Batman is exactly why I don't PC game

[Zacharious-khan]

I don't know as I wasn't buying the PC version. I do remember there being quite a lot of reviews that weekend, which was surprising as most the time reviews come out day of release. But anyways, I didn't need reviews, it's a Batman game by Rocksteady, I know what I'm getting. Just like I know what I'm getting with MGS5 already.

Oh see i was saying that people who do game on pc should wait for a review to make sure it functions when there is a "no refunds" policy in place. It's an old habit.

 

[Neonsilver]

-PC upgrade would be necessary, because due to the new generation, new games would be made to fit them. So they
would require more power from the pc as well

Actually, if you had a pretty decent PC when the next gen consoles came out, you were already running a more powerful system. When the Xbox360/PS3 came out, you would have had to build a pretty expensive computer to match their performance. With this generation, that's absolutely not necessary [http://www.cheatsheet.com/technology/cheap-gaming-pc-builds-to-rival-ps4-and-xbox-one.html/?a=viewall], and it's far cheaper to upgrade that PC in a few years time than it is to buy the next generation of consoles. Plus, you really think you're not getting some extra value out of the increased functionality of a PC?

I got my current PC in the same year that the consoles were released. It had cost me 500-600? I think. Since I had used a Laptop before, I had to pretty much buy an entire PC, otherwise it would have 100-200? less. I waited as long as I could with getting a new machine, but it didn't run games in a satisfactory manner. Otherwise I probably would have waited a little longer. Also I think you misunderstood what I wanted to say. I'm a PC gamer, the last console I played with was the PS2. I tried to explain why I think some developers don't care much about PC gamers. Which in turn makes gamers buy consoles instead of upgrading/buying a PC and thus increasing the numbers of console gamers. And since this lowers the market share of the PC, the developers feel justified about ignoring the PC.
This is my personal opinion, an opinion that is somewhat verified by this thread. I'm aware that this is most likely just a part of the reason, for developers releasing abysmal PC ports.

What I meant with my statement is, the consoles have an upper limit to their performance. You can't upgrade them, you can only tweak the software to get the most out of it. So while the games might become better towards the end, they should still run on a PC (assuming it's properly ported) that ran the games at the beginning of the generation. Or assuming the developers still work more with the previous generation in mind at the beginning, a PC that runs games in the middle of the console lifetime.
Obviously with new consoles the limit that the consoles create gets increased. While a PC can probably still run the new games, the settings for the games will have to be lowered more and more. That is why I consider one PC upgrade necessary for a new console generation. Of course a PC user is a little more flexible about the time of the upgrade compared to a console user.

 

[alj]

If I buy a game for a console, it's going to fucking work.

If only that was true. It should be but its not. Thats one of the big advantages to a console and its getting less and less each day with the ship now patch later culture in the industry.

At least on PC if there is a problem you can try to fix it not have to be at the mercy of a dev.

I agree with you thats how consoles should be thats there selling point but its not like that anymore.

You can also return stuff for a full refund on steam now. Or just you know, wait and read reviews before you buy something ( also good advice for a console).

 

[WouldYouKindly]

The simple solution is don't buy shit day one. I never buy anything day one(The Witcher 3 was a rare exception), though I may now that steam has an actual refund policy.

I'm a very patient person when it comes to potentially wasting money.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

It is 2015. You *HAVE* Windows. If you dont... uhm... I dont know what to say. I honestly dont. KB/M costs 10 leva for crying out loud!
Nothing is wrong with Sapphire, better build quality than a PS4. The i5 IS NOT 200$...
You get LESS if you buy a console and a 100 dollar PC. That is the problem. And you PAY more in the long run.
I am NOT talking about the average gamer. That is not an animal worth any discussions. They are too buys playing DOTA 2, LoL and WoT to care about hardware.

Mods I want to play: Unknown, higher than 1. ATM 3 (Ray of Hope, CoC, EF)
Console games I want to play: 1 (TLOU, played it... good game, but how can people like playing it like that?)

Yeah, cause the community is that stupid... If WoT competitive was balanced by the 1%, it would be bloody perfect.
The New Order is a new game. I was talking Wolfenstein Enemy Territory... and Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Some of the finest games ever made...
Lol... power suit ... special... lol...

Most people have OEM Windows meaning you need to buy a new license if you change the motherboard. You linked to a video with a $350 PC that has an i5. You can't even build a $350 gaming PC with an AMD chip (the $450 one I linked to) let alone an i5. $10 is still $10. Plus, you kinda need a controller as 3rd-person games play better with a controller. Please explain how to build a gaming PC for $350, which was what you claimed.

The $100 PC does everything and more that a normal person needs a PC to do.

Pretty much everyone but you had pretty much no issues playing TLOU, outside of Naughty Dog's shitty controls.

Games aren't balanced by the 1%...

 

[asdfen]

games are GPU (graphics processing unit) intensive not CPU. I5 will do fine in a budget gaming pc as long as the graphics card is good and it has 8gb of ram.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Are YOU MOST PEOPLE?
If you are, why are you HERE?

That i5 750 is from 2009. If you think it is a powerhouse of death and destruction... well thank you. My 6 year old mid range PC that cost me 640 dollars in 2009 has it. I guess I only need replace the GPU and add RAM and am all set (ATI HD 5770, 4GB RAM).

10 is also nothing but nitpicking. Saved from buying one game.

"Pretty much everyone but you had pretty much no issues playing TLOU, outside of Naughty Dog's shitty controls."
So just because you had no issues, no one else had?

My issues were with the way it looked. Like smeared in Vaseline, it made my eyes hurt. And the constant bad frames... I barely played it.

Aren't you trying to say most gamers (not just me) should PC game over console game? If so, then most people buy pre-builts, thus have OEM versions of Windows. Thus, if they have to upgrade the CPU, they need to buy a new mobo and a Windows license.

I don't care when the i5 is from because to build a PC with those specs (whether you get an i5 or not), it still costs over $350, which is what that Youtube video you posted claimed. A decent gaming PC costs more than a console.

A 95 critic score and 9.1 user score of TLOU says you seemed to be like the only one with issues.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

People on consoles have lower standards when it comes to performence. I dont say the game is bad BTW, sure it aint no STALKER or Witcher 3, but it is very good.
But was TERRIBLE to play. I am just used to better. That was when only the PS3 version existed. It was hard to watch the blockyness and play at such framerates.

I am saying that I had hoped I am talking to someone who does not equate themselves to something so low. Most gamers play MOBA games or FB stuff. Should you be most gamers?

Then why not look at the video where they MAKE the damned thing?
So you dont care if for example your car is a model T from the 1910s. as it is still a car? What kind of messed up logic is that?
It is an i5 that is weak by todays standards. It is not even produced at this point. Tech moves on. Moore's Law is still in effect.

Most critics PC game as they kinda have to review games and they had no issues with TLOU either. 30fps is just fine for a game that slow. Other visual mediums run at 30fps or less, cartoons can be 15fps.

LMAO, you were all talking about how online PC games have more players and talking about LoL player counts, but I guess LoL is shit and doesn't count and might as well be Candy Crush.

I know PC prices, you can't build a decent gaming PC (with brand new parts) for $350. A PS4 isn't a Model T. Games would be better if they utilized the CPU more instead of just upping the graphics and being GPU dependent.

 

[Flammablezeus]

Luckily, because I primarily game on PC, it doesn't really matter if a game doesn't work properly right away. You know why? Apart from the fact that it can be fixed (something much harder with broken console games,) the PC has the most expansive library of games, both multiplatform and exclusive. Plus they're always cheaper and often become available for a lower cost than any console game.

The fact that PC games look and perform better with a wider variety of control options is merely an awesome bonus at that point.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

It is not 30 fps. That is the problem. It is 20-something. And I AM USED to more. Nothing you say can change that fact, I played it but it was NOT WELL for me.
Less you are meaning to tell me you know ME better than I do... in which case that is quite erotic...

I never said LoL is shit. That is now what I meant *Facepalm* . I do NOT play LOL BTW...
And NEITHER are FB flash games. Even if 99% of them are made for a quick buck. There are good ones here and there.
It is a fact that is what the average gamer is probably playing.

Of coarse you know PC prices and dont need to even check out a video to know that you are obviously being "lied" to lol. And now we go for "brand new parts". And the PS4 is totally not a Model T
Witcher 3 uses the CPU very well. So do ... almost all new EE games.

TLOU PS3 runs in the upper 20s, a couple frames less doesn't make much of a difference. I bet if something was run for you at 30fps and 28 fps, you couldn't tell the difference.

You equate MOBAs to being at the low-end of the gaming spectrum, LoL is a MOBA so how were you not putting down LoL by that comment?

I know at no time you could buy an i5 for under $150 dollars new, PC parts kinda have set prices; the cheapest you can buy a case&PS is about $75, RAM is $40 for 4GB ($60 for 8GB), HD is $40 (at the cheapest), mobo is about $60, you'd want to at least get a $100 video card. That comes to $465 (with the cheapest prices used and $150 for an i5 that you could never buy at that price). It's down to $415 going with an AMD chip at $100, and it's back up to $435 for 8GBs of RAM (which you'll want). Plus, you need a KB/M and a Windows license still. Even without those 2 things, the price is still over a console that comes with a controller and game. Please explain how in the world you get a decent gaming PC for $350. The guy that made the video even said he bought used parts.... You never do ANY RESEARCH.

Witcher 3's AI is pretty much weaksauce, the game would be better with lesser graphics and better AI.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

snip

A bit late, but sorry for being a ****. I still think you're wrong in almost every single aspect, but I shouldn't have been a dick about it, no excuses.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Here is the thing. You dont need an i5 CPU to beat a PS4.... Another thing, Moore's Law. i5 750 is not worth 200 dollars. You SHOULD KNOW that.
I know very well they bought used parts... it is in the effin description... *facepalm*.

Witcher 3's AI is decent for what it is. That is not all a CPU does though. It is not STALKER, but nothing is.

If you are going to build a PC from used parts, you can't compared a used PC to a new console in price. You can get a used PS4 for about $300, which is lower than $350. A decent gaming PC always costs more.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-PlayStation-4-500-GB-Console-CUH-1001A-/361328968947?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5420e284f3

A lot of the enemies definitely have some poor AI in Witcher 3.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

snip

A bit late, but sorry for being a ****. I still think you're wrong in almost every single aspect, but I shouldn't have been a dick about it, no excuses.

No worries. You're way off in saying I was a PS fanboy though. Nintendo is out just because they don't make current-gen consoles anymore. And Sony easily has more exclusives than Microsoft, which really just has Halo & Gears. The only exclusive Xbone title that interests me is Quantum Break.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

And that cant be found for that price here where I live. And it is also still a console and not a PC.
If it were 100 I might say it was worth it to say the PS4 is cheaper. It aint though.

No game has good AI compared to STALKER. The combat AI (individual) of enemies in Witcher 3 is superior to most Western or Eastern games of the same type.

Console + normal PC is basically the same price as just a gaming PC no matter what.

Just because combat AI is better than most other open world RPGs doesn't mean it's good because most open world RPGs have much much shittier combat with worse AI. Best of the worst isn't really much of a compliment. Focusing on things other than graphics makes for better games, yet all we get are games with better graphics.