PC Gamers can seperate the wheat from the chaff.

[Laughing Man]

"The PC market is much more... hardcore," he says, taking a minute to mull on the appropriate term. "PC players are more decisive in what they want to play; they're more focused. You can't release a crap game for the PC anymore, and people will just rush out and buy it."

I get the impression more and more from these forums that people seem to hold up PC gamers as some sort of specimen of super human design. So I think it's time to show just how full of mince that the idea of PC gamers being some sort of discerning super gamer really is.

Quite easy really it can be done in three games.

Spore
Crysis
The Sims

Spore; was and is unremittant poo of the highest calibre. A game that went straight to the top of the charts on release, inspite of intrusive of DRM, and is still their now. This game sold purely on the hype that it generated prior to release and even given how many people complaimed about the DRM people still went ahead and bought it. EA released a crap game and then dolloped a big pile of DRM flavoured cow shite on top of it and the 'discerning' PC gamer still bought it up in droves!

Crysis. If ever a game was released that proved PC gamers are just as shallow a graphic whore as any life long console fanboy then this is the game. It didn't matter the game play was mediocre and had been done before, many many many times by far far better games, that didn't require quantum super computers to run them. It didn't matter that you needed something close to Deep Blue to actually play the game and that for most people that bought the game at launch the game ran like a three legged asmatic dog. They bought it because it promised shiny shiny graphics. Ooooo look at the nice graphics, doesn't matter the game doesn't run well and is generically average to the point of rice cake blandness.

Finally the best selling games series in the history of PC gaming. The Sims. The game was good the first time round but everything after that has been the same game just with more generally useless wank thrown in with each expansion and YET the 'discerning' PC gamer is still buying the game and chances are when Sims 3 arrives next month it will shoot straight to the top of the charts.

PC gamers are in no way more picky about their choice of title than console gamers the evidence is right out there to show that you can release any old rubbish and PC gamers will buy it. Face it just because you're a PC gamer does not make you some sort of super gaming god it certainly doesn't make you any better than your average console gamer.

 

[MercFox1]

Spore - Not a bad game, but compared to what it was marketed as, it's terrible. To be honest, if you've seen the 2005 GDC video, you can't make an unbiased opinion on the game, and that's including me. Also, while DRM is an issue, DRM is NOT the game, so try to compartmentalize your issues and focus your DRM-hate at the party responsible: EA!
Crysis - Most people I've talked to agree that Crysis just gets better with time as more people can play it. I certainly wasn't expecting the ending, and the alien level was disorienting to say the least, but the first few levels of that game provided enough replay value themselves to justify the purchase. Tack on Warhead, Crysis Wars, and the promise of more games to come, and it's not just the red-headed step child you make it to be.
The Sims - It's popular for a reason: It's a people simulator that gives the gamer unparalleled freedom, decent graphics, tons of exploration value, and something that "casual" gamers can embrace.

For the reasons bolded above, and your unnecessarily abrasive tone of voice, you should really reevaluate your position. From where it stands right here, you either look like a troll, or terribly jaded.

 

[rossatdi]

*cough* Sims *cough*

 

[Chaos Marine]

I would agree I didn't spend £2000 in total on a PC to play rubbish games

You did?

Care to give us your specifications?

That machine must be a beast.

Not really the machine was built mid 2006
Athlon X2 5200 (2.6Ghz dual core)
2x1 gig Crucial Ballistix tracer ram (DDR2 800Mhz 4-4-4-12)
EVGA 7900GTX
ThermalTake ArmourLCS (massive case with liquid cooling system)
ASUS Crosshair republic of gamer series motherboard (AM2 2x pci-e x16 slots)
160GB SATA300 Harddrive
560 modular PSU
standard floppy, dvd rom, m/Kb, speakers

The original power supply didn't work so I got an Enermax Galaxy (850W Quad sli certified)
I also upgraded to a 9800GTX in april along with another 2 500GB Seagate harddrives (7200.11 32Mb cache) the water cooling also died and was replaced by an Zalman 9700 fan so in all the time i have had it (upgrades/replacments) I have spent roughly £2000.
If I brought this machine today it would only cost about £700 (probably less) the prices of hardware is stupidly cheap, now it would only cost about £30 to replace the Ram were it to died and I easily spent over £100 back in 2006.

I have pics if you want to see I have LEDs all over the place

XD

I paid about 1,300? for components at the end of June in 2007, rebuilding my entire case and my computer outperforms yours many times over.

Q6600
4GB PC 6400 - 800 MHz DDR2 Ram
XFX Geforce 8800GTX
MSI P6N Diamond Motherboard
250 GB SATA II HDD
750 GB SATA II HDD
SATA DVD/CD Burner drive
SATA DVD/CD Reader drive x2
650W Tagon Tough Power PSU
Thermaltake Super ATX case


Though since then I have expanded it with a better cooler for the processor and two new Samsung T1 Spin Points 1TB HDDs.

When MS release Windows 7, I'm probably going to upgrade and I've done a quick list of the components I'm going to get which will include (And subject to change)

3.2 GHz i7
Asus Rampage Extreme Motherboard
128 GB SSD HDD
Coolermaster Colossus Stealth S Case
8 GB of PC3 14400 1800 MHz RAM
1.2 KW PSU
3x Samsung T1 Spin Points
Blu Ray Drive
SATA DVD/CD Burners x2
BFG Geforce 295 x2

Thing is, I already have the money to actually buy all the components now and anything else I save will be put away for a rainy day.

Gonig to use my old computer then solely for media and my new one for gaming.

 

[fix-the-spade]

However, this article would be alot different if it was written 10 years ago when the PC had a huge advantage over consoles in terms of depth and quality. Nowadays, everything is pretty much even.

I disagree with this statement. The reason is this, how many console games are there with the scale of either WoW or Battlefield 2, or even Battlefield 1942 for that matter.

Whilst there is more or less parity on graphics at the moment, console games are still short and small scale compared to a lot of what's on the PC, at least in the multiplayer sense.
Resistance 2 tried large scale multiplayer but my friends tell me it's success is variable (I confess to having never played it online), most console game are still hovering between 24-32 players.

 

[jebussaves88]

I would definatly agree, as people who have taken the time and effort to upgrade a PC are going to be more informed about which games are good and which are not. Meanwhile, any 5 year old can get a 360 or PS3 and demand the King Fu Panda game along with it.

 

[NXMT]

I disagree with this statement. The reason is this, how many console games are there with the scale of either WoW or Battlefield 2, or even Battlefield 1942 for that matter.

I disagree also. The quality standard on console titles is much lower than of PC titles and the multiplayer on consoles is very often laggy as hell and broken with bugs even with major titles. At least on PC you often get a patch or update quickly but thats always the case on consoles or not at all. GTA4 MP could have been amazing with more polish and time but seemed like an afterthought. It was laggy, buggy and with no dedicated servers. Even the menu system felt dated like i was playing an crappy old MP PC Game from like 10 years ago perhaps.

Even so, will you not agree that much of the gap has been bridged? Console FPS' for example, were laughed at back then but today, it's so common, the only people who still comment on it are PC "elitists". With games like Overlord, Battle for Middle-Earth, C&C3 and Civilizations, even the PC stronghold of strategy gaming is beginning to pour into the console market.

Controls may be the deciding factor on the overall quality on a game, but when PC games are starting to highly recommend controllers more often or when you start seeing convenient Xbox360 gamepad options sitting in the options menu, you know the line separating the two is beginning to fade.

The PC may still have the advantage with games you mentioned and I fully agree. Consoles may not be able to knock the PC off the pedestal but it's got much to show for itself, evolving for the past decade.

 

[veloper]

Only 13 year old girls play the Sims... and keep buying the millions of expansions.

Yeah... that's a lie. I know gamers of all types from all walks of life who play The Sims.

It's a fair enough generalisation. I don't know any male gamer who would admit to playing the Sims. SimCity, yes a few, but not Sims.
The Sims is $$ because casual female gamers with modest rigs can enjoy it. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

The above picture is what I see here in this thread. And it is crap.

The fact is, PC games are of lower quality than console games. I am not talking about game content, I am talking about how finished and polished the games are. If I get a console game I know it is going to work (actually, after Fable 2, make that "probably work"). If I get a PC game, I expect it to fail until patch 3 or 4. PC gaming is a mess. There are probably 30 or 40 times more PCs in the world than there are consoles, but PC games sell like crap when compared to their console counter-parts. This is because console games make for the most trouble free game experience. No installing, no poncing about with drivers or updates, no DRM, just pop it in and play.

What is a "hard-core" gamer anyway?

 

[LLORTREPUS]

Oh yeah, hands down PC games are always going to be set to a higher standard. The only reason that I could think of is because PC users are not normally just casual gamers; we are the l33t dorks.

This.

PC gamers usually pump more money into their PC than the cost of a console (for example I just spent £700 on a new PC, when I could have easily got a 360 and a PS3 instead).
It's because of the notion that consoles are played by younger gamers as well (especially the Wii) and as a result, companies can get away with a lot more because their pre-teen fans arn't going to care.
PC gamers on the other hand, are as stated above, l33t. If you've got over 9000 Gh of processing power and an equal amount of RAM, supported by dual graphics cards and so many fans you could solve global warming, then you're only going to spend MORE money on a game that is truely epic.

Or you could download it, that has quite an impact on sales too.

 

[veloper]

The fact is, PC games are of lower quality than console games. I am not talking about game content, I am talking about how finished and polished the games are.

That's because Japan.
I've noticed Japanese devs generally polish their games alot more than americans and europeans.

 

[Chaos Marine]

The above picture is what I see here in this thread. And it is crap.

The fact is, PC games are of lower quality than console games. I am not talking about game content, I am talking about how finished and polished the games are. If I get a console game I know it is going to work (actually, after Fable 2, make that "probably work"). If I get a PC game, I expect it to fail until patch 3 or 4. PC gaming is a mess. There are probably 30 or 40 times more PCs in the world than there are consoles, but PC games sell like crap when compared to their console counter-parts. This is because console games make for the most trouble free game experience. No installing, no poncing about with drivers or updates, no DRM, just pop it in and play.

What is a "hard-core" gamer anyway?

In regards to selling, do you mean comparing store bought PC games to ones bought online or digitally distributed games? I haven't bought games from a game store since... Crysis I think.

Additionally, you have it backwards, PC games tend to be higher grade than console games. Compare Halo to HL. You can't, HL is so many levels above Halo it's not even funny.

Though I will say you're right on one thing, the PC has a crap load more games than any console has combined. I can play games that are literally over a decade old. You're lucky if half your older games are supported by the backwards compatibility chips or emulators the 360 or PS3 use.

Which is another thing, there are old classics like Doom, Hexen, Chaos Gate and the original C&C. They're still great fun to play.