John Carmack: PC Is Not the "Leading Platform" for Games

[-Dragmire-]

id was actually "quite happy" with the state of the game on its test systems, but those were sporting drivers that had gone through "significant internal changes" to maximize performance. "We knew that all older AMD drivers, and some Nvidia drivers would have problems with the game, but we were running well in-house on all of our test systems," Carmack

Isn't that an odd way to test a game? Wouldn't it be more practical to test on a diverse range of systems to make sure the largest percentage of customers experience the least amount of bugs possible? Unless the time/money budget wouldn't allow for it, but that should be an important part of quality assurance testing...

 

[Doom972]

Well, id is not the leading developer of technically impressive shooters.
I guess things have changed.

 

[ShakenBake]

Guys, guys, don't fall for it! This has nothing to do with PCs vs. consoles and more like coming up with an excuse for rushing a title out of the door. You release any game half-assed, and it'll run like shit no matter what system it is.

 

[James White]

While I will accept that PC is not the "leading" platform, you developed the game for Xbox 360 and PS3. I am sorry to say, by definition only one of those is the "leading" platform. Unless you ment consoles in general, but then where is the Wii love?

As consoles become more and more like PCs, I find the "we will just port to PC" more and more BS. It stands to reason and practicality (though I may be wrong) building a game for PC which is more powerful and more complex, then simplifying it for console in the later stages would be an easier task.

But consider the complete BS Id gave us in RAGE (even though they were in love with using PC for all the press footage) I guess it is easier to build for PS3/Xbox 360 and take a giant dump on PC.

PC is not the leading platform because we spend our money on game and companies that don't opening say, "Screw the millions of PC gamers. They aren't important enough to consider."

 

[ph0b0s123]

id was actually "quite happy" with the state of the game on its test systems, but those were sporting drivers that had gone through "significant internal changes" to maximize performance. "We knew that all older AMD drivers, and some Nvidia drivers would have problems with the game, but we were running well in-house on all of our test systems," Carmack

Isn't that an odd way to test a game? Wouldn't it be more practical to test on a diverse range of systems to make sure the largest percentage of customers experience the least amount of bugs possible? Unless the time/money budget wouldn't allow for it, but that should be an important part of quality assurance testing...

If they did not have the money to properly QA test it, there was a way they could have got loads of people to test if for free on a multitude of systems.
O____P____E____N__________B____E____T____A

Just a thought....

 

[James White]

Beta Test....a game...on PC? That would be almost like they gave a crap about something other than getting money from console. It would be like they actually wanted to make a "great" game. Nobody does that any more.

 

[gabe12301]

...wow I was actually planing on getting this. I'll finally buy New Vegas and save a bit of cash.

 

[ph0b0s123]

While I am a PC gamer myself, I have a hard time feeling sorry for PC gamers as a group. Rage is right now the number two bestseller on Steam and will certainly far outsell Hard Reset. This essentially means that PC gamers are voting with their wallet in support of the company that considers the PC a very decisive afterthought rather than the company that actively cares about the PC audience.

Could someone explain this thing about Hard reset being such a credit to PC gaming and how the company is really behind PC's? This a game that got mixed reviews and even though currently PC only used only DX9 which normally denotes a multiform game...

 

[The Madman]

Sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy that.

Game will obviously sell more on consoles, but by ignoring the PC platform and releasing the game in a much publicized poor state you're not exactly helping your sales on the PC either with many people who might have bought it on that platform instead either buying it on a console or not at all.

 

[Versuvius]

Hey Carmack! Fuck off!

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

PC is not the leading platform? As someone else already said, in other news, the sky is blue...

Seriously, why are we still taking shit like this?

I mean as a consumer, not a "PC Gamer".

This is the lowest form of bullshit coming from a dev, and coming from one of the legends in gaming like Carmack, its an outright slap in the face.

As a consumer I expect a product to fulfill a certain set of expectations. A car is supposed to move me from A to B, if the car has no wheels or the wheels fall of at random intervals then the product is flawed.

In the age of NO RETURNS (Steam) this shit should have severe backlash. Yeah you didn't develop it -for- PC but you, well, released it on it so it better at least work in the most rudimentary sense.

Having read most of the comments this one is the one I agree with most. That last paragraph in particular makes a lot of sense to me. ID should either release something that works on PC or skip the PC altogether.

Having said that, I do always appreciate honesty. Carmack has openly admitted ID's evident negligence rather than spouting PR BS that nobody with half a brain would believe, and I give him a little credit for that.

 

[-Dragmire-]

id was actually "quite happy" with the state of the game on its test systems, but those were sporting drivers that had gone through "significant internal changes" to maximize performance. "We knew that all older AMD drivers, and some Nvidia drivers would have problems with the game, but we were running well in-house on all of our test systems," Carmack

Isn't that an odd way to test a game? Wouldn't it be more practical to test on a diverse range of systems to make sure the largest percentage of customers experience the least amount of bugs possible? Unless the time/money budget wouldn't allow for it, but that should be an important part of quality assurance testing...

If they did not have the money to properly QA test it, there was a way they could have got loads of people to test if for free on a multitude of systems.
O____P____E____N__________B____E____T____A

Just a thought....

I guess they thought they didn't need to, after all "It worked perfectly well on our systems"....

Meh, I assume most people will forget about this if their next release is good.

EDIT:

Holy shit! The internet is about to explode with rage, hit the fucking deck!! *FLAMESPOLISIONS!*

An event so large it will eventually see a theatrical release directed by Michael Bay.

 

[CrawlingPastaHellion]

Heh, Carmack and his giant ego again I see. Was he just making lame and beside the point excuses just now? He definitely was. Nevermind, even if he doesn't fix this the PC community will, it's just a matter of time. A power of PC after all, flexibility amongst many more.

As I said in a related topic, however, it will greatly reduce the initial sales of the PC-version, which doesn't really help id in the slightest. They sabotaged themselves, basically and as I said before they really can't afford stunts like these anymore. Their glory days are long gone now, but yeah, Carmack couldn't care less I guess. He never did. All it was to him: a technical challenge to show his genius as a self-taught programmer.

 

[DracoSuave]

In this thread:

PC Gamers refusing to admit the platform has (and always has had) hardware compatability flaws, while JOHN FUCKING CARMACK says 'We have found insurmountable driver compatibility issues with PC development.

This guy makes bleeding edge graphics engines in his sleep. He once got scratched by Perseus, and the blood from the scratch touched the ground and from that sprang forth the pegasus, and Doom 3's lighting effect engine. He knows his shit. You should probably listen and heed his words even if you don't like the message. He's a bigger expert in this than any poster this board can muster. Including most industry insiders.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Holy shit! The internet is about to explode with rage, hit the fucking deck!! *FLAMESPOLISIONS!*

Even if he does think that... why in the world would you say it. Why deliberately piss off part of consumer base by saying that. I know he probibly doesn't want to wishy-washy about his opinions (I certainly don't) but that seems tasteless and not very not PR friendly.

 

[ph0b0s123]

And now every unreasonable PC gamer is going to ***** and moan that Rage wasn't developed for their one of a kind $1.5k rig but rather for standardized gaming rigs that are used by about 100 million people in the world.

No PC is one of a kind even if 1.5k, as the PC works off a set of standards and off the shelf parts. Also I think people are bitching not becuase it has not been designed to take advantage of their 1.5k PC, but becuase the game does not run properly on a majority of PC's not just 1.5k ones. Or is it now acceptable to sell products that don't work properly?

Why would id cater to you rather than to consoles.

"A high-end PC is nearly ten times as powerful as a console and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it."

From the man himself, if they catered 'us' they "could unquestionably provide a better experience". Enough said.

Besides, fps on consoles are stable and really what the PC has over consoles is graphics.

And for me a better control method in the case of FPS's. I can live with an FPS having the same graphic quality as consoles. But being forced to use a joypad rather a mouse. It's simple, no mouse, no play.

And Carmack is right. Look at minecraft, it looks like we went back in time graphics-wise, but no one cares then. PC elitest need to stop swinging their raging hard ons for their superior processing power and realize that they are a minority and are not as important as they think they are.

This is my favourite paragraph. How can Minecraft, a currently PC unique game, have been so popular if all PC gamers care about is graphics and processing power. Surely Minecraft being so popular in the PC community proves completely the opposite, to the point you were using it to make. Brilliant logic.

 

[Virmire]

Is it sad that the graphics in the video far surpasses the quality of all of my PC games..?

His point is valid. If it's cheaper to cater to a larger audience, why pay more for a smaller one?
Doesn't excuse the buggy piece of crap the game is though.

 

[Aprilgold]

"Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on," he continued. "A game built with a tenth of the resources on a platform ten times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases."

This here, is a reasonable standing... though I doubt some PC enthusiasts will likely let their pedestal be taken away from them.

I thought he meant by that Consoles were more powerful then PC.

Bad logic right here, not a leading platform excuses a buggy clusterf*** release? I guess they just shot their entire PC future in the bullocks, chances are people won't appreciate that.

Then count that they lead shooters and PCs back in the day. Yeah, with Rage's release, they sorta shat on their own legacy.

 

[ph0b0s123]

Is it sad that the graphics in the video far surpasses the quality of all of my PC games..?

His point is valid. If it's cheaper to cater to a larger audience, why pay more for a smaller one?
Doesn't excuse the buggy piece of crap the game is though.

Where did you get the idea, from the story, that developing for a larger audience was cheaper? It just gives better returns, that's all

"A high-end PC is nearly ten times as powerful as a console and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it."

'expend the same amount of resources'

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Dear Mr. Carmack, you are *R*E*A*L*L*Y* not helping to keep constant b*tching between consoles gamers and PC gamers civil. Just simply admit that you want us at each others throats.

The game was a multi platform launch. What precisely does id stand to gain if they foment tensions amongst people (i.e. those who actually get worked up about what platform is best and choose to shout their displeasure to the masses) who are predisposed to irrational and hyperbolic arguments? I'm all for an evil conspiracy theory but i've got to have something to work with here.

If you are incapable of making bearable PC ports from your console game designs maybe you should just stop doing them in the first place.

I think they make them for the very same reason games get made by most companies: because they think they can make money doing it.

Demon Souls, Infamous and Brütal Legends all were successful and available on console only

. One of your entries was notable as a platform exclusive, another was a niche title at best and the third is generally considered to have been a commercial failure (likely a part of the reason the company who made it radically changed their business strategy).

Just simply admit that most of you just want more money without adding the needed ressources to port that game succesfully on PC.

I'm often amused by this sentiment. I understand why you have it and where it comes from but holding it generally overlooks a glaring and quite frankly obvious point: the PC is not a platform. It is a competing mass of standards. Give the people at id A known hardware target to aim at and I think you'll find them incredibly proficient at their duties. But there isn't a known hardware standard, now is there? I'd be willing to bet if you polled every single person who responded to this thread, you'd be hard pressed to find two people with identical systems. I think the short version is simply this: you can hope someone does the job better but to expect anything even approaching perfection in such a situation only reflects a failure of your ability to assess the complexity of what you ask.

Look, in my opinion, once you release a game for a specific plattform it HAS TO WORK for that plattform.

So you also take issue with the hundreds of games commercially released with damning bugs that came before. Off the top of my head for example: Modern Warfare 2, Battlefield Bad Company, Fallout 3, Sin, World of Warcraft, Alpha Protocol. . .

But since that logic is too hard understand for some of those developers/publishers I rather wait for the price tag to drop to an appropriate "Crappy Game => Bargain Price" level.

I utterly agree with this statement. I've patiently waited for plenty of games to drop because I foresaw some terrible flaw with the product - something trained into me by paying full price for the privileged of beta testing dozens of times.