Star Citizen Creator: You Can't Do That On Consoles

[UberNoodle]

You can't go off-road with an Mazda RX7. Don't sports cars suck ass?!

 

[Sandjube]

Guy states fact about PC hardware being better, everyone screams elitism and gets butthurt. Classy, Escapist!

Also the game looks awesome. I've been waiting for a space sim.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Okay... if a developer puts too many resources into graphics he'll neglect the other parts of the game and as a result you will get a very pretty game that plays like E.T. combined with Superman 64. There you go, why too much focus on graphics is bad.

Because the only thing hardware does is graphics, AMIRITE? *hits head against the desk*

That was a response to the question 'How is being a graphics whore bad for game development'. It is a valid response. Please don't try and take my comments out of context, thank you.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Okay... if a developer puts too many resources into graphics he'll neglect the other parts of the game and as a result you will get a very pretty game that plays like E.T. combined with Superman 64. There you go, why too much focus on graphics is bad.

Why being a PC elitist is bad is because its a self imposed limitation on the functionality of your game. Different platforms are better options for different games. Cut the Rope would suck on a non-touchscreen platform. Being an elitist means the person has such an affinity for the thing that he'll/she'll likely pound a round peg into a square hole, as it were, when it comes to issues.

Your logic is entirely backwards, and demonstrates that you haven't worked on actual software development, or alternatively you're grossly misinterpreting Roberts' statement about hardware as to be about graphics specifically and only.

Development resources required are reduced when you have a platform that has oodles of RAM and heavy GPU availability and so on. The technical challenge today isn't making good games (and whilst your point about graphics not making a game is a valid one, there are terrible games for pretty much every environment, so it's something of a non-issue). It's making them run on a toaster so that no matter how low-end the hardware is (and that can also be a PC!), you the player still get a good experience. See above for a long list of compromises that low hardware budget forces on the developer.

That effort hits you more reliably when working with a console because you have a relatively poor hardware budget, but it's fixed & unchanging - nobody is going to have some wacky setup. You can reliably make sometimes bizarre optimisations that you know will carry over into launch & be safe regardless. The converse is also true - that because of that fixed hardware budget, your game cannot soar into wild unknown areas or take advantage of new features if they're present - new features that might well make the developer's life very easy & time to launch earlier (or more features). I've lost count of the number of times I've come across algorithms that go 'if X is available, do this, if not, do this very complex workaround that requires lots of extra testing'.

Consoles are different beasts to PCs. Roberts is making a perfectly valid point that you just can't do some stuff on them. That does not mean he is 'pound[ing] a round peg into a square hole' - quite the contrary - he's saying he's picking the platform that works for what he wants to achieve. That is not console hate. That is reality. It does not stop consoles having good games that do work on their hardware budget.

Yes, it requires less developer resources to develop for PC because you don't need to optimize. Of course he's not talking about all things being equal, he's talking about developing far more complex system and graphics to take advantage of the PC, thus putting more time into graphics systems. That means optimizing for the PC and developing entirely new algorithms for these new and better graphics.

On top of that, you don't have a leg to stand on since my response has nothing to do with this particular game, it is only a general answer to the question and applies more to time and money as resources then computer resources as too much focus in one area during development kills games.

My main issue with this blowhard is that equating 'game experience' with graphics and physics, or at least things that are done with raw processing power. The last time I checked, my 'experience' has more to do with other areas of game design then just these things. I think its a stupid statement and one he should have rephrased.

 

[1337mokro]

Nobody can hear you upgrade your PC in SPAAAAAAACE!!!

Though I am indeed buying a new set of cards for this sweet sweet jewel of nostalgic space action. I want to play this game at a crystal clear minimal 60 FPS at ALL times.

 

[Strazdas]

Small RAM size on consoles is a huge problem for gaming as a whole. It makes the developer choose between open environments and graphic fidelity. For example, wouldn't it have been cool if Bioshock had more diversity in room size? Or if Skyrim had a bigger texture palette? Since most games are ported between different systems, all platforms suffer for the constraints of the others.

baiscally this. our old and outdate consoles cant catch up with the times and thats why ported PC games suffer. And this is why i take a stand with this guy, make a game for pc, and if consoles cant keep up, thats thier own fault, suckers.

 

[NotALiberal]

size snip

Bravo sir, I love reading your posts.

Its too bad some of the strawman heavy posters wont respond as they couldnt try to pick it apart.

This needs to be a sticky about "Elitism".

PC elitism comes up, you have about 10000 butthurt console elitists coming out the woodwork, decrying "ALL TEH ELITISTS PC GAEMERZ!!!one!", and there are NONE in site.

None.

Oh mind you there ARE elitists, just ones who think decade old hardware are merely an "alternative" (BUT SOMEHOW BETTER TOO BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW PC'S COST $100000 AND BREAK AT THE SLIGHTEST TOUCH AMIRITE), as opposed to being objectively inferior (This is a fact, NOT ELITISM. You can do everything that is possible on a console and MORE, on a PC. Playing a racing game? Just plug that Xbox 360 controller in. Playing a flight sim? Grab a joystick and plug it in. Playing a shooter? You have a mouse and keyboard, which are far more precise than two imprecise rotatable thumbsticks. Want to write up a word document for work/school? You can do that too).

To Dexter, I love you man. Such profound wisdom is rare here on the Escapist.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

-snip-

Fantastic post, very well put.

I just have to say I saw this a while ago and I was sitting on the fence wondering whether I should buy this game, but that video footage you pointed out at 24 minutes into the Youtube video just blew me away utterly.
I've just been playing Skyrim, which was designed for consoles, but I'm running at ultra graphics settings, modded with HD textures and stuff to look as good as possible, and it still just blew it completely away. The detail in that character model flightsuit is astounding, and the spacecraft look awesome.
It brought back memories of the space missions in Battlefront 2, which were the best thing about a fantastic game.

Still 7 days left on the Kickstarter, time to get my wallet out...