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

[ph0b0s123]

"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.

No, my pedestal feels pretty secure...

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."

Focus on consoles larger audience has deprived PC's of an "unquestionably" "better experience". Yeah, really don't see that pedestal going anywhere....

Oh, okay... but you're missing his point, and mine. The market is in favour of consoles and has been for a few years now. PC is still the pioneer of technology, but it's not the focus of the game market and consequently it's lost its top spot (probably a while ago) as a gaming platform. That's not to say it's dead mind you.

I'm not saying I agree with it, I just see it as a reasonable perspective. I also expect irate PC users to jump at this as some sort of indication that Consoles are ruining the industry or as some sort of bogus statement that PC is dead/dying or some such nonsense.

Face it, only a handful of developers/producers set the standard with PC these days, most build their games with the Xbox in mind, since it's the lowest spec. The few that I can think of (Valve, CD project, Blizzard, Relic etc,) have started to accept PC central business is not as lucrative as it once was and plan to incorporate consoles into their future projects (Valve is gearing steam for PSN, CD project are porting The Witcher 2 to Xbox, Blizzard are releasing Diablo 3 to consoles and Relic just released their first console game "Space Marine").

I don't personally think this is a result of consoles though (well, not as a fault of their own)... the ludicrous diversification of hardware and a ton of misinformation has long since crumpled PC's reputation. Fewer people could be bothered kitting out a decent PC, despite it not being so hard or expensive to do at the moment (what with the tech gap reaching a sort of plateau... which is what Carmack is suggesting).

PC is great for customisation and depth, but sadly it's not a straight forward affair... there is no real standard to hold to, just speculations (and mileage may vary) that fluctuate yearly. There is so many options to choose from and some of them come with insane price tags, a lot of which are hit and miss, that it isn't surprising how so many people almost abhor PC. Why bother with the research and effort of filtering hundreds and thousands of hardware permutations when you can get 1 of 3 consoles that entertain just as well.

Just for the record. I'm a PC gamer first and foremost... I have a PS3 with about 3 games, all exclusives. But I hold no allegiance to any platform and personally think Hardware companies have done the damage and not the consoles...

That was a rant I wasn't expecting to get into, sorry about that.

This all depends on what you meant by 'pedestal'. Is it the 'pedestal' of audience / sales figures. Or the 'pedestal' of being a platform capable of delivering better gaming experiences than consoles.

If the first, then guess what, that was a pedestal I would never claimed to have sat on during my 20 plus year of gaming on the PC. I don't remember a time when PC's were out performing consoles in sales or audience. Which was always going to be the case with the easier access console gaming has, with lower price of admission in money and time to get playing. This was never a chip on my shoulder or something I though that had been lost. Don't know where this idea in the community has come from.

Now the second option for what you meant as 'pedestal' is what I will defend. And this is also what Carmack's comments support. And I do believe that it is the fault of the almost blinkered focus on consoles that means the PC is not able to deliver on it's potential of delivering better gaming experiences. This is something new with this console generation and it's booming sales figures, which have made the PC's look bad purely because they have not increased as fast, so are now deemed as not worth chasing.

Your idea that PC's are unpopular due to diversification is completely the opposite of reality. The PC has never been as consolidated as now. Now we only have two companies making gaming GPU's. One API of DirectX that they have to conform to, so no matter which you buy you know games will run. A while ago you had ATI, Nvidia, 3DFX, Mattrox, PowerVR and others all making cards with their own API's. You also could buy CPU's from Intel Cyrix, AMD and VIA. Now its just Intel or AMD. Oh and I'm aware that Rage is OPENGL, a standard that has not been used in a PC game for a while (which was probably the main cause of all these issues). So if anyone is causing diversification it's ID.

And the idea there are no standards to hold to. That's wrong as the PC has standards that are so good consoles have taken to using them as well, whether it be DirectX on 360 or OpenGL on PS3 and mobile devices. Not forgetting the PC hardware consoles are quite happy to incorporate.

So consoles have always had the highest popularity in gaming for the in the present, but the PC has always been the window into tommorow.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

He's pretty much right, but this has to be awful PR. Everyone knows people use consoles more than PCs for gaming in this day and age, but to come out and say it like that is just ridiculous, particularly from a comany like id.

All we've learnt here is Cormack is still a total douche.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Er so? Its a platform that needs a tiny bit more work on the port than the others you work more on the port and release it, how hard is that for a master programmer? Apparently imposable ...

Except that's not true it's just as hard to do a good port from 360-> ps3 as from any console to a PC.

 

[Lunar Templar]

nice cop out there, impressive really

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

I do know one thing personally I will not be buying another product for ID.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Er so? Its a platform that needs a tiny bit more work on the port than the others you work more on the port and release it, how hard is that for a master programmer? Apparently imposable ...

Except that's not true it's just as hard to do a good port from 360-> ps3 as from any console to a PC.

It can be done but not many stop and take that effort everything is for the short trem and consoles fill that goal more than anything else.

 

[SyphonX]

So I've heard.

However, mobile gaming via phones and/or social-networking is actually more popular than consoles. Therefore, it's redundant to produce quality products on consoles, since more people play on their phones and Facebook. It's only logical. Stupid console players, if you played on Facebook or your iDevice, you wouldn't be having any of these problems.


Ugh.

What can be seen.... cannot.. be... unseen.

Never buying another id game ever again. Ever.

 

[ph0b0s123]

Nice of you to take my comments out of context and try and put other words in my mouth.

Ok, I give you all the things you listed, but one.
"- They made an FPS from the ground up that was designed for the PC"
Yeah, a PC from 7 years ago. This would cut more ice if it used an API higher than DX 9.

Why is that necessarily a bad thing? So the graphics aren't the epitome of shiny, and it doesn't require a laundry list of specific parts to run. It's a good game, with all those features listed.

Who says I am after another Crysis that only a handful of PC's could play. Also where did I say that the game should only be playable on hardware the supports the latest API's. All I was saying is that for a game 'built from the ground up only for PC' it is odd that the maximum API it supports is so old. Just because you have a game that runs the latest API does not meant people who only have old older hardware can't run it. There's this thing on PC's called 'backwards compatibility'...

No, my pedestal feels pretty secure...

Ah, that explains a lot...

Yes, it explains that I was pointing out to someone that the comment of Carmack's he used to make a point was contradicted by the comment made just above. Live by the sword die by the sword. I did not bring in the 'pedestal' idea, but 'when the world gives you lemons make lemonade'.

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."

Focus on consoles larger audience has deprived PC's of an "unquestionably" "better experience". Yeah, really don't see that pedestal going anywhere....

The guy's trying to suck up to the PC Gamers he screwed out of a decent experience by appealing to their egos. I know PC Gamers have big egos but you can't honestly tell me you're falling for that. It's a PR spin to try and divert blame. "Oh, we didn't do a lousy port job and just fuck up. It's all the console gamer's fault!"

Yeah, that would be the case if he did not spend the rest of his comments explaining that PC wasn't very important any more. If this was a suck up, it is probably one of the worst I have seen...

 

[Blind Sight]

Damn, here's my conflict of interest:

1. Carmack's a smart guy who's been doing this for a long time (and obviously knows what he's doing).
2. He makes this statement right after his company provides a piss-poor port that makes it seem like he's using it as a justification.
3. His previous statement was the reverse of this.

I'm leaning towards 2, but I do agree that PC sales don't make up a large sum of triple-A titles. However, that's no excuse for failing to provide proper play-testing and decent port development (not being able to change ANY of your graphic settings? That's just lazy).

Despite the fact that its sales are lower, the PC remains an important gaming platform. It provides an excellent venue for independent developers and people starting out, and also typically offers up cheaper games, despite the hardware being more expensive. Typically I've found the communities for games to be a bit better as well, and the creation of mods just allows for a much more expanded and longer experience. I've also found that PC games are often more experimental then console games as well, but that's just me.

I really don't see why everyone has to turn this into an immature 'us vs. them' pissing contest that makes everyone look like idiots. Let's just demonize the shit out of each other, right guys? "Oh, those PC gamer elitist pricks are so annoying!" "Man, those console retards just don't know what they're talking about." Please, this is just such a tired, dull argument over something so pointless as personal taste. All I want is decent development and some customer respect across all platforms. My PC's my wife, but my 360 is my mistress.

 

[Clonekiller]

You know, comparing PC to console is rather pointless. The two platforms offer completely different experiences. The PC offers much more individual control & precision (with a keyboard & mouse along with usually customizable graphics), while a console offers simple & easy play without the hassle often associated with PC game use. The experience a player desires will be influenced by the platform they choose.
I personally prefer the play style offered by the PC. I like the ability to customize my graphics, get player-made mods for older games, and have a whole keyboard to use & map the way I see fit. However, I have many friends who love the feel of a game pad in their hands, and only use the PC to play strategy games. Trying to compare the two platforms types is a really bad idea, and developers that view PC and consoles as inseparable are making huge mistakes, which will probably cost them money in the long run.
On another note, trying to deflect criticism for a poor PC port by blaming PC as a failing platform is just lame. Man up and take responsibility for your own actions Carmack.

 

[vivalahelvig]

*Marks checklist*
And so Id joins the ranks of Crytek, Bethesda, Bioware, and most recently of all Blizzard in the modern age and are better for it.

You keep saying that but fail to back it up. Even when I refuted that same stance you refused to respond.

Oh don't even bother with him, he justs puts out hate against anything pc and doesnt listen to reason. Nothing new, honestly.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Hmmm I'll give it a miss then, the tiny dredges of interest I had in it before were based on it reminding me of Fallout.

You and me both.

I had gotten the impression that Rage was going to include some RPG elements, probably even going so far as ripping off fallout 3 and NV. But I wouldn't mind a rip-off of the RPG elements if Rage could bring some more adrenaline to the table during in-game combat (something that I thought Fallout 3 and New Vegas were lacking a little).

Don't get me wrong, combat in Fallout 3/NV isn't "bad" in my opinion, but it isn't very fast-paced. Most guns sound like pea-shooters, and it's a bit silly how you can pretty much plant an entire clip of bullets in someone's head and they're still standing up shooting back at you.

So I thought that if Id would pretty much rip-off the post-apocalypse RPG-concept, but introduce their style of FPS-violence, which tend to be more meaty, brutal with weapons making really loud noises etc. And add mad max-esque cars to the mix, Rage could've been what I wanted Fallout 3/NV to be (or at least how I wanted to see them improved).

But now all I see is just another generic first person shooter. Seems boring, and im turned off by it.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

As far as my play trough the only time I really had fun was with their card mini-game.

 

[Redworld13]

Whoa i find this thread really interesting, are all these posts from pc gamers only, or.....?

 

[emeraldrafael]

And all the PC gamers will come in bitching and moaning about how someone could say this before they go right back to saying they're the master gaming race and looking down their noses at console gamers.

...

Im not even sure if Im joking.

OT: I didnt buy rage. its not my type of a game. A friend did for his PC. He returned it same day, then used the money to buy two DS games. And tahts about all the opinion I can make on the matter.

 

[Waaghpowa]

Whoa i find this thread really interesting, are all these posts from pc gamers only, or.....?

Some of them are from console players trying to be smug and pretentious.

My take: As I said earlier in the tread, Carmack was also quoted as saying it was a mistake to develop for consoles, so something's not right. Though it still doesn't excuse how bad the release is. It's by far the worst release I can remember, coincidentally, some of the bad releases are published by Bethesda like New Vegas.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

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...

Let's see:
- They made an FPS from the ground up that was designed for the PC
- They've been very engaged with their community and very often have helped troubleshoot problems
- Their very first patch came out very quickly and really took into consideration community input
- In interviews they've shown a very anti-DRM stance acknowledging they dislike it since they're gamers themselves
- Hard Reset compared to Rage actually allows you to adjust the game settings. This is particularly important with the field of view slider since it can cause headaches if the field of view isn't set properly.

Ok, I give you all the things you listed, but one.
"- They made an FPS from the ground up that was designed for the PC"
Yeah, a PC from 7 years ago. This would cut more ice if it used an API higher than DX 9.

Meh, the game works and it's fun. That's more important than what tech level they're working at. It's not like they were hyping it as the next Crysis/Metro 2033 PC-buster. Besides, it's not like it's unforgivable for a new developer to cut back on the tech whizbangs to save a bit of cash.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Not only that but AAA games will be dead in a couple years, its just not a sustainable income source.

They could stay sustainable if publishers and developers were willing to put the brakes on development budgets... AND if gamers would accept the end results of it.

With things as they stand now, with budgets so large that a title not selling multiple millions of copies is not only seen as a commercial flop but also a net loss for the publisher... Well, strangely enough, I think it's Epic who've actually come out and said it, it's the middle tier (or 'Middle Class' as says Cliffy because he's a knob) developers and publishers who've got superior financial and creative flexibility... More modest budgets allow for modest sales to be sustainable and in turn less financial risk, which allows for greater risk taking with the type of product they release.


edit:

Developers are abandoning console gaming en masse in favor for PC gaming and casual gaming.

Case in point. PC is where the middle tier is strongest and has a large install base for casual and social gaming... and these are areas where AAA developers and publishers are looking to dip their toes. Markets where a single commercial flop doesn't force you to close up entire studios. Hell, just look at THQ's attempts to play at being one of the Big Boys has led them.

 

[Ziadaine_v1legacy]

Sounds more like a case of a moron who cant optimize a game right. Honestly, they should cater to more then average PCs. Im not talking Skyrim/Crysis2 Engine graphics etc but most people are going to upgrade. I myself had a shit computer for years and whilst using it I knew optimizing games to run on such old hardware isn't smart (and a resource slut).

 

[AngryPants]

The funniest part is that the patch that only took 4 days to make fixed graphical issues for most PC users, so the question is... was it really necessary to lie about bad drivers in first place?

PC is not the leading platform and bla-bla-bla, which is probably true, but there are still millions of people that prefer it keyboard-mouse-office-chair-monitor way and there's no excuse for delivering the game in such a state. It would have been fine for an indy developer, but then again indy developer would never sell it as AAA title for 60 bucks in fist place.