Crytek: PCs Are a Generation Ahead of Consoles

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
Super Toast said:
ZippyDSMlee said:
I disagree with some of your points, and agree with others. Nonetheless, we should probably stop before this turns into a flame war. Agreed?
I dunno PC might be better hardware and even price wise(sorry PS3 but thats what you get for being overly complicated) but they lack focused content from mainstream developers, is the PC dead hell no is it the same as the late 90s hell no.

Instead of a flame war how do you see where the PC is gaming wise? For me I see it as getting sloppy seconds from the mainstream but even with that it has a ton of non mainstream support but its changed vastly from what it was 10ish years ago making it not very semi normal gamer(kinda average kinda not) friendly.

And lets not forget 2ndary support through DLC is 9 times out of 10 console specific and not intended or planed for the PC, for instance TF:War for cybertron mofos did a disservice not selling the DLC not to mention with game matching there is no disparity between PC and console player skills anymore.....bastards need to start picking up the slack....
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Super Toast said:
MR T3D said:
[PC games are rather innovative, but this guy saw 'fanboy rage']
Once again, plenty of people like CoD4. And just because you can do more with a PC doesn't mean that consoles are crap. Consoles are easier to use, less expensive and get more games. If you deny any of these facts, then you're a helpless fanboy. I'm a PC and console gamer, while you've probably never even seen a console. Try both first.
I play both console and PC. Also, its a shame I worded my post in a way that makes it sound to you that I'm just a fanboy whom never touches the PC, because that's just not true. I said that its 'inferior' as in "of less value" which, when I look at it, it is. still of value, but not as much.

Yeah, its easier to press A button to turn on the device, wait for dashboard/XMB to boot up, then sign in, then press play game, than it is to push a button on a PC wait for windows to boot (that does take longer, but I can be patient) then click on the shotrcut to my game. installing a game isn't hard either, neither is doing some option adjustments, and with a digital distribution service, its browse, buy and wait for download, the I'm gravy. for someone like me, the technical competence needed to game on PC isn't really harder than the console

Hell, when stuff goes awry on console, such as 'disk read error' then you're wondering if that game you like now has a scratch on its disk, or your console is broken (my old 360 had done both, break and damage disks). no option tweaks or patches are going to fix it. That's much worse.


Price: this depends on many variables, there are a lot more factors than "200-300 for console is smaller number than gaming PC's price" (Imma use $800 for this, the price of my freind's new tower he bought a couple months ago, it runs games GREAT) to get into the PC gaming.
**the display is a X-factor, so we'll factor that out, as a 3D HDTV could be used, very pricey, or a 20" CRT you had laying around, and an expensive monitor, or a freebie from someone getting new stuff for their office could also be used, its too much of a variable to analyze)**
-You still need a PC that's at least 400$
(oh, my, the difference is down to 100-200$)
-Games: they're cheaper on the PC, many AAA recent titles run for 50$ while new, and price drop faster on PC, and then there are digital retailer sales which can get you that new game for 10$. with stuff like that, getting 15 games will put the two systems at the same cost, with more favouring the PC. I bought 2 very excellent games released this year (STALKER CoP and Starcraft 2) for the price of 1 fairly fun console game (HALO: Reach). the superiour value and gameplay goes to the combo of STALKER and starcraft, from my point of view, the console game is 'inferior'.

um, just no on the 'more games' front, as there is a HUGE number of new games on PC that just aren't on a console. the mountain of flash games, the MMO market, the simulator niche marker (quite a few VERY high-quality games there), RTS's like SC2, and then there are the total conversion mods, free, and which often do more to the original game than many devs change with (bi)annual sequels. check out some of the custom games for SC2, from sentry scramble to star battle, to the numerous DOTA-likes and RPG's (even one just like FF).

So yeah.
 

Bre2nan

New member
Nov 18, 2010
87
0
0
ph0b0s123 said:
(Puts head in hands) I'm sure on all consoles with USB you can connect a mouse and keyboard, but what's the point without game support. Non-one said consoles are not technically capable of handling mouse input. Which is why it is so annoying that it is not supported. The reason that I belive console makers have blocked this support is a whole other discussion.
Oh, guess I should have explained that statement a little more. You can connect a keyboard and mouse to the PS3, and it DOES have game support. Support was put in there mainly for the PS3's web browsing, but there's tons of info and third party tools out there to make it so that you can control games like Resistance with the keyboard and mouse setup.

That said, I do agree that it is not supported enough. If they make something like a PS3 port of Starcraft 2 or some other RTS that exclusively used the setup and have it sell well/get good reviews/break the console RTS stigma, than that might increase awareness of consoles' capabilities in this regard and the confidence of third party developers. However, this will probably not happen, due to some other intervening factors related to the "whole other discussion" you touched on.
 

carpathic

New member
Oct 5, 2009
1,287
0
0
The Imp said:
TheRightToArmBears said:
The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.
I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300?, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.
Same here.

I paid about $2000 Canadian for my computer 2 years ago, and I still have a very good gaming rig. No longer top of the line, but I haven't run into many games that will slow my computer down significantly.

Though, oddly enough, Dragon Age Origins crawled along at times. I suspect though that it was more coding related than hardware issue, since it is one aberation in a respectfully large sample size.
 

Flac00

New member
May 19, 2010
782
0
0
Trelmayas said:
Flac00 said:
PC's have been and will always be ahead of the consoles because innovation only seems to appear on PC's. The few games I can think of that brought something significant to the table from consoles was Halo 1's innovations (even though it was originally a Mac game), and Gears of War (the cover system). If you can name others, please do, im not omnipotent. But at this point I can't think of a single other thing.
I assume you're talking only about shooters here, since those are the only games you're naming off. And yes, PC has always been ahead of consoles for shooters. Other genres not so much.
yep, i mean at FPS's for now. Strategy games, and RTS are a PC only style too though
 

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
Zeithri said:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.
Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.
 

Flac00

New member
May 19, 2010
782
0
0
carpathic said:
The Imp said:
TheRightToArmBears said:
The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.
I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300?, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.
Same here.

I paid about $2000 Canadian for my computer 2 years ago, and I still have a very good gaming rig. No longer top of the line, but I haven't run into many games that will slow my computer down significantly.

Though, oddly enough, Dragon Age Origins crawled along at times. I suspect though that it was more coding related than hardware issue, since it is one aberation in a respectfully large sample size.
Don't worry, once Crysis 2 is released you can get your computer's ass kicked again.
 

TheEndlessSleep

New member
Sep 1, 2010
469
0
0
Two words: Moore's law:
Every 18 months, computers will have halved in size, doubled in speed, or halved in price.

Consoles are replaced every 2 years at best.

That means that inevitably Pcs will get ahead
 

ph0b0s123

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,689
0
0
Bre2nan said:
Oh, guess I should have explained that statement a little more. You can connect a keyboard and mouse to the PS3, and it DOES have game support. Support was put in there mainly for the PS3's web browsing, but there's tons of info and third party tools out there to make it so that you can control games like Resistance with the keyboard and mouse setup.

That said, I do agree that it is not supported enough. If they make something like a PS3 port of Starcraft 2 or some other RTS that exclusively used the setup and have it sell well/get good reviews/break the console RTS stigma, than that might increase awareness of consoles' capabilities in this regard and the confidence of third party developers. However, this will probably not happen, due to some other intervening factors related to the "whole other discussion" you touched on.
Interesting, so the support is more than I thought for the PS3. I suppose Sony and the PS3 don't have the issue Microsft had with the Xbox of trying to differentiate it from the PC by not allowing mouse support.

RTS fine, but I am more interested in having the option for console FPS games. Apart from what I mentioned about the Xbox above, I never quite understood why the choice was not given. For other types of games on consoles you have the option to use different controllers. Wheel controllers for driving games or joystick with lots of buttons for fighting games are two examples that spring to mind. The mouse seems a bit discriminated against.
 

MrGalactus

Elite Member
Sep 18, 2010
1,849
0
41
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.
 

jamesworkshop

New member
Sep 3, 2008
2,683
0
0
THEJORRRG said:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

 

MrGalactus

Elite Member
Sep 18, 2010
1,849
0
41
jamesworkshop said:
THEJORRRG said:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like
It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!
 

jamesworkshop

New member
Sep 3, 2008
2,683
0
0
THEJORRRG said:
jamesworkshop said:
THEJORRRG said:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like
It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!
Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
ZippyDSMlee said:
Zeithri said:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.
Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.
More or less this. The heart of the matter is that the thing that keeps PC gaming down more than any other is the disparity in hardware. This means that, as a programmer, you're generally forced to compromise efficiency for stability across as many different pieces of hardware as possible. This often means solving problems though brute force when there was often a better (less computationally expensive) way available for a specific hardware configuration.
 

MrGalactus

Elite Member
Sep 18, 2010
1,849
0
41
jamesworkshop said:
THEJORRRG said:
jamesworkshop said:
THEJORRRG said:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like
It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!
Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not
Touche. Although I would most likely not play it at all
 

nipsen

New member
Sep 20, 2008
521
0
0
Eclectic Dreck said:
ZippyDSMlee said:
Zeithri said:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.
Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.
More or less this. The heart of the matter is that the thing that keeps PC gaming down more than any other is the disparity in hardware. This means that, as a programmer, you're generally forced to compromise efficiency for stability across as many different pieces of hardware as possible. This often means solving problems though brute force when there was often a better (less computationally expensive) way available for a specific hardware configuration.
..it's a very logical argument, and all that. But.. it's not actually true, you know. It was true. And is true for some specific examples. But mostly it's not true at all.