Console gamers are ruining PC Gaming!

[unsung]

I am absolutely sick of console gamers always getting exclusive PC games like Crysis 2, Battlefield 3, Dragon Age 2, and a ton of other titles. And when they do get a game such as Battlefield 3, they complain that it only support 24 players instead of 64 players. First of all, Battlefield 3 SHOULD never be made for console, that alone that shown the betrayal of EA and Dice. Second of all even though the PC is the leading platform for the game, it is still "water down". When I mean "water down" I mean that despite it being made for PC, they didn't put every single effort and technology for it. I read in a early preview that it was suppose to be 84 players but by trying to make it multi-platform, some of the new technology never made it.

Another example is despite DX 11 graphic card being out for a while now, not many games have utilize it because it take to much work and developer rather just make it "good enough" for PC gamers so they can spent that "extra time" developing it for console gamer.

PC gamer don't get to enjoy many console exclusive like Red Dead Redemption, yet why do console gamer get majority of AAA PC Titles?

As it stand, I feel PC gamer are the only true gamer, and console gamer are nothing but just casual gamer, yet console gamer demand that they get as much right as PC while spending 3 to 4 times much less.

If PC gamer are spending much more money than console, then their experience should be at least 3 time greater, and that all AAA PC titles should be exclusive.

It not like console port to PC is even great, it has no AA or AF, and it look just as jaggy as console game.

I own both a 360 and a high end PC.

 

[overlord20]

For reference man, Dragon Age was on the console as well. Not a PC exclusive.

Second of all, we have 64 players on BF3 that has already been announced. And that game will be ported to console once the PC version is done. It will be DX11 and it looks fantastic. I have never read that we were supposed to have 84 player multi in BF3. Consoles make more money then PC. If I were a developer, I would release for every platform.

I am a PC gamer above all. I hate that PC games don't get the attention they deserve but it is what it is. Your post has a lot of faults in it. Just because we pay more for a machine that does more than play games doesn't mean we SHOULD get a 3x better experience either. It would be nice if we could get a better experience, and some companies still try and make PC gaming a better experience. But as it is, a company wouldn't really be able to survive if they didn't create there games for every platform.

 

[unsung]

They did it back when the 360 and PS3 didn't exist. When you go to your local Best Buy or Fry store you see a ton of pc exclusive game, nowadays most of the isle are empty. I know that PC will always be superior to any console but every year we get less value for our buck. If you saying PC games get AA, AF, and DX11, well that fine and all but if developer focus more on PC, the technology would be even more amazing. Don't tell me games like Crysis 2 is the same amount of effort put in even though it also ported to console? NO way, it not ever going to be as good as it suppose to be. Also my bad I didn't realize Dragon Age IP was made for console and ported to PC, I would think most RPG are made for PC beside the Japanese Turn Base RPG like Final Fantasy.

Lastly, why are some PC games now $60? I think you know why. Console are ruining PC games.

 

[overlord20]

Dragon Age was ported from PC to Console hence why it was so ****ty on console.

Evolution is why PC games are $60. We can't stay at $40, or $50 forever. Gradually things change. Consoles are not the reason for less and less games on the shelf in the store. With growing popularity of Amazon.com who often offer games cheaper than stores, and Direct Download services like Steam, Direct 2 Drive, and Amazon.com there has been no need to go into the store and hassle with stuff.

Crysis 2 is pretty **** good. It looks just as good as the first on PC and it doesn't make your hardware cry. That is great optimization. So it definitely got the attention it deserved. What is the point of advancing technology so much that we have to constantly update our components? That will drive more people to consoles. If I have to buy a new $400 GPU every time a new game comes out just to play it, I am going to buy a console because I won't have to upgrade it for 3-5 years.

 

[Druid]

I have never read that we were supposed to have 84 player multi in BF3.

I actually read something about that a few years ago...

Crysis 2 is pretty **** good. It looks just as good as the first on PC and it doesn't make your hardware cry. That is great optimization. So it definitely got the attention it deserved.

I don't think it looks as good as the first one... At least not as good as warhead. I'm just going off of the demo though.

 

[Trotter]

I can partially agree with the OP.

Companies are turning to consoles first and adding PC versions as an after-thought. I can actually see the reasoning behind this up to a point and that is that there is much less piracy going on with consoles than with PCs. Not only that, but consoles are frozen platforms, making it much easier to get the desired effect because everyone who plays the game will be doing so on the exact same hardware/software.

I have never read that we were supposed to have 84 player multi in BF3.

I actually read something about that a few years ago...

Can you imagine the lag...

 

[C0RR0SIVE]

The thing is, consoles are being pushed too hard, I have played Reach on my 360, while it's not a PC game or anything, I always get lag on my 360 in single player. I have an older Falcon unit, and these games are just becoming unplayable as they push older versions, I played Reach on a friends console the other day, one of these newer units, and no lag at all.

So something needs to change, and it needs to change soon, I may not have the worlds best PC for video games, but developers need to respect the PC market and stop trying to make games for consoles and then port them to the PC. Otherwise, Piracy will skyrocket on the console market, which it already has just because titles look better on a console than on the PC.

I remember FEAR2, people where ****ED once they learned it was built on the 360, and ported for the PC and PS3, had horrible graphics for a second game, and just overall, a very poor game, why would I have to use a keyboard at a main menu? I have a flipping mouse -.-

 

[overlord20]

I agree on the console portion of corrosives statement. Unless you installed Reach on your HDD on the older units (Mine is a launch unit) then it ran like crap!

Like I said earlier, [piracy aside because that is obviously not really the issue especially with recent numbers] if you develop for PC and PC only, you will make a lot less then if you develop for PS3 and Xbox360 as well. As far as porting, I imagine it is cheaper and easier to port a 360 game to PC.

I like to keep my controller plugged into my PC, but when I played Darksiders and other games on my computer, it makes me use the controller?! What the ****?

To have 84 players in one server with a game like BF3, which has great graphics and is going to be harder to run anyway, you would need a fully loaded SR2 server . Okay maybe not that much but maybe...

 

[35g700]

It's not the consoles fault, its the developers fault for being too lazy to make a good port.

You've got to look at it from the developers point of view. Would you rather make the game for PS3, 360, and PC and sell many more copies or would you rather make a game PC only and sell a lot less?

 

[KoF Ripsaw]

If it conforts you because of all this everyone goes to console. How is this good?Its good because we PC gamers are left with the most intelligent and skilled gamers, the ones who saw the light of the PC and decided to let it in there hearts!=)