Source : The Division already downgraded because of consoles

If that's the case, then I'm unclear as to why you'd be implying that PCs are lacking in exclusive content unless you truly didn't know that any of the games I listed are in development.

Not sure, both?

Just saying that you cannot blame that on consoles thats all. Its not there poor little fault. Maybe if more PC gamers actually brought games (and not 3 years later in the cheap steam sale) we would not have this problem.

Name a console game with a higher sklilcap and e-sports earnings than LoL and Dota2.

You can't. At best you might come up with a fighting game, and even those fall flat.

@CrownKingArthur: @soulitane:

Are you both dense are just fucking stupid? LOL and Dota 2 accounted for nearly half of pc revenue this year. Can you post me a link of a big budget AAA title exclusively on pc that's been successful? When's the last time a big budget pc game could support itself with a $50 price tag? SC2? Every game exclusively on pc that has been successful has done it with a F2P model or a monthly fee.

No,

Most AAA crap does not sell well on PCs because: it's crap, and most PC players are sick of playing the 8th iteration of a given franchise or the retreading of exhausted genres, themes, characters, and scenarios.

The gaming industry has been is in a state of stagnation because of consoles continued existence. As the arcades of the 80s started dying, with the exception of Nintendo, console makers found themselves with a lack of content to emulate and license. By this time, EA, a former PC software studio that had recently ventured into console content development with their Madden and FIFA other sports series', managed to sell enough copies of the first iterations of those games to allow them to start to redirect their focus and finances more toward consoles and the acquisition of other successful PC studios (i.e. Westwood Studios, Origin, etc.) that they would later gut or just turn into drone developers.

Activision would do the same a few years later with the success of their CoD series. Gradually, both former studios became the borg publishers of today; only interested in the safe investment that comes from sequelization of already successful franchises, and the acquisition of established studios rather than taking risks and producing new original content.

PC gamers buy plenty of games, this fact combined with Steam are the reasons for the revitalization of the indie gaming scene that effectively removed the need for a small developer to go through a major publisher in order to get shelf space in a traditional brick and mortar store. Many indie games are reintroducing the concept of gameplay over graphics while also creating new genres of games and revitalizing older ones. The gaming industry as a whole benefits as many of these games eventually make their way over to consoles as well.

You're welcome ... again.

PCs just keep giving back whereas the consoles do nothing but take.

Basically: consoles emulated PCs (Disc drives, hard drives, ethernet, online gaming, USB, APU, digital content distribution, x86 architecture, etc.) through continual adoption of PC technology until they became the inferior locked down versions of PCs that now call themselves "consoles," they helped with the cannibalization of former PC studios, they have held back multiplat gaming development with their overly long lifecycles, outdated technology (512MB RAM) and inferior control/input device options, all while helping to create a generation of technologically ignorant fanboys who quote tech spec numbers with no understanding of what the spec measures.

But yeah, I think all these things are the fault of PC gamers.

So the answer is no, you can't provide conclusive proof. "All because the Only games that make money on your platform is F2P Shit". That's the original statement you made. No please take a little while to think and get back to me with an argument that proves that statement correct. It's quite amusing getting called stupid when the other person is struggling to grasp basic English.

Also just to nicely shoot down your last statement. Minecraft has sold over 10 million on PC, probably closer to 20+ million, that didn't have a monthly fee and I distinctly remember paying for it. Also, no idea why you're bringing up high budget games since your original statement had nothing to do with that.

1. Any Blizzard, Sega, Valve game. Destroyed.

2. Why does a game have to be big budget? Several small budget games are reviewed more favorable than big budget ones for both console and PC. Infact, ps4 is mostly indy.

minecraft isnt a big budget AAA exclusive.

His statement is that "Every game exclusively on pc that has been successful has done it with a F2P model or a monthly fee." Try reading.

he will probably have some cop out.

get ready.

@Dasein808:

Stop whining and do something about it then. You seem to lack critcal thinking skills.

I agree. He's already started to move the goal posts with introducing his argument about big budget games.

I like how you skipped on my blizzard/sega comment which entails almost a dozen games last gen.

PC has more big budget aaa than a single console in a given gen.

I'm not whining about it.

As I pointed out in my previous post, PCs are helping to break the consoles' curse of stagnation, and I am "doing something about" it by spreading these truths.

Sure you are. Hahaha

I think that you may have forgotten to read the name of the forum.

A game that was never in development for PC originally is now being tailored back due to consoles kiddies?

Keep drinking that milkshake. Great sources, btw.

lol stop blaming downgrades on consoles, they could easily make the game beefy for the PC but there is no reason too since about 99% of pc gamers wouldn't be able to take advantage.

@Dasein808:

Do you have a point? Please dont ramble off another book to me bro.

I'm not your "bro" and I already made my point by disproving whatever point you thought you were making.

@CrownKingArthur: @soulitane: Lmfao look at you two circle jerking. I asked you to name me a pc exclusive that could support itself. One without a F2P model and you mention minecraft? The low budget indie title that actually sold better on consoles.

You sit here and babble about grammer on a forum eventhough you're post is no better all because you are to fucking stupid to grasp the basic concept of this whole argument. Let me explain it to you. If it wasn't for consoles the pc would not see any impressive looking titles as your platform isn't strong enough to support them. Games like LOL , Minecraft, DOTA and SC are so popular because anyone can run them. Consoles are holding back PC? Watchdogs, The Division, FC4 , Crysis 3 you know what they have in common? None of them would exist if it wasn't for Consoles. Almost every franchise that has started on PC has had to come to consoles because your platform couldn't sustain it. Now I ask you, post me a link of a full price PC exclusive that could support itself without a F2P model or monthly fee.

starcraft 2 is a dated looking dx9 game designed to run on 10 year old pcs. same for diablo. give me a break

Senstive little soul. Maybe you should just get off the web bro.

Bro you tend to talk lots with no substence. Please type me a book back bro as I need some light entertainment and thats all your rubbish 30 post are bro.

Bro much bro. Make me bro. Suck it bro.

just as i predicted you failed to answer soulitane's question. i know why, it's because you can't back up your own statement because you fabricated it.

so why would we oblige you with answers to your strawman questions?

oh go on, here's one answer: civilization 5. "a full price PC exclusive that can support itself without a f2p model or a monthly fee. " that's what you asked for, that's what you get.

@CrownKingArthur:

No need to back things up. Were on the internet.

Do you have a point m8?

Nah, you're just an angry little chav peasant that can't spell the word "substance."

ah! so that's why i've never seen you win a debate, make a point, or anything of the like.

Spelling on the internet is real important kuz. Whats your point again? Irelevant as per normal.

@CrownKingArthur: Except I did answer his question. The highest grossing games on pc are all f2p. Do you need links for why it took the pc a year to get GTA 5 or why Destiny still isn't announced?

PS. I'm glad you still have civ a pc franchise that started in the 90s. To bad it launched for $29.99 and now cost $7 on steam.

Its not about winning, making a point or anything else. This site is all about the lolz.

My point is that your borderline illiteracy makes you the one that's "irrelevant."

@Dasein808:

Oh noes a picture. Scared me right off.

The Division was primarily a PC game . Massive entertainment confirmed that later in interview . UBISOFT didn't show PC logo in the end to build the hype for consoles .

It was designed as PC MMO but Ubisoft dumbed down its controls to fit on a controller .

http://venturebeat.com/2013/12/10/the-director-of-ubisofts-the-division-reveals-what-next-generation-development-is-like-interview/

"It started as a PC project, and now it’s all three platforms as one. The reason we announced The Division for next-gen only was really because we weren’t sure we would be able to get the controls and the interface right. It wasn’t for any technical reason. It was already running on PC quite a while back. But the control scheme and the UI still require different approaches."

They just cannot resist the sales they can get on consoles. Hopefully one day they will get over it. It is frustrating.

too bad it's $7 now? are you kidding ... that sounds good. don't you like saving money? also, wouldn't you expect the price to drop more rapidly in an ecosystem that doesn't have to support used games?

as with all your posts, i'd like to do what all the rest of the gamespotters have to do with you, start with where you were wrong this time:

1. you're saying that civilization 5 launched for 30 american dollars. that's wrong. apparently it was $50USD to pre order, and shortly before launch it went up to $80USD. i notice that you didn't provide any evidence for your $30 statement, which was most curious. here is evidence to back up mine:

http://pc.mmgn.com/Forums/pc-gaming/Civilization-5 post 4 by tweekfu and post 6 by desi should put that issue to bed.

2. no you haven't answered @soulitane's question, in fact you don't refer to it at all.

you said:

"All because the Only games that make money on your platform is F2P Shit" now, that can onlymean one thing. haha, see what i did there?

now you're saying "The highest grossing games on pc are all f2p" yeah well nobody is disputing that. why don't you try backing up that statement you made? prove that: the only games that make money on the PC platform are F2P 'shit'.

i'm sure you will have no problem whatsoever with this, after all you have earned so much respect from us all.

**

anyway down to business with the rest of your post.

gta5? destiny? nah I'm not going to play either of those on my 360. just not interested.

That is the truth. Or, if the community actually gave a crap about more than just visuals there'd be pc pushers like Half Life coming along more than once every twenty years. Gotta have that nintendo mentality that you are buying the system to play the games, not buying the system to have games made for it.

Again you're ignoring your original comment. I'm not talking about grammar, I've very clearly stated your reading comprehension skills are lacking which that statement further proves. You have yet to prove your original statement and continue to move the goal posts further and further away. It really is quite amusing, I'm not sure whether you just don't understand or are doing this on purpose.

To answer your question, you've already named one with SC. To name a few more, the ARMA series is doing pretty well, along with Civ which was already mention. Total War games also sell a reasonable amount. There's a few, so would you please read your original post that I quoted and the statement that you made, which my question stemmed from and make a proper argument.

Starcraft 2 : Wings of Liberty on Ultra settings is one helluva looker .

80% cutscenes are realtime and look amazing . Back in 2010 it was also quite demanding game to run on Ultra settings . Character models looked better than any console game out there at that time . Then you have 200+ units on screen at once . That's something that requires a lot of power .

Yet another post proving that your reading skills are not well developed.

yes well

it is in fact entirely possible to win, make good points, and laugh - all at the same time.

did you know that?

@soulitane: 'if they can't even fit inside the building'

In cow world that would == fact, IF it was about the Xbox.

News to me. Please explain how?

@Cloud_imperium said:

@AM-Gamer said:

@melonfarmerz: Well in that case not one game you mentioned is technically demanding. So why is it all the pc exclusives usually look far worse then multiplatform titles? In the case of consoles the opposite is true. I'll tell you once and I'll tell you again. It's not consoles holding back pc gaming it's weak pc's.

Starcraft 2 : Wings of Liberty on Ultra settings is one helluva looker .

80% cutscenes are realtime and look amazing . Back in 2010 it was also quite demanding game to run on Ultra settings . Character models looked better than any console game out there at that time . Then you have 200+ units on screen at once . That's something that requires a lot of power .

TLOU has better character models. pretty sad state of affairs when a supposed big budget AAA pc exclusive cant even beat the visuals of a game coded for 6 year old hardware

So they aren't big budget AAA games now?

PC will continue to have the most aaa/aa, big budget or indy. It will continue to have the best gfx of each gen. It will continue to have the best competitive scenes and genres. It will reign supreme.

@m3dude1 said:

@Cloud_imperium said:

@AM-Gamer said:

@melonfarmerz: Well in that case not one game you mentioned is technically demanding. So why is it all the pc exclusives usually look far worse then multiplatform titles? In the case of consoles the opposite is true. I'll tell you once and I'll tell you again. It's not consoles holding back pc gaming it's weak pc's.

Starcraft 2 : Wings of Liberty on Ultra settings is one helluva looker .

80% cutscenes are realtime and look amazing . Back in 2010 it was also quite demanding game to run on Ultra settings . Character models looked better than any console game out there at that time . Then you have 200+ units on screen at once . That's something that requires a lot of power .

TLOU has better character models. pretty sad state of affairs when a supposed big budget AAA pc exclusive cant even beat the visuals of a game coded for 6 year old hardware

Learn to read . I said "At that time" . BTW TLOU character models in real time footage aren't that good . Look too blurry . Even if you count pre rendered cutscenes , then there are already better character models in other PC games like BF 4 , Crysis 3 etc .

And PC will continue to have games that does not take advantage of the top dollar hardware, and will be around the graphical capabilities of console. I don't call that supreme. I call it being ripped off. I'll enjoy my games made for consoles, on consoles. I don't see why you herms even shell out top dollar hardware for graphical experiences similar to consoles. Yeah, you get higher framerates, resolution, texture differences, all that good stuff if your hardware allows it, but is that why you spent top dollar on superior hardware? Looking at Crysis 1 back in the day, you would think that games would be indistinguishable from real life by now. It;s not. Instead, you sprinted towards to finish line, only to have a rubberband pull you back. Enjoy your supremacy. We'll play our games made for consoles on consoles while you play games that has been made for console hardware in mind.

the ps4 could pull it off but the X1 definitely can't. which is why they need to downgrade it.

@highking_kallor:

one

cut a hole in a box