Why are some people upset over the boodborne pc petition?

[loa]

I'm not being sour or petty about it, just being real here. Every platform needs its own little perks and personal things that need to make it something worth having.

If the ps4 was less chained down with proprietary nonsense and people could do what sony can't be arsed to do, put a ps2 emulator onto that darn thing which it should be more than powerful enough to handle, more people would get a ps4.
I might since I have a huge ps2 library.
Also a small form factor pre-built system that doesn't utterly suck and works out of the box has a market.
But no, instead of trying to compete with a convincing product, consoles use exclusives as a crutch to stay relevant at all and god forbid if the platforms were opened up even a little, they could no longer charge extortion money for games multiplayer parts.

No, I don't see why we, the consumers, should carry that cross on our backs.
Consoles no longer being relevant if they don't employ anti-consumer business tactics is not our problem nor is it something that "can't be helped because that's just the way it is".

 

[Danny Dowling]

I'm not being sour or petty about it, just being real here. Every platform needs its own little perks and personal things that need to make it something worth having.

If the ps4 was less chained down with proprietary nonsense and people could do what sony can't be arsed to do, put a ps2 emulator onto that darn thing which it should be more than powerful enough to handle, more people would get a ps4.
I might since I have a huge ps2 library.
Also a small form factor pre-built system that doesn't utterly suck and works out of the box has a market.
But no, instead of trying to compete with a convincing product, consoles use exclusives as a crutch to stay relevant at all and god forbid if the platforms were opened up even a little, they could no longer charge extortion money for games multiplayer parts.

I'm pretty sure, in layman terms, Sony pay for the exclusivity, they get it. Don't know why you feel the need to complicate such a simple process with talking about 1 feature you want that has little if anything to do with this case.

 

[loa]

I'm pretty sure, in layman terms, Sony pay for the exclusivity, they get it. Don't know why you feel the need to complicate such a simple process with talking about 1 feature you want that has little if anything to do with this case.

Maybe because exclusivity is tightly related to closed systems?

 

[Danny Dowling]

I'm pretty sure, in layman terms, Sony pay for the exclusivity, they get it. Don't know why you feel the need to complicate such a simple process with talking about 1 feature you want that has little if anything to do with this case.

Maybe because exclusivity is tightly related to closed systems?

exclusivity is about the company that made the console funding games and wanting said game to be playable only on their system to tempt potential customers to their system. There was only one place to play Crash Bandicoot and that was Playstation; get the Playstation get the bandicoot. Simple.

What you're talking about is backwards compatibility right? Something that was already given a logical explanation early on prior to the consoles release. The makeup of the console doesn't properly suit it, but they were planning to look at ways to make it backwards compatible to a point using GAIKAI. Also, look at all these HD Collections, these guys don't want you getting backwards compatibility when they can sell you a new disc with the series on it. That's the real fact.

 

[loa]

What you're talking about is backwards compatibility right?

No. Yes.
I was talking about consoles being more than toys.
Imagine if you could legally and easily (because sony doesn't throw 50 sticks between your ankles and constantly patches it out) modify your ps4 to draw stuff in photoshop and work on it like a pc.
Would that not make the ps4 more attractive since, even if there are no games for the box, it's still useful?
But no. That's not gonna happen.

Instead, console manufacturers stick to an antiquated business model that only benefits them.
You can point out that they need exclusives and how the process of making contracts to manufacture exclusivity is simple (?) until you're blue in the face, that doesn't make it beneficial for us in the grand scheme of things.

Exclusivity is on the same level as day 1 DLC and microtransactions.
You can rationalize its existance, sure, but don't confuse rationalization with approval.

 

[Danny Dowling]

What you're talking about is backwards compatibility right?

No. Yes.
I was talking about consoles being more than toys.
Imagine if you could legally and easily (because sony doesn't throw 50 sticks between your ankles and constantly patches it out) modify your ps4 to draw stuff in photoshop and work on it like a pc.
Would that not make the ps4 more attractive since, even if there are no games for the box, it's still useful?
But no. That's not gonna happen.

Instead, console manufacturers stick to an antiquated business model that only benefits them.
You can point out that they need exclusives and how the process of making contracts to manufacture exclusivity is simple (?) until you're blue in the face, that doesn't make it beneficial for us in the grand scheme of things.

Exclusivity is on the same level as day 1 DLC and microtransactions.
You can rationalize its existance, sure, but don't confuse rationalization with approval.

No.

It's pretty simple really for me; I get my game console, it plays games. Lucky me now I can watch Netflix as well but the function is to play games. If I want to use photoshop I'll go on my laptop.

They aren't the same things, they aren't even supposed to be the same things your angle is borderline stupidity

 

[dreng3]

I have a great hatred for exclusives, and for several reasons at that.
The first reason is personal, after all I want to play all the cool games, but I don't want to get a console that would cost me a fair bit of cash and take up some of my limited space for the few games each generation has that actually intersts me. At this point the exclusives that interest me is limited to; the infamous series (which spans two generations of Playstation), the Bayonetta series (Playstation and WII U), and now Bloodborne. In total I'm missing out on seven games, not a huge loss, but the point still stands.

The second reason is more from a business perspective, it simply seems stupid that someone would want to cater only to a very narrow market, after all I would never get a playstation 4 for just Bloodborne and Infamous: First Light, nor would I get a WII U for Bayonetta 2. This makes the companies seem spiteful at best and stupid at worst. Isn't it, after all, good business practice to try and reach as many consumers as possible? The counter argument would be that the company has an obligation to serve its core fanbase before any other group. There is, however, a method for that, we call it a timed exclusive. Introduce the game to the select console and let the others wait 6 months or so before releasing it at full price again, that way your core fans get the benefit of enjoying the game before anyone else and you get two seperate surges of income per game.

This is of course only my humble opinion and seeing as I'm not an economist you might not want to put too much stock in it.

 

[TristanBelmont]

This is the same as all the jackasses who were screaming at Platinum to put Bayo 2 on every console when Ninty was publishing it. Just a bunch of people who don't understand publishing.

 

[Bombiz]

snip

AMD Radeon HD 7400M Series.

basically this. its people trying to justify their expenses whichever way they can. we are built to do this to lower regret amount to help us move on into the world. Howeer this sometimes backfire when the deicision is actually bad but not dangerous, meaning that people will end up defending it with whatever illogical tactics they can come up with.

It doesn't help that its pretty much risk vs reward. Maintain quite an expensive investment in pc gaming and pray that eventually exclusives would come to pc or buy a less powerful console and hope you don't get the raw deal further down the line.

those arent the only options though. i spend less money on my PC than i would spend on a console and can still play games. not on highest settings, yes, but still very much playable at 1080p 60fps. since there are PCs that can do more for cheaper nowadays (first time at new console release we have such a situation), a lot of extra justification is needed to own a console.

Yeah they're playable for the most part, Skyrim at 18 fps with black texture overlays, and mouse stuttering is playable, but compared to it's console counter part that run better, and have less spontaneous, sometime' unique issues, but then I'd have to wait eons for the DLC. How much justification is need depends on luck, from my experience at least.

well if you want an upgrade from that and want to run skyrim at a decent level you don't have to spen $400 plus dollars . you can get a gtx 660( the card I currently have which runs skyrim perfectly on high settings) brand new for less the $240 on newegg.

 

[SeventhSigil]

The game does seem to be drawing some, er, heated responses in general, which I kind of see as a good sign for its reception. Exclusives considered so-so will generally be greeted with only mild grumbling from those who don't own the required platform, but poking around the Youtube comments (which, yes, brings about an inherent inevitability of finding such strife as it is) there's quite a bit of backlash from the PC crowd about this particular title's exclusivity. "Damn Sony," "Curse Sony," "We should tell From Software to release it on PC because we clearly have no idea how publishing works,' etc, etc, it's an epidemic of griping gamers. =P Jim Sterling released a few clips of his playthrough on his Youtube channel and later commented in the same video about the fact that his comments section had spawned QUITE an, er, enthused response from the have-nots. Still, it does suggest the game's enjoyable qualities (I've quite enjoyed my currently incomplete playthrough) is drawing hype, even if it includes negative frustrated hype.

Anyway, I don't really have an issue with the petition, largely because I don't figure it'll change anything. Even if Sony does choose to completely break their usual habit and release their currently best-received exclusive title on PC, (which, while not TECHNICALLY impossible, is so improbable it might as well be so,) it's going to be due to their own reasons, not because of gamer outcry. (Though, naturally, they'd insist they were 'listening to the outcry' when they did it.)

But yeah, as for OP, folks on the Internet tend to react strongly. Some console gamers are reacting with extreme negativity to the petition, and some PC gamers are reacting with equal negativity to the very fact that Bloodborne is exclusive. =P

 

[K12]

I want Bloodborne more than I ever wanted any console exclusive title and would love this to come to PC but I'm not holding my breath.

I think claiming that it is "disgusting" for somebody to ask for a game to be available on more than one platform is just childish petty whining.

There's always going to be at least one arsehole who just loves to hear his/her own whining voice.

 

[Def25]

It is giant circle jerk of "GRRR pc beggars" or "GRRR console kiddies" depending which side you are with.

Personally i HATE dark souls, so i dont care about this game and i find the insanelly high ratings to be laughable considering games have been getting subpar scores for not being quite "next gen" or being "something we played 100 times over already" When bloodborne still uses old technology, controls physics and it is far from "next gen" not to mention it is effectively dark souls 3 and its not like dark souls 2 and lord of the fallen didnt came out a while ago.

Anyway i fully believe that games should be released on all systems and a pc version would get the much needed 60 fps in a hard game that requires perfect timning, not to mention dipping to 20 fps on the "most powerfull console ever" PFTTTTTTTT.(You can go ahead and add bad optimization on the list of why this game is overrated) and not to mention mods that can change the game so "noobs" can enjoy it.

Seriously why cant we all be gamers? I understand that pc has diffirent standards, capabilities and community, but both next gen consoles are effectivel the same boxes with the same capabilities and while they differ in exlusives, they are not that diffirent from eachother...now the wiiu is another thing.

 

[Risingblade]

Probably because pc gamers are going to throw a ***** tantrum if the PC version isn't better than the console version...just like last time.

But it was better then the console version... last time.

Bad PC port still > game on consoles

The problem is that PC Gamers are used to more.

Now that's just depressing .-.

 

[Azure23]

It is giant circle jerk of "GRRR pc beggars" or "GRRR console kiddies" depending which side you are with.

Personally i HATE dark souls, so i dont care about this game and i find the insanelly high ratings to be laughable considering games have been getting subpar scores for not being quite "next gen" or being "something we played 100 times over already" When bloodborne still uses old technology, controls physics and it is far from "next gen" not to mention it is effectively dark souls 3 and its not like dark souls 2 and lord of the fallen didnt came out a while ago.

Anyway i fully believe that games should be released on all systems and a pc version would get the much needed 60 fps in a hard game that requires perfect timning, not to mention dipping to 20 fps on the "most powerfull console ever" PFTTTTTTTT.(You can go ahead and add bad optimization on the list of why this game is overrated) and not to mention mods that can change the game so "noobs" can enjoy it.

Seriously why cant we all be gamers? I understand that pc has diffirent standards, capabilities and community, but both next gen consoles are effectivel the same boxes with the same capabilities and while they differ in exlusives, they are not that diffirent from eachother...now the wiiu is another thing.

I'm amazed that you can have such an informed opinion on Bloodborne considering you hate the souls series. Do you routinely play games that you hate? As to the review scores- maybe reviewers just have a lot of fun playing it? I mean hell, I know a lot of PC gamers obsess about graphics and physics engines and rightfully so, but isn't gameplay the most important thing in any game?

 

[Azure23]

I've never had a problem with 30fps in a souls game. It's not a character action game, your parry and dodge windows are plenty generous. Sure, I'd love if it ran at 60fps, but not if it meant compromising the game in some other way. And of course this is just my opinion, but I don't think I'm alone in valuing the atmosphere and mechanics over the tech. The guy I quoted up above was talking shit about the physics engine, but souls fans fucking love the havoc physics engine, which is kind of antiquated, but charming, we love kicking those enemies around. He talked about how the engine was shit, but the game looks glorious and detailed. As for enemy count? I played the game, and I don't honestly believe that they skimped on enemies due to processing power, that's silly. From put enemies where they wanted to put enemies. They created the ambushes that they wanted, it's difficult, but it's not overwhelming. Which was a common criticism leveled at dks2, that they just threw extra enemies in where they couldn't think of doing anything else. Essentially I feel like the the technical criticism being leveled at Bloodborne (which is overwhelmingly coming from people who haven't played it) misses the point completely.

 

[Atmos Duality]

it is but things like framerate player and enemy count affect gameplay.

Getting a high framerate is piss easy and pretty cheap these days*.
(*mostly; shitty drivers and bad optimization exists)

Getting a high framerate with enough pretty-crap tech enabled to sate a given (overinflated) ego, not so much.

 

[Tilly]

Because people need to be in a tribe and they need constant reinforcement that their tribe is better than other tribes.
Simples.

 

[Strazdas]

Yeah they're playable for the most part, Skyrim at 18 fps with black texture overlays, and mouse stuttering is playable, but compared to it's console counter part that run better, and have less spontaneous, sometime' unique issues, but then I'd have to wait eons for the DLC. How much justification is need depends on luck, from my experience at least.

and here ladies and gentlemen we have grade A bullshit, sorry, Island Buffalo Shit.

A 750 ti, a card that costs 140 dollars on Newegg (first google result) is capable of running Watch Dogs on ultra in 1080p @ FPS:

Min: 18
Max: 41
Avg: 29

Heres a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzDQo4vkSCI

It will run Unmodded skyrim at 1080p and 60 fps without a problem (sorry, didnt bother looking up a video for that). Modding can reduce framerate of course, but its optional for PCs and not available for consoles anyway.

And yes, you can complete a capable PC with 750ti for 400 dollars. the 260 remaining is enough to put some i3 or older AMD CPU in and some ram, the rest can be found cheap.

Yes, sometimes PC has unique issues, such as Ubisoft shutting down its DRM servers making thier older games crash on startup because of that (block their internet access in windows firewall and they will work as a fix), but they are mostly made by incompetent game developers rather than computer software itself.

As far as waiting for content, you are correct that some studios do shaft PC gamers and release the PC versions later. if you are one of the people that are incapable of being patient then you may want to go for console. just remmeber that it will cost you more.

I know a lot of PC gamers obsess about graphics and physics engines and rightfully so, but isn't gameplay the most important thing in any game?

COnsidering that Framerate is gameplay and not graphics i dont see the problem?