Except that's not true it's just as hard to do a good port from 360-> ps3 as from any console to a PC.ZippyDSMlee said:
John Carmack: PC Is Not the "Leading Platform" for Games
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It can be done but not many stop and take that effort everything is for the short trem and consoles fill that goal more than anything else.Normandyfoxtrot said:
So I've heard.
However, mobile gaming via phones and/or social-networking is actually more popular than consoles. Therefore, it's redundant to produce quality products on consoles, since more people play on their phones and Facebook. It's only logical. Stupid console players, if you played on Facebook or your iDevice, you wouldn't be having any of these problems.
Ugh.
What can be seen.... cannot.. be... unseen.
Never buying another id game ever again. Ever.
However, mobile gaming via phones and/or social-networking is actually more popular than consoles. Therefore, it's redundant to produce quality products on consoles, since more people play on their phones and Facebook. It's only logical. Stupid console players, if you played on Facebook or your iDevice, you wouldn't be having any of these problems.
Ugh.
What can be seen.... cannot.. be... unseen.
Never buying another id game ever again. Ever.
Nice of you to take my comments out of context and try and put other words in my mouth.
Who says I am after another Crysis that only a handful of PC's could play. Also where did I say that the game should only be playable on hardware the supports the latest API's. All I was saying is that for a game 'built from the ground up only for PC' it is odd that the maximum API it supports is so old. Just because you have a game that runs the latest API does not meant people who only have old older hardware can't run it. There's this thing on PC's called 'backwards compatibility'...Mr. Omega said:
Yes, it explains that I was pointing out to someone that the comment of Carmack's he used to make a point was contradicted by the comment made just above. Live by the sword die by the sword. I did not bring in the 'pedestal' idea, but 'when the world gives you lemons make lemonade'.Mr. Omega said:
Yeah, that would be the case if he did not spend the rest of his comments explaining that PC wasn't very important any more. If this was a suck up, it is probably one of the worst I have seen...Mr. Omega said:
Damn, here's my conflict of interest:
1. Carmack's a smart guy who's been doing this for a long time (and obviously knows what he's doing).
2. He makes this statement right after his company provides a piss-poor port that makes it seem like he's using it as a justification.
3. His previous statement was the reverse of this.
I'm leaning towards 2, but I do agree that PC sales don't make up a large sum of triple-A titles. However, that's no excuse for failing to provide proper play-testing and decent port development (not being able to change ANY of your graphic settings? That's just lazy).
Despite the fact that its sales are lower, the PC remains an important gaming platform. It provides an excellent venue for independent developers and people starting out, and also typically offers up cheaper games, despite the hardware being more expensive. Typically I've found the communities for games to be a bit better as well, and the creation of mods just allows for a much more expanded and longer experience. I've also found that PC games are often more experimental then console games as well, but that's just me.
I really don't see why everyone has to turn this into an immature 'us vs. them' pissing contest that makes everyone look like idiots. Let's just demonize the shit out of each other, right guys? "Oh, those PC gamer elitist pricks are so annoying!" "Man, those console retards just don't know what they're talking about." Please, this is just such a tired, dull argument over something so pointless as personal taste. All I want is decent development and some customer respect across all platforms. My PC's my wife, but my 360 is my mistress.
1. Carmack's a smart guy who's been doing this for a long time (and obviously knows what he's doing).
2. He makes this statement right after his company provides a piss-poor port that makes it seem like he's using it as a justification.
3. His previous statement was the reverse of this.
I'm leaning towards 2, but I do agree that PC sales don't make up a large sum of triple-A titles. However, that's no excuse for failing to provide proper play-testing and decent port development (not being able to change ANY of your graphic settings? That's just lazy).
Despite the fact that its sales are lower, the PC remains an important gaming platform. It provides an excellent venue for independent developers and people starting out, and also typically offers up cheaper games, despite the hardware being more expensive. Typically I've found the communities for games to be a bit better as well, and the creation of mods just allows for a much more expanded and longer experience. I've also found that PC games are often more experimental then console games as well, but that's just me.
I really don't see why everyone has to turn this into an immature 'us vs. them' pissing contest that makes everyone look like idiots. Let's just demonize the shit out of each other, right guys? "Oh, those PC gamer elitist pricks are so annoying!" "Man, those console retards just don't know what they're talking about." Please, this is just such a tired, dull argument over something so pointless as personal taste. All I want is decent development and some customer respect across all platforms. My PC's my wife, but my 360 is my mistress.
You know, comparing PC to console is rather pointless. The two platforms offer completely different experiences. The PC offers much more individual control & precision (with a keyboard & mouse along with usually customizable graphics), while a console offers simple & easy play without the hassle often associated with PC game use. The experience a player desires will be influenced by the platform they choose.
I personally prefer the play style offered by the PC. I like the ability to customize my graphics, get player-made mods for older games, and have a whole keyboard to use & map the way I see fit. However, I have many friends who love the feel of a game pad in their hands, and only use the PC to play strategy games. Trying to compare the two platforms types is a really bad idea, and developers that view PC and consoles as inseparable are making huge mistakes, which will probably cost them money in the long run.
On another note, trying to deflect criticism for a poor PC port by blaming PC as a failing platform is just lame. Man up and take responsibility for your own actions Carmack.
I personally prefer the play style offered by the PC. I like the ability to customize my graphics, get player-made mods for older games, and have a whole keyboard to use & map the way I see fit. However, I have many friends who love the feel of a game pad in their hands, and only use the PC to play strategy games. Trying to compare the two platforms types is a really bad idea, and developers that view PC and consoles as inseparable are making huge mistakes, which will probably cost them money in the long run.
On another note, trying to deflect criticism for a poor PC port by blaming PC as a failing platform is just lame. Man up and take responsibility for your own actions Carmack.
Oh don't even bother with him, he justs puts out hate against anything pc and doesnt listen to reason. Nothing new, honestly.Ultratwinkie said:
You and me both.Corporal Yakob said:
I had gotten the impression that Rage was going to include some RPG elements, probably even going so far as ripping off fallout 3 and NV. But I wouldn't mind a rip-off of the RPG elements if Rage could bring some more adrenaline to the table during in-game combat (something that I thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were lacking a little).
Don't get me wrong, combat in Fallout 3/NV isn't "bad" in my opinion, but it isn't very fast-paced. Most guns sound like pea-shooters, and it's a bit silly how you can pretty much plant an entire clip of bullets in someone's head and they're still standing up shooting back at you.
So I thought that if Id would pretty much rip-off the post-apocalypse RPG-concept, but introduce their style of FPS-violence, which tend to be more meaty, brutal with weapons making really loud noises etc. And add mad max-esque cars to the mix, Rage could've been what I wanted Fallout 3/NV to be (or at least how I wanted to see them improved).
But now all I see is just another generic first person shooter. Seems boring, and im turned off by it.
And all the PC gamers will come in bitching and moaning about how someone could say this before they go right back to saying they're the master gaming race and looking down their noses at console gamers.
...
Im not even sure if Im joking.
OT: I didnt buy rage. its not my type of a game. A friend did for his PC. He returned it same day, then used the money to buy two DS games. And tahts about all the opinion I can make on the matter.
...
Im not even sure if Im joking.
OT: I didnt buy rage. its not my type of a game. A friend did for his PC. He returned it same day, then used the money to buy two DS games. And tahts about all the opinion I can make on the matter.
Some of them are from console players trying to be smug and pretentious.Redworld13 said:
My take: As I said earlier in the tread, Carmack was also quoted as saying it was a mistake to develop for consoles, so something's not right. Though it still doesn't excuse how bad the release is. It's by far the worst release I can remember, coincidentally, some of the bad releases are published by Bethesda like New Vegas.
Meh, the game works and it's fun. That's more important than what tech level they're working at. It's not like they were hyping it as the next Crysis/Metro 2033 PC-buster. Besides, it's not like it's unforgivable for a new developer to cut back on the tech whizbangs to save a bit of cash.ph0b0s123 said:
They could stay sustainable if publishers and developers were willing to put the brakes on development budgets... AND if gamers would accept the end results of it.Ultratwinkie said:
With things as they stand now, with budgets so large that a title not selling multiple millions of copies is not only seen as a commercial flop but also a net loss for the publisher... Well, strangely enough, I think it's Epic who've actually come out and said it, it's the middle tier (or 'Middle Class' as says Cliffy because he's a knob) developers and publishers who've got superior financial and creative flexibility... More modest budgets allow for modest sales to be sustainable and in turn less financial risk, which allows for greater risk taking with the type of product they release.
edit:
Case in point. PC is where the middle tier is strongest and has a large install base for casual and social gaming... and these are areas where AAA developers and publishers are looking to dip their toes. Markets where a single commercial flop doesn't force you to close up entire studios. Hell, just look at THQ's attempts to play at being one of the Big Boys has led them.
Sounds more like a case of a moron who cant optimize a game right. Honestly, they should cater to more then average PCs. Im not talking Skyrim/Crysis2 Engine graphics etc but most people are going to upgrade. I myself had a shit computer for years and whilst using it I knew optimizing games to run on such old hardware isn't smart (and a resource slut).
The funniest part is that the patch that only took 4 days to make fixed graphical issues for most PC users, so the question is... was it really necessary to lie about bad drivers in first place?
PC is not the leading platform and bla-bla-bla, which is probably true, but there are still millions of people that prefer it keyboard-mouse-office-chair-monitor way and there's no excuse for delivering the game in such a state. It would have been fine for an indy developer, but then again indy developer would never sell it as AAA title for 60 bucks in fist place.
PC is not the leading platform and bla-bla-bla, which is probably true, but there are still millions of people that prefer it keyboard-mouse-office-chair-monitor way and there's no excuse for delivering the game in such a state. It would have been fine for an indy developer, but then again indy developer would never sell it as AAA title for 60 bucks in fist place.