PC players have higher standards?

Star Shitizen more like!! Amirite?!

:P

Most PC gamers reek of insecurity.

This board is full of insecurity.

So your system (be it PC, XB1, PS4, w/e) is so damn great. You should be playing it and having a blast. But instead, you choose to go to a forum and bash everything other than what you own.

If that is not insecurity, I don't know what is.

Most Call of Duty games are. But they are not worth $60 every year. MW1 and 2 perfected the formula and the series could have ended there.

Except Unity did not sell well.........................

You also have a strange definition of "everyone". A few people with too much money and free time buy them and then complain about games that they should have avoided.

I would say they have different standards.

Most Console games tend to be VERY formulaic, you might not know the story it tells, but you damn well almost always know exactly how it plays.

The most important Things seems to be initial impressions and a very well made game with fairly basic sontrol schemes and gameplay. You can see it from console games purchace habits.

I find that alot of PC gamers, look more into the game mechanics, and don't mind a less polished game as long as it offers something different, a new spin on something, new ideas and executions. In other Words They seem to find gameplay the most important aspect of all, by such a margin that there seems to be a disconnect from the two Groups if exclusively playing on one of the types of systems.

I think that is why we see such a devide in a game loke TLoU (a very good example to be honest) Execution, voice acting, setup and story are told really well, but placed untop of really simple and run-of-the-mill gameplay systems.

As oppsed to most PC centric games that might look great but really might not, where the act of playing is way more important, how the character moves, how many options and what options you have to your disposal.

A game like Divinity Original Sin might be a good example of this, or perhaps Endless Legend. A Whole lot of tweaking and usage of different systems, which carreis the game, the story is there to facilitage the gameplay, not the other way around like we often see on Console.

Ofcourse this only really seem to make sense if we look at exclusives, to see differences, as most of us play a ton of 3rd party games, which tend to strike a ballance between console and pc sensibilities (Nothing to do with difficulty, as most of us moan about the low curve nomatter the platform).

Atleast that would be my notion, after having spent way too many hours on both throughout 25 years.

Steam early access games still have better value/more content than the order lmao.

Not really considering most PC gamers use shitty little LCD monitors with garbage contrast, black levels, color saturation, and motion resolution. With shitty speakers or built in stereo speakers too. Lol master race? More like peasant race

I'm the exception of course

That is because you are a blind fanboy,all i see is a list of old ass games..

You've played League?

There's just a much greater variety and volume of games on pc so people are naturally more picky than on consoles.

True. The thing is even websites like PCGamer aren't cool anymore. You'll see them praising trash ports like Dark Souls all the time and call it "classic game" but will leave no opportunity to bash high profile PC game for silliest reasons. According to them, best "PC Game" ever is Mass Effect 2 (Facepalm). ME2 was my favorite game of last gen (PC or not) but it is not hard to see that ME series is made primarily for consoles with great PC ports.

Even Dark Souls was in their top 10 best PC games ever list and DA2 is awarded to have best combat. I blame lazy ports and casual gaming from last gen that have lowered the standards in gaming (PC included). Standards used to be a lot higher than what they are today. People complain about "dumbed down console" games yet when time comes to vote for best "PC Game" of the year, console centric games are voted by the crowd. Either that or you find a lot of people playing broken early access survival games. Still higher standards than consoles since dude bro shooters sell better on consoles but things are changed IMO.

stop making pc gamers look bad

Higher standards? I see a lot of begging for consoles games.

A very good observation. Can't argue with that.

@tormentos: You say it like it's a bad thing... Then again, console gamers treat their games like they are paper towels...

Anyway... I wouldn't say it's too much about higher standarrds since F2P and early access has been such a success with the deluge of garbage that has polluted the steam store lately

It's more because as PC gamers we have way more games to play, everyone is too busy playing their backlogs to even bother sticking with one game

"Why are console gamers pleased so easily?"

In terms of the way console gamers allow themselves to be treated, I don't think it is that they are easily pleased. I don't blame them either.

I think Playstation and Xbox owners have to deal with Sony and MS. These greedy bastards are masters at marketing and manipulating. But since the PC isn't owned by anyone, we don't have that, so we can see the BS better.

I've tried unsuccessfully to point out that pretty much everyone that is on Gamespot owns and plays consoles. They assume because they can't afford PCs, PCs gamers can't afford consoles.

Given the garbage that has been posted in this thread, I would say the "console brain" is just an inferior version of the PC brain...that is never really used.

Also, they love cutscenes, but text and menus scare them.

of course

unlike peasants i have standards

i only play quality games,no EA scams,no indie wanks,no ubisoft-activision-ea games(except games made by bioware)

Play Quake 2 then play a modern FPS designed for consoles; compare the level design.

I see a lot of people taking jabs at "early access" PC games. The thing with the concept behind early access, is that you basically pre-order, and at the same time gain access to internal alpha build testing, but most importantly, gives financial support to a team of developers that would otherwise have no way of funding.

The bad thing about early access is that people judge unfinished products, and players loose interest in it before it's even released. A good example is DayZ Standalone. Still has tons of players, me included, but a lot of people have simply been burned out playing it and it's not even out yet.

I enjoy early access games a lot, but I am picky about which i spend money on. Most of them are niche genres which big budget developers aren't taking a chance on.

Its an undeniable fact that with each new gen, Consoles are becoming more like Gimped PCs.

A bit. A while back.

Except that's now how it works.

It's an excuse to jack up the price for games already kickstarted and already sitting with publishers.

Back in ye old 90's days of pc gaming: sitting playing alpha's and beta's was the norm. Free.

You providing them, with a service.

Of course. Look at the Titanfall reviews. None of them mentioned server browsers for instance.
On the PC platform those things are the standard. Neither did they take into account the elevated price or bad lag compensation, because they were written for console gamers.
And CoD is a fracking overrated POS.
We have different standards for AAA games than for indie games, for early access, and innovative games.
(Non-Nintendo) Console games tend to be run of the mill AND trash. Closed, limited, expensive, bad online, bad community, slow support, bad performance, no redeeming qualities.

So what is the "current standard" of console games? If the crap that's been released on the new consoles to date is anything to go by, you can keep them.

I could have gone with any number of good indie games that out class most of the AAA console exclusives so far this generation. Without needing to go into bigger budget games.

I think in general they probably do because there is such a huge backlog to compare with, you have discrete differences between the 360 and the Xbone but that is not the case on PC. In fact you can still readily play games from 15 years agon on PC means you have a bigger set of standards to compare it against.

I also think PC gaming has some technical standards that are harshly criticized if not included (controls, performance, interface etc)

CoD has been dead on PC for a while actually. Pretty much died with Ghosts. The franchise has a negative stigma on PC that will be super hard to rectify. Treyarch is certainly a chance to boost numbers higher than Advanced Warfare, but it will never by as big as it once was. PC gamers don't like Activision anymore.

is there a point there?

@MBirdy88: it's el tormo, what do you think?

I would imagine that the differences in graphical upgrades regarding Devil May Cry HD and Serious Sam HD are of some indication of standards difference.

There's a difference between the samples. The term "PC gamer" is being used here to specifically refer to a smaller, hardcore crowd that's better informed than your average consumer. The only reason there appears to be more "informed" PC gamers is difficulty of entry: if you care enough to learn all the system building, troubleshooting ins-and-outs of the platform the chances are gaming matters enough to you to push through the hassle.

So no, PC gamers aren't more informed or have higher standards, they just don't absorb users who are less informed (less interested/passionate) to quite the extent console gaming does. You can see this through the proliferation of questionable DLC schemes that extend (and continue) even onto the PC. PC gamers often call this practice out as a console thing, but clearly they're buying it in droves (when you look at the mass market) or publishers would have dropped it by now.

What do you want to bet that those COD (or FIFA) players don't play much else other than that? They don't play those games because they own a console, they play on a console because they don't have the interest in videogames as a whole to invest (time and money) into PC gaming.

On the slight discrepancy in scores: The score differences are in a close enough range that the difference is honestly negligible. It also fails to factor in platform affinity of these releases, case in point: it's been a sticking point that DA:I doesn't feel right with the mouse, that's going to drag its evaluation down. Then there's also the history issue as what PC gamers want out of a game like Dragon Age isn't just reaching a particular quality bar, but recapturing some of the magic of very different games that are pretty much exclusive to the platform (old Bioware games).

Take a look at the review scores for a game poor game like Yaiba amongst console gamers were it got trashed. Now take a look at the same game on Steam which has considerably higher ratings. For many PC gamers the score they award a game isn't based on the quality of the game itself, but the quality of the porting. Reading across Steam you'll notice there's very little actual critical talk about the games themselves in reviews, but plenty on performance, suggesting that reaching performance competency is awarded proportionally higher than it is on consoles.

Nope, just different tastes. If anything a lot of PC games have worse taste considering how many early access games sell and how bad a lot of them are.

Then they have a PC-console hybrid brain. LoL!

Tell that to the countless kiddies on pc playing LoL.

Misclick, sorry. Carry on.

Hell no, PC Plebs liked Half Life 2, that's the furthest thing from having standards.

If master race got higher standards why do PC gamers play games that look worse than consoles?

It's funny that you mentioned graphics. The type of games that you like depends on one's preference, so one can't say it for sure if PC games are better or the ones made for consoles, but it's a known fact that PC gets better looking games every gen (exclusives and multiplats). So why bother?

Doesn't make them better people.

PC gamers are obviously better and more skilled. console gamers are bunch of pre teen kids and girls who play JRPGs.

now go back to barbie games cutie pie.

Oh no, not you again.

/dull surprise

Did u missed me?

In a cosmic sort of way, yes.

This guy thinks LoL is a game for kiddies, while the biggest console games are COD and FIFA.

Clearly you've never tried a MOBA.

In response to thread title:

"Yes."