Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / [LOCKED] Why are PC gamers so stingy?

Author
Message
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 4th Oct 2010 18:46 Edited at: 4th Oct 2010 18:46
Another important thing to remember is that games are optimized for their target platform (not just the other way around). Since a console has fixed hardware it's possible to optimize far better than for a PC.
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Oct 2010 14:06
Quote: "No, as previously stated most TVs run at 60hz or around that, and that's basically 60fps"


last time i checked, a monitor for a computer is 60hz aswell

does this mean i get 60 fps in games? NICE!

>__<' i dont understand D:


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 6th Oct 2010 14:37
A game, film, console game, anything at all connected to a display cannot update faster than the display is designed to - most monitors have more than one refresh rate, 60hz, 70hz etc etc, so even if your game is running at 2000fps, the monitor is only displaying at 60/70fps, in other words by the time the monitor has updated, the game might have updated several times, depending on the game. An arcade game might just lock the frame rate at 60, nice and easy to program, just assume the system can handle a constant frame rate and lock it at 60. However, some games are designed to work on timer based movement with variable frame rates, and on high spec hardware they will update much faster than the monitor refresh rate. So a lower spec PC will be a bit more jerky but will still run the game, a monster gaming PC would run the game super-smooth, much more frequent updates, smaller movements inbetween, much more responsive. There is no visual difference between 60fps and 6000fps - smoothness just depends on how the game is written.

Both games would still be tied with the monitors refresh rate, but a timer based game will be able to adopt faster displays and advanced features (like 3D) wheras a locked frame rate is exactly that, locked. 3D is a good example of what can be done with any 'leftovers' - if your game can render at >120fps, then it could render twice, one for each eye, and adopt 3D with no serious loss of performance.

One good example of this is Elite - that uses timer based movement, even on the humble Spectrum, so originally it might update at 4 or 5 frames per second, but run it on an emulator with an un-capped performance, and it'll update at 60/70fps, making it super-smooth in comparison, instead of just running much faster.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Sasuke
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2005
Location: Milton Keynes UK
Posted: 6th Oct 2010 16:49 Edited at: 6th Oct 2010 16:55
Another note about screens is PC monitors (not every) are different than a TV or HDTV, it's built for precision. So an upscaled resolution of 480/720p on 1080p HDTV will look good thanks to the bluring effects TV's have (basically how the TV's coded to render the image). But on a PC monitor, you'll notice the difference straight away (not saying you couldn't with TV's, it's just more noticeable on PC monitors).

A dream is a fantasy, if you achieve that fantasy it was never a dream to begin with.
Indicium
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th May 2008
Location:
Posted: 6th Oct 2010 18:54
A console is a PC designed for gaming... I don't understand what point you're trying to make Sasuke. Halo Reach is a physics dreamland :p

Basically, For a PC, lots of your resources are taken up by Windows, whereas I imagine on a console, the OS keeps itself at bay.

Sasuke
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2005
Location: Milton Keynes UK
Posted: 6th Oct 2010 22:09
Quote: "A console is a PC designed for gaming..."


True

Quote: "I don't understand what point you're trying to make Sasuke."


I was thinking about a console running on current top spec PC hardware.

Quote: "Halo Reach is a physics dreamland"


Not even close.

Quote: "Basically, For a PC, lots of your resources are taken up by Windows, whereas I imagine on a console, the OS keeps itself at bay."


Pretty much what I said ¬
An OS specifically designed to use that hardware only for games - just like a console.

Least the PS3 is unique thanks to it's Cell Processor that is one hell of a chip, it can rocket out over 200 gigaflops, your top i7 core can only just get above 50 and how old is the Cell. Though it requires a ton of coding, if that thing was coupled with a the latest Graphics Card and Ram... lets just say, the PS4 could be a mini black hole generator.

A dream is a fantasy, if you achieve that fantasy it was never a dream to begin with.
DJ Almix
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Location: Freedom
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 07:50
Can a mod lock this as it went completely off topic
(ironically into PC/Console comparison thread)

Your signature has been erased by a mod because it's almost 1MB in size
Sasuke
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2005
Location: Milton Keynes UK
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 14:18 Edited at: 7th Oct 2010 14:19
Quote: "Can a mod lock this as it went completely off topic
(ironically into PC/Console comparison thread)"


DJ Almix, before this gets locked, I wonder if I can add a question that may put it back on topic.

Sometimes I'm annoyed at companies for not releasing a PC version of the game, when the stupid thing was built on a PC to begin with. All the media is there. If it's the 360 version, then it's a case of porting the code. For instance, there's a PC version of Alan Wake sitting on Remedy's computers doing nothing (source: remedy's bosses). Why the hell have they just released it for Consoles. OK, I know it's less of a risk to release it on the Consoles and that's where the moneys at, but come on it's not like their a poor company, least make a digital copy. They where a PC based company, just like Epic, not anymore it seems. Did you know Halo was originally designed for PC, then Microsoft got in the way and you know the rest.

If they do release anything for the PC, it will only get half the treatment (most of the time). No wonder there's piracy when they give us a crap version of the game, it's even got Xbox 360 icons in the PC version, what the hell. (just to add, I don't and never will pirate. If I found one, I'd kill (figuratively) them for ruining the PC games industry)

Because of all this, I think this is why PC gamers take their frustration out on console gamers. Though I wouldn't know cause I'm just in it for the games, whatever platform. But it makes sense, if shouting at the companies doesn't work, maybe shouting at the console players will, who knows.

A dream is a fantasy, if you achieve that fantasy it was never a dream to begin with.
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 15:15
Reality fuelled rant comming up, apologies in advance, reader discretion is advised...

It's no wonder that some companies just don't bother releasing PC versions. Although, I doubt that it's simply a case of porting, there has to be QA - professionals aren't using XNA, where you can compile to 360 and PC with practically the same code, and if a publisher did that, there would be outrage. Anyway, difference in PC sales compared to consoles is astronomical - I've said it here before, but any PC gamer who downloads torrents is basically burying the PC gaming industry, because publishers are LUCKY if the PC version sells 1/10th the copies that the console version does, very lucky indeed.

When Halo did make it onto PC's, did it take the world by storm?, did it redefine PC gaming?, did it re-invent the FPS genre?, was it even all that important at the end of the day?

NO.

The PC version of Halo was less important than games like Farcry, Counterstrike and Half Life. Accept that and move on... Microsoft took Bungies baby and turned it into the most important videogame we've seen in decades, that was not Bungies awesomeness that did that, but rather Microsofts marketting machine and bloody mindedness.

So it's no wonder that it went onto the XBox IMO, where it made such an incredible impact, and did all those things. Halo on XBox = trailblazer, Halo on PC = FPS game. The PC already has important FPS games like Half Life, Rainbow 6, Delta Force, Battlefield - it never needed Halo, the XBox desperately needed Halo, and so did console gamers, so it was huge. There's nothing to be gained in looking back on Halo as if it was raped from the hands of PC gamers, because it would never have been anything but a decent FPS.

Frustrated PC gamers should go and encourage their friends, and themseleves if need be, to actually buy games, when they first come out, from an actual shop. There's no way forward apart from adopting console gamer habits, by habit, I mean pre-ordering important games, supporting publishers who support the PC. What will it take to get the message across? - Bethesda, or Blizzard going console only?, maybe that would be the wake up call the PC gamers need. Seriously, appreciate what you have, make the most of it, because it's not as if the PC gaming industry is gonna get any bigger, no, consoles will eventually take over to the point where PC versions of important games are rare - instead the PC will have indi games and casual games while major titles appear on consoles, where they can be sold for profit and actually feed the development team.

PC gamers want to pay 9.50 for a game that will have umpteen mods and enhancements over the course of several years, for free, somehow their 9.50 must fund all future development, versions, servers, support... Much like some people don't see why TGC have to venture into other markets to stay afloat.

If PC gamers don't show more support, then this decline will sharpen - look at APB. There are only 2 major software houses in Britain nowadays, 20 years ago that would be more like 20. The 2 surviving companies concentrate on console games over PC games, usually there's a delay of at least 6 months before the PC version surfaces. Maybe next time it wont surface, maybe we won't ever see GTA outside of the console market again. PC gaming's future is not at the high end, it's at the low end, our end, indi games, casual games, portable games.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Aaagreen
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2007
Location: City 17
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 16:24
Are those two major software houses Rockstar and Rareware or did you have someone else in mind?


I'd love to see things from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my bum.
jeffhuys
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th May 2006
Location: No cheesy line here.
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 16:38
1 Word: Steam.

Steam has over 4 million users that actually BUY games. You can go on these forums and pretend they're not, but (at the very best) 4 million times 50 euros = a whole lot of money.

Don't pretend every single PC gamer downloads their stuff.

Aaagreen
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2007
Location: City 17
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 16:47
Valve pretty much revolutionised the PC gaming market with Steam. Naturally, everyone hated it when the buggy, crap version was released before Half-Life 2. Now, only the stubborn morons refuse to use the much improved version, much like the improvements Microsoft made from Vista to Win 7.


I'd love to see things from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my bum.
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 17:00
I was thinking Rockstar and Lionhead really, but I guess Rare are pretty big too, so we should say 3 major development houses.

Quote: "4 million times 50 euros = a whole lot of money."


Granted, and I'm not saying that PC gamers all pirate software, but basically the console market is worth about 5 times what the PC market is worth. PC gamers have to find a way to keep the major titles from becomming console only. It's a financial thing - maybe we'll see the price of PC games rise to meet that of console versions - and sadly we'd just have to accept that and stump up the extra £10. What I'm trying to say is that people should pay full price for PC games, instead of waiting until they are a few pounds on Steam, because it'll become less and less financially viable to support lagging formats.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Aaagreen
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2007
Location: City 17
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 17:06 Edited at: 7th Oct 2010 18:35
Only really old games or unsuccessful ones cost less on Steam, Amazon.co.uk is the better option.

Unless of course it's the Steam Summer/Holiday sales, they should be the highlight of any PC gamer's year.

EDIT: Make that 6 companies, we forgot Team17, Codemasters, Free Radical Design (Crytek UK).
See, the UK isn't doing too badly.


I'd love to see things from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my bum.
Richar97
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Jan 2010
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 21:14
I've played with an N64 and an Xbox (the original) I use my laptop for games now (and other stuff) but in anyway what I like more about my laptop than my Xbox was that in Halo PC I could have online multiplayer with servers as long as I had internet and things such as Xbox Live did not exists while I was using my Xbox also Halo PC was modable and had the flamethrower and rocket warthog it's a real shame they did not put those in the Xbox version the N64 is one of the best consoles and you really only play N64 games on an N64 because emulators like Project 64 can't really fit the demand of replacing a controller with a keyboard and mouse although Duke Nukem 64 worked perfectly. (On Project 64)

Thanks,
Richard
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 7th Oct 2010 23:06
Quote: "It's no wonder that some companies just don't bother releasing PC versions. Although, I doubt that it's simply a case of porting, there has to be QA - professionals aren't using XNA, where you can compile to 360 and PC with practically the same code, and if a publisher did that, there would be outrage. Anyway, difference in PC sales compared to consoles is astronomical - I've said it here before, but any PC gamer who downloads torrents is basically burying the PC gaming industry, because publishers are LUCKY if the PC version sells 1/10th the copies that the console version does, very lucky indeed."


now then, if console games sell so good then i bet it would be a good idea to have console games on a lower sale price than PCgames, this sis the main reason i rarely buy console games. Because it is basicly 10£ difference, and i think PCgames are, as a student, way to expensive, and then, a Xbox game is 10£ more expensive, whats the chanse i can afford more than 1 game per month? (ill change it to SEK now, just google x SEK in USD or other currency.)
none, since i get 1000SEK per month, a game costs 599 for PC and 699 for Xbox, who in the world buys games for that price?

i only buy the ones i KNOW ill be enjoying, IE, Bioshock, wow, Fallout, SC2, aso. and thats for PC. i would buy a game like Halo for Xbox, but thats probably the only game ill buy for a year.

i mean the price for a game is, considering most games are aimed at the teenagers, outrageous.
I rather buy an EXCELLENT game like killing floor, which i can enjoy with my friends for ages, and it only costs 160sek. or Zeno clash, or minecraft...
acually any indie game. Because even though an indie game is AAA quality they dont sell it for 599.

I really think that this is part of the piracy, not a big part, but a part in it.

i would gladly buy twice the amount of games i buy now, if they halvered the price.


just think it is a bit weird that they aim the games at teenagers, and expect us to be able to pay for a 599 - 699 game, when out budges is less than 1000.

take movies for example, same problem here.
a movie in sweden is for about 200SEK, and thats just for 2hours of entertainment. ofc i can rent a movie for 50, but then i got to turn it back.

music? an album goes for 200, and thats for 10 songs, 10 FREAKING SONGS. By the end of the week ill be sick with those songs.

seems i trailed of... quiet a bit>___<'


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
Lemonade
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Dec 2008
Location:
Posted: 10th Oct 2010 10:04
Quote: "whats the chanse i can afford more than 1 game per month?"


*Only* one game a month?

I haven't bought any games for a couple years (no, I don't pirate them).

Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 10th Oct 2010 12:27
You use your invisiblity

Ocho Geek - Pretending to be a useful contribution to the forums since 2005
uzi idiot
Valued Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2009
Location: Who Knows?
Posted: 10th Oct 2010 17:05
I get my game for pc if i think my laptop can run it, if not i'll get it for PS3

good frame rates matter...
Travis Gatlin
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th May 2009
Location: Oxford, Alabama
Posted: 15th Oct 2010 00:12
Im A Console Gamer Mainly because with consoles you dont have to worry about compatibility or framerates (much) and you can mod (some) Games on the ps3 and xbox 360 UT3 has mods! plus with consoles you get top of the line hardware for cheap and with PCs you can get a top of the line PC and pay $1000 for the absolute cheapest PC you could ever get.

The Object of war is not to die for your country but make the other guy die for his
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 15th Oct 2010 08:13
Quote: "y $1000 for the absolute cheapest PC you could ever get."


for that price you will get an epic PC D:


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
DJ Almix
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Location: Freedom
Posted: 15th Oct 2010 08:26
PLEASE LOCK THIS!

[caps off]


Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 16th Oct 2010 03:12
No, we're not going to lock a thread when it's still a valid topic.


Senior Web Developer - Nokia

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-05-23 07:27:56
Your offset time is: 2025-05-23 07:27:56