has never been better, and that all the polished/refined games we get these with online matchmaking, little to no mod support, no cheats ... no expansions .... far less risks taken... I disagree... the early days where "Engagement, money, DLC and "polish the game until it looks perfect, but is shallow as shit" were not a factor was better.

People say Matchmaking is better than Server Browsers "because its easier and quicker" are full of shit... sort by ping and pick, if you liked it add to your favourites! Matchmaking is mindless NPC drone cancer.

Consoles are now heavily west focused, and a Japanese company is pumping out more Western Action Shooters (Sony) than anyone else, while completely failing with its original Japanese mix. Most of the popular games outside of the 1st party games are PC to Console genres popularised with the 10 year-late online support and refining of shooter controls (which still suck)

Doesn't change the bottom line though. all these platforms are merging into the lowest common denominator heap, but only one plays 99% of the games the best, plays the most games, has the most high quality games, has the most genres etc etc yadda yadda.

I don't know if I get it but I see like this. Console exlusives games have to be( generally) unique or better than multiplat,because they are made to sells consoles. If nintendo or sony games, in rispective genres, have the same quality of multiplatform games, they dont sells consoles for them (in theory, some games are worse I know, but many exlusives games, in the genre they became, are great games).

If 90% of games are made with multiplatform in mind, pc take the big hit here because i can't make phisics, gameplay or graphic that can't run on a console. Game is the same. The advantage that I can have on pc, in some games where it makes a great difference and is optimezed, are fps and loading time. On graphic we are on diminush return now, we don't have the leaps that we had in the past, many games have the same graphic on pc and console, little differences. Japanese games expecially. Nier automata, nioh, dragon quest 11, same graphic, but somtimes more problems on pc(less plug and play experience). I have read disgaea 5, out on pc now, is UNcomplete version, 1 year later, same graphic of switch (ps4 is better than both). Yakuza 0, same game and graphic, on pc can have some problem. On console you know that games are designed with that system (or that generation of consoles) in mind.

Im not saying that console is better but Im sayng that console and pc both have pros and cons. Its just the reality. the choice, if someone have to choice beetween pc and consoles is subjective and personal. If you ask me "I buy a pc or a console?" I'll ask you" what games you play?" and then I ask you also if you like to game without any effort, without doing nothing to your machine. Than I'll say you if pc or consoles is better for you.

So the beter experience on pc depends from the game itself and optimization. if someone play 90% of mass market multiplat games, indie games that now are also on consoles for the most part, and exlusives console game, why choose a pc, that is less plug and play, have shitty windows upgrade every 6 months and nvidia has stopped to make "perfect" driver? and also spend a little more than a console, because if you buy a pc with 500 eu\usd, you dont have any value and in one year is trash.

So, its okey to play on pc if someone like exlusives game of pc, like paradox games and so on, or games, that are designed with pc in mind, but I wouldn't say pc are just console but better.

Avatar image for Alucard_Prime
#234 Posted by Alucard_Prime (10107 posts) -

No I disagree, not losing its purpose but the advantage part has been shortened over the years, to what extent I have no idea as I have not gamed on PC for years, however I grew up on PC gaming and used to game there a lot in the past. PC gaming excels in some areas, but not all....both PCs and consoles have their pros and cons, and it's up to preference which one you want to game on imo.

PCs are not just for playing slightly better looking versions of console games, there are many other benefits/differences as well, such as full Backwards compatibility and a much larger library overall. There are other advantages too for some people and I don't have the time to have a detailed discussion, but the hardware aspect is definitely one of those.

As a PC gamer I remember I used to regularly tinker and try to fine tune my PC, I would regularly upgrade it and every time I did that, I would often go back and replay some of my favorite games. This messing around with the hardware, it can be addicting and fun and for many people it is part of the enjoyment of owning a PC, they want full control, they don't want a box with everything already pre-determined where they cannot change anything.

Although I loved many series on PC such as Unreal Tournament, C&C, Startcraft, Warcraft, Quake, and many others, by far and away my favorite series has always been Diablo. I used to be a Diablo 2 addict for a year, and it was near the end of that period that I basically stopped gaming on PC for various reasons, none of which I really feel like discussing now. At the end of the day I choose to game on console but that does not meant I don't like PC gaming, just my preference for now. I honestly don't like comparing them, they are apples and oranges for me.

Avatar image for Dark_sageX
#235 Posted by Dark_sageX (3420 posts) -
@ariochmel said:
@Dark_sageX said:
@ariochmel said:

One important thing I have learned reading this forum: many of the more elitist pc gamer are just recent pc gamer or relatively recent pc gamer. People that have gamed on pc since many years knows the real pro and cons of each platform.

Bra4ever nailed exatly this.

Please do elaborate, what are the pros of consoles?

For me console and pc are not comparable in many ways but I try to be obejctive in the answer.

Console pros:

Standard hardware with a closed system software that make inerenthly the consoles more plug and play and majority of game optimezed for said hwardare, that are cheaper than pc. Ratio hardware\cost is favorable for the console.

exlusives games(the same pro is for pc exlusive games but with some difference), and if you like some of them, you buy a console for them because every good titles that you like is untradable with others ( you can't say "ah you play persona 5, you could just play dragon quest 11 on pc" ). Firts party titles, expecially sony and nintendo, are generally quality games and often unique experiences (astro bot for ps4 or splatoon 2 for nintendo, just 2 examples)

They have great market share with the same standard hawdare,so many games are made with them in mind, with pc the mass is on medium,low pc, you can't make a game with a 1080ti in mind. Yes engines scaling but you can't say that one game is optimized for a 1080ti (expecially with nvidia "problem" with latest drivers and windows 10 that seems to want to fight gsyinc). More you spend on pc more the ratio cost\optimization fall off. If you dont play specific pc games and want a more plug and play experience than pc console is favorable. the same is if the games you play cant benefit from pc (if you like bindinc of isaac, nier automata, hollow knight and so on, the pc power is useless)

Pc has pro and cons but you asked about consoles:P

Subjective speaking, I play on pc for exlusive pc games and on console for exclusive console games or for games that dont get any advantage from a pc or little advantage (and in this case I like them more on console for plug and play:P). basically i play on pc only if its exlusive to pc(4x and strategy games) or if the game have huge advantage over console version.

So I play stellaris,total war warhammer 2, age of wonders 3, rimowrld, doom, on pc. Mario,zelda,xenoblade, binding of isaac, hollow knight,splaton 2 on switch. Blood borne, persona 5, nier automata, dragon quest 11, astro bot, last of us, the last guardian, disgaea 5, nioh, monster hunter on ps 4 pro. Just some example.

@Zarya for me games designed for pc gamers are quake champion, escape from tarkov, crusader kings2, rimworld, eve online, and so on. Nowadays i dont see specific pc games the same caliber they had in the past, not many. we had masterpieces designed for pc, now dont know. Overwatch is good, but multyplayer games are different, and the most famous and esport centric games are "old"concept\games , like dota 2,counter strike and starcraft 2.

I also posted facts about why games that are not pc exlusives can be a problem for pc gamers. Not awalys, but often.

Its very easy to compare both machines objectively, iall you have to do is check the list of things one can do, you will easily realize which is the superior system.

I was only interested in consoles because I want to focus on consoles, now to respond:

PCs are plug and play as well, its not difficult to push the ON button on a PC, and then move your mouse to click on things, I'd argue its much easier to navigate through menus with a mouse and keyboard than a controller, and the majority of games on PC are optimized for the hardware as well, the issue with un-optimized games isn't as common as you think, 90% of games on PC are well optimized for a wide range of hardware, and the few that aren't get patched up relatively quickly (just like on consoles), out of the 200+ games I have I can honestly say only 2 are not well optimized, and even then they perform much better than consoles, even if you argue that you don't get the performance increase you expected you would get, PC is the only way to get those performance increase.

Lets say you want to play X game at 4k 60fps and you bought a super expensive GPU expecting to get that result but instead you get 50fps, what would the alternative be? buy a consoles and get lower visuals and lower performance? because that still won't get you the results you want, the only way you can argue that consoles offer a better value to performance ratio is if you can the results you want or better.

PCs can be cheap, you don't need a freakin RTX 2080 ti with an i9 to play games you know...

Having exclusives isn't an advantage of a system, exclusives are simply games that were artificially enabled for specific systems due to marketing reasons, a PC can run those games as well, its just that developers locked those games from being playable on PC, besides even if we play the exclusivity card, PC beats consoles by a landslide, and that is not even mentioning multiplats not available to consoles, console exclusives being available for streaming and emulated games, you will at best only have a handful of games that you cannot access on PC.

you can name all the examples you want but it will be a short list, not enough to make investing $300+ on a closed system justifiable by any economic point, if anything is a compromise, you can say you don't mind paying it of course, but you can't argue that you are getting any decent measurable benefit in return, its actually a loss in investment.

Avatar image for ariochmel
#236 Edited by Ariochmel (9 posts) -

For un-optimization I dont intend just the fps (that will be higher than a console or in worse scenario 60 fps on par (ex. fighting games) but the stuttering, frametime issues, some drivers problem (latest nvidia driver give witcher 3 flickering problems on some textures for example, some drivers have problem with gsyinc) or a windows upgrade that can give some problems. Its the nature of pc, the "open" platform that give advantage but have also some cons, inerently. Consoles, with their closed system nature, are more plug and play for this. You can solve the "poblems" when they occur on pc, but this make pc gaming less plug and play. It can go all well but somtimes can happen to have to trobleshooting something, for the more variables of pc (os,drivers, games, system maintance )

cost\persomance ratio on console you get what you pay, and games are made,generally, to run at their best on the hardware of said console. the games (turning back on the topic) that are mich better on pc or desigend specifically for pc are less and less.

Exlusives games are supported by the consoles manifactures generally because, if third party (less now), they are system seller(=games that stand out) or, in case of firts party, they make the games with internal studios and they want them to be over the competition in the respective genre. Quality speaking is the reason why firts party exlusives are often betten than multiplatform games of the same genre.

Pc exlusives is another argument (is the argument of the topic btw:P) but are made for different reasons (control scheme or require more power for that kind of gameplay). The topic says that these games are less now or dont have the quality that thay had some time ago. And i agree with the op.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#237 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25366 posts) -

@Midnightshade29 said:

@brah4ever: You are right. I just bought an nvidia 1060gtx after my amd 7870 died. I wasn't in the market for a video card, but this card a mid range card makes all my old games maxed, nothing I have really pushes it at 1080p (have a 24" 1080p monitor).

I remember buying a voodoo 5 for unreal tornament and quake 2/3, theif, tomb raider etc.. A GeForce 3 for morrowind, kotor and neverwinter nights, vampire the masquerade, half-life 2, farcry, nolf, etc.. A GeForce 6800gt for Oblivion, a 8800gts for the witcher, neverwinter nights 2, stalker and crisis. Then a 9800gt when that died. The 7870 got me to ps4 level. Now with the 1060gtx the benchmarking was fun for a few days but there is no exclusives really that showcase that gen of cards.

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead). Where is a new Quake, or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse. It seems that most games on pc these days are indies, or multiplayer free to play crap like fortnight or some other millennial trend game, or games I like on pc that don't even require high end graphics (roguelikes and strategy games).

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

For controller games, I play on ps4, because my tv is huge and games like RDR2, GOW etc, aren't' on pc.

You speak as if games like Star Citizen and Hunt: Showdown don't exist. Not to mention, World War 3 and other exclusives.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#238 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25366 posts) -

@ariochmel said:

For un-optimization I dont intend just the fps (that will be higher than a console or in worse scenario 60 fps on par (ex. fighting games) but the stuttering, frametime issues, some drivers problem (latest nvidia driver give witcher 3 flickering problems on some textures for example, some drivers have problem with gsyinc) or a windows upgrade that can give some problems. Its the nature of pc, the "open" platform that give advantage but have also some cons, inerently. Consoles, with their closed system nature, are more plug and play for this. You can solve the "poblems" when they occur on pc, but this make pc gaming less plug and play. It can go all well but somtimes can happen to have to trobleshooting something, for the more variables of pc (os,drivers, games, system maintance )

cost\persomance ratio on console you get what you pay, and games are made,generally, to run at their best on the hardware of said console. the games (turning back on the topic) that are mich better on pc or desigend specifically for pc are less and less.

Exlusives games are supported by the consoles manifactures generally because, if third party (less now), they are system seller(=games that stand out) or, in case of firts party, they make the games with internal studios and they want them to be over the competition in the respective genre. Quality speaking is the reason why firts party exlusives are often betten than multiplatform games of the same genre.

Pc exlusives is another argument (is the argument of the topic btw:P) but are made for different reasons (control scheme or require more power for that kind of gameplay). The topic says that these games are less now or dont have the quality that thay had some time ago. And i agree with the op.

Textures flickering sounds more like a game file problem than a driver problem. Drivers could possibly cause artifacts, but you won't just see textures flickering if it's a driver issue.

Avatar image for ariochmel
#239 Edited by Ariochmel (9 posts) -
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@ariochmel said:

For un-optimization I dont intend just the fps (that will be higher than a console or in worse scenario 60 fps on par (ex. fighting games) but the stuttering, frametime issues, some drivers problem (latest nvidia driver give witcher 3 flickering problems on some textures for example, some drivers have problem with gsyinc) or a windows upgrade that can give some problems. Its the nature of pc, the "open" platform that give advantage but have also some cons, inerently. Consoles, with their closed system nature, are more plug and play for this. You can solve the "poblems" when they occur on pc, but this make pc gaming less plug and play. It can go all well but somtimes can happen to have to trobleshooting something, for the more variables of pc (os,drivers, games, system maintance )

cost\persomance ratio on console you get what you pay, and games are made,generally, to run at their best on the hardware of said console. the games (turning back on the topic) that are mich better on pc or desigend specifically for pc are less and less.

Exlusives games are supported by the consoles manifactures generally because, if third party (less now), they are system seller(=games that stand out) or, in case of firts party, they make the games with internal studios and they want them to be over the competition in the respective genre. Quality speaking is the reason why firts party exlusives are often betten than multiplatform games of the same genre.

Pc exlusives is another argument (is the argument of the topic btw:P) but are made for different reasons (control scheme or require more power for that kind of gameplay). The topic says that these games are less now or dont have the quality that thay had some time ago. And i agree with the op.

Textures flickering sounds more like a game file problem than a driver problem. Drivers could possibly cause artifacts, but you won't just see textures flickering if it's a driver issue.

last release note https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1075674/geforce-drivers/official-416-34-game-ready-whql-display-driver-feedback-thread-released-10-11-18-/

But some problems remains, nvidia having more problems in recent times, they have to fight also with windows 10 that upgrade every 6 months. Its not the end of the world guys, but this is the reason that consoles are,often, more plug and play than a pc.

And when I speak about optimization I speak about games but also os and drivers. Consoles is fixed hardware, is a cons for some reasons, but is also a pro (the pro is more plug and play that what a pc can be).

Last hotfix https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1078106/geforce-drivers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-416-64-released-10-26-18-/

  • Far Cry 5: Flicker during gameplay
  • Monster Hunter World: Corruption is seen when Volume Rendering Quality is set to highest
  • The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt: Flicker during gameplay
  • Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Improves game stability

add to this the variables of different hardaware, motherboard, bios, chipset drivers, program installed and running on a pc, windows that sometimes is better to format for having a clean system. And geforce experience that give program like DDU(display driver uninstall) a reason to exist:P

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#240 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25366 posts) -

@ariochmel said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@ariochmel said:

For un-optimization I dont intend just the fps (that will be higher than a console or in worse scenario 60 fps on par (ex. fighting games) but the stuttering, frametime issues, some drivers problem (latest nvidia driver give witcher 3 flickering problems on some textures for example, some drivers have problem with gsyinc) or a windows upgrade that can give some problems. Its the nature of pc, the "open" platform that give advantage but have also some cons, inerently. Consoles, with their closed system nature, are more plug and play for this. You can solve the "poblems" when they occur on pc, but this make pc gaming less plug and play. It can go all well but somtimes can happen to have to trobleshooting something, for the more variables of pc (os,drivers, games, system maintance )

cost\persomance ratio on console you get what you pay, and games are made,generally, to run at their best on the hardware of said console. the games (turning back on the topic) that are mich better on pc or desigend specifically for pc are less and less.

Exlusives games are supported by the consoles manifactures generally because, if third party (less now), they are system seller(=games that stand out) or, in case of firts party, they make the games with internal studios and they want them to be over the competition in the respective genre. Quality speaking is the reason why firts party exlusives are often betten than multiplatform games of the same genre.

Pc exlusives is another argument (is the argument of the topic btw:P) but are made for different reasons (control scheme or require more power for that kind of gameplay). The topic says that these games are less now or dont have the quality that thay had some time ago. And i agree with the op.

Textures flickering sounds more like a game file problem than a driver problem. Drivers could possibly cause artifacts, but you won't just see textures flickering if it's a driver issue.

last release note https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1075674/geforce-drivers/official-416-34-game-ready-whql-display-driver-feedback-thread-released-10-11-18-/

But some problems remains, nvidia having more problems in recent times, they have to fight also with windows 10 that upgrade every 6 months. Its not the end of the world guys, but this is the reason that consoles are,often, more plug and play than a pc.

And when I speak about optimization I speak about games but also os and drivers. Consoles is fixed hardware, is a cons for some reasons, but is also a pro (the pro is more plug and play that what a pc can be).

Last hotfix https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1078106/geforce-drivers/announcing-geforce-hotfix-driver-416-64-released-10-26-18-/

  • Far Cry 5: Flicker during gameplay
  • Monster Hunter World: Corruption is seen when Volume Rendering Quality is set to highest
  • The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt: Flicker during gameplay
  • Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Improves game stability

add to this the variables of different hardaware, motherboard, bios, chipset drivers, program installed and running on a pc, windows that sometimes is better to format for having a clean system. And geforce experience that give program like DDU(display driver uninstall) a reason to exist:P

Yes, those games flicker entirely, not just the textures. That would indicate a driver problem if everything flickers, but you said only textures flickered.

Avatar image for tenaka2
#241 Posted by tenaka2 (17188 posts) -

The peasants are revolting again.

Avatar image for Gatygun
#242 Edited by Gatygun (1525 posts) -
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@Midnightshade29 said:

@brah4ever: You are right. I just bought an nvidia 1060gtx after my amd 7870 died. I wasn't in the market for a video card, but this card a mid range card makes all my old games maxed, nothing I have really pushes it at 1080p (have a 24" 1080p monitor).

I remember buying a voodoo 5 for unreal tornament and quake 2/3, theif, tomb raider etc.. A GeForce 3 for morrowind, kotor and neverwinter nights, vampire the masquerade, half-life 2, farcry, nolf, etc.. A GeForce 6800gt for Oblivion, a 8800gts for the witcher, neverwinter nights 2, stalker and crisis. Then a 9800gt when that died. The 7870 got me to ps4 level. Now with the 1060gtx the benchmarking was fun for a few days but there is no exclusives really that showcase that gen of cards.

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead). Where is a new Quake, or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse. It seems that most games on pc these days are indies, or multiplayer free to play crap like fortnight or some other millennial trend game, or games I like on pc that don't even require high end graphics (roguelikes and strategy games).

I have been saying this for years though. I remember when pc pushed exclusives like Crysis, Stalker, Gothic, the witcher, Doom 3, neverwinter nights, etc.. that aren't mmos or free to play schemes.

For controller games, I play on ps4, because my tv is huge and games like RDR2, GOW etc, aren't' on pc.

You speak as if games like Star Citizen and Hunt: Showdown don't exist. Not to mention, World War 3 and other exclusives.

Because they are delusional and full of rose tinted nostalgic googles or simple full of crap entirely.

I have been PC gaming already from i386 and experienced all windows versions, most of the generation hardware as i spended fortunes on it. ( think about 10k a year just for PC hardware through the years )

PC gaming back in the day was filled with "there so called indie trash already". But the ones that did work are suddenly seen excellent which made pc gaming so much better. It's just hilarious. It's selective view at best.

Most people bought Quake 3 for the mods, most people bought half life 1 for mod counterstrike, most people bought warcraft 3 for mods that got pushed into it. The base games where all trash. Twitchy fast shooters that are now called fortnite and overwatch It's the exact same concept. But hey lets not talk about those because "free to play trash" or it's populair so lets bash on it just to make a point. Because that point is laughable at best. ( all of these twitchy shooters where clones of eachother back in the day );

Then lets move to modding while we are at it. Modding has never been as easy as now. Buy a game on steam like divinity 2, you can download mods and scroll through them with a click on a button and play the game without doing anything. there are millions of mods on there, there are millions of mods on nexus if you like to do it for older titles. There are programs that even allow you to revamp multiplayer games entirely of older games yourself to make them far more interesting. Those 10 mods that where something interesting back in the day don't even weight up remotely towards it. And that comes from somebody that made mods for warcraft 3 / quake 3 and half life 1 + 2. The modding scene was a absolute joke.

Then crysis and graphical powerhouses. Every single game can be a graphical powerhouse even fortnite, getting a stable 240+ fps is no small feed in that game for super smooth movement on a 240+hz screen. But even besides that the current genetion crysis or graphical powerhouse is star citizen. but the moment you put that game forwards we gotta input another slogan that removes that one out of the equalization entirely. Because somehow far cry / oblivion / crisis where such incredible games, they where hot garbage and received massive backslash already back in the day. Oblivion and there HDR / bloom garbage ( yea HDR has a bit of a history on PC already )

Now with digital market where everybody can make there own games on and sure there is a lot of trash, but that was already the case back in the day with flash games and other vaporware stuff. You had floppy games that you could buy for a buck in shops that where absolute trash but atleast gave you something to do.

Let's not talk about OS back in the days that where massively unstable like trying to balance on a earthquake every time something new came along and you wanted to install it. The trash hardware from 100's of company's that all tried to dig a market on the PC sector which made support a hell. Having to mess around with physical garbage something consoles are still bound towards and terrible support by devs resulted in a lot of issue's and home made crappy scripts to get stuff even to run.

But but gaming back in the day specially PC was so much more better guys. Remember paying 100 bucks for a game or 180 bucks for a n64 game. I do. And that game gave you so much content that if it would have released today you would have refunded it directly.

The problem with people specially on this forum is they have no argument, they have no discussion point they just throw out there garbage and make up so many boundaries to proof there idiocy.

PC gaming has no games because:

1) Indies don't count

2) Online games don't count

3) Multiplayer games don't count

4) Free to play games don't count

5) Games from X country don't count

6) Games that are ported don't count

7) Mmo's don't count

8) RTS and stratagy games don't count

9) Modding doesn't count

10) BC doesn't count

11) Emulation doesn't count

12) Old games don't count in general

And if we still don't have enough ways ways to limit there idiocy we gotta make extra boundaries obviously to make a point otherwise it doesn't work.

1) Graphics, only graphics that matter is what my console does. because we need to keep the chain of stupid going in order to validate our product.

- Resolution only matters if my console does it, if not its a non factor

- FPS only matters if my console does it, if not its a non factor

- Settings only matter if my console does it nothing else

- Screen tech only matters if consoles are capable to use it etc etc.

2) Price "oh look you need a 500 buck GPU to push 4k resolution, but in the meanwhile forget that 4k isn't even remotely needed and that console runs it at sub high settings with dynamic resolutions everywhere with shit framerates", basically they forget the PS4 pro is nothing but a 400 buck gpu upgrade over there old PS4 and isn't even delivering what a 400 buck gpu would on PC remotely.

3) Look i need to spend extra time to fix this problem "which is also a negative, because being able to fix problems without waiting for a week on sony to deliver a patch where you have no control over is somehow better then googling a hot fix yourself and apply it 1 minute later". gotta keep the special Olympics going".

4) Swapping out hardware is also a bad thing, being able to overclock your hardware is also a bad things, Everything that mister console isn't offering really is a bad thing to keep there spirits up.

5) Paid online, let's defend this because paying is better then having it for free because my favorite console does it guys. It's laughable.

6) But but meh exclusives.

There is a reason why sony moved with the PS4 to a PC architecture something xbox360 also did, to keep up and make porting easier to keep support rolling for longer without having to pay developers a truck ton of money to get things going ( aka basically paying the entire port ). This means when you have platforms that are more of the same that games are easier to port over and exclusives naturally make far less sense business wise. Which resuilt on PC having tons of japanese games influx right now, which means a lot of PC games move to consoles without much effort. But this also is a bad thing guys.

You know how i call these people.

Clowns.

It's almost like reading american journalism. Feels the story.

Reality? never heard of it.

Avatar image for personalbox4
#243 Posted by PersonalBox4 (14 posts) -

Man I agree, especially with that 4k. Computers cant do that right? Computers weren't able to do that even before consoles right? And also the world is flat.

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
#245 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (25253 posts) -

This is one reason why I game on PC. The flexibility and customization I crave is unmatched.

Avatar image for Dark_sageX
#246 Posted by Dark_sageX (3420 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
@AdobeArtist said:

The purpose of PC has always been freedom & flexibility for the player to choose their hardware configuration and specs according to their own budget. To set their own priorities of resolution, graphics, and performance (fps), completely open ended options in input type and custom key mapping. And the advantage has always been having the best visuals available (again by budget) and the best performance, not being limited to 30 fps.

And these are far from being lost. It's always be what truly sets PC apart from the confined ecosystems of consoles.

@knight-k said:

Consolites don't have a problem with 30 fps since we aren't graphic whores like you hermits. But it's funny you bring up the streamable argument to claim some ownage but in the meantime those games won't be playable at 60 fps. Typical hermit hypocrites.

Oh well, have fun playing RDR 2 though.... oh wait

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And that's why we never see graphics arguments between Playstation and Xbox for three generations already? Even going all the way back to Nintendo vs Sega. You need to be way more self aware before throwing around "hypocrite."

But I also need to point out that frame rate isn't about graphics, it's about performance. The difference between how pretty a game looks and how smoothly it looks in motion.

And the only reason you're "fine" with 30 fps is because you have to convince yourself of that when you have no other option. When you've experienced 60 fps and above first hand, there's no denying that higher frame rate is an objectively better gameplay experience. Not "just for shooters and racers", for all action oriented gameplay; fighters, hack n' slash, sports, platforming, fighters both 3D and 2D... it benefits both the visual experience (character animations, environment scrolling) and the input responsiveness.

Moving the goal posts can only give you the reality you want to see, not reality for what it actually is.

lolwut?

The purpose of PC gaming indeed yes been the flexibility and freedom it provides but you are missing one thing. The lack of big budget titles to push the hardware diminishes most of its benefits. Where are the Half Life 2's, Crysis, Battlefield 2/2142, UT2K4, Doom 3, etc. PC destroying games that used to exist in the past? Games that were built with the PC player in mind and had a game designed around the advantages of the PC ecosystem. Games that blew away everything else from a technical standpoint in their eras. Now its as if consoles have surpassed and caught up and the only advantage PC has the ability to apply anti aliasing and up the resolution per game.

Ever heard of something called, mod tools? It's rare for games to include them despite back then them being common place to allows communities to grow and build the pre-existing game.

Since you sound like a younger and relatively inexperienced PC gamer, peer 2 peer and multiplayer and paying for map packs wasn't always the defacto of PC gaming, it was dedicated servers ran by players passionate about the games.

Now it's all about homogenized version of titles that basically import console specific game design and interface to the PC ecosystem, awesome right? There used to be two different version of the same game developed both very different than one another but each taking advantage of their platform. Example, Battlefield 2 vs Battlefield Modern Combat or Rainbow Six 3 Raven Shield vs Rainbow Six 3 (consoles) or even Unreal Tournament 2004 vs Unreal Championship II. The PC versions were built to the benefits of the platform in more ways than just graphics but in terms of design and scope.

Also 30 fps with a controller sitting 6ft+ away from the screen is a much different experience than 30 fps with a mouse sitting 2 feet from the screen.

If you would like to gain more knowledge on the history of PC gaming, feel free to ask.

If you think exclusives games is a selling point for PC gaming then you really really REALLY have no idea about PC gaming.....

Avatar image for freedomfreak
#247 Posted by freedomfreak (51198 posts) -

It's dying. Rapidly.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
#248 Posted by Ghosts4ever (9981 posts) -

@Midnightshade29 said:

Where is the new stalker games (dev is dead)

Here

where were you living my friend? dev are not dead they are back from dead.

Quake

Quake champions?? but Doom reboot is new quake

or a new Crysis graphics powerhouse.

Thats Metro Exodus. pushing graphics to limit and having semi open world structure like Crysis/STALKER used to had.

Avatar image for GarGx1
#249 Posted by GarGx1 (10928 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:

It's dying. Rapidly.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/308330/number-stream-users/

Do you honestly think that the numbers don't go up and down?

Avatar image for dxmcat
#250 Posted by dxmcat (2667 posts) -

@ghosts4ever: LOL, I knew it was only matter of time before you snubbed Quake Chumpions for the POS that it is. Everyone should.

Outsourcing Doom (2016) MP to a Halo developer, Outsourcing QC to some failed Russian Dev with a terrible engine when id has one of the best engines in the world.

Bethesda buys out id for exclusive rights to their engine, but hey, don't use it for your own games.... That sure makes a lot of sense.