E3′s Dirty Little Secret

Dcully · 08-06-2012 10:13am #1

To be fair anyone with an ounce of hardware knowledge and relative performance would have spotted this long ago, however its about time to see an article in black and white about it.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/06/07/pc-gaming-e3s-dirty-little-secret/

VinLieger · 08-06-2012 10:36am

Thats pretty well known, the only exception is Sony who wont allow anything demoed during the press conference unless its running on a a PS3 or Vita

hooradiation · 08-06-2012 10:46am

Everybody knows, nobody cares.

Corkfeen · 08-06-2012 10:48am

I remember that around the point the PS3 was announced, there was uproar over the fact that alot of the games that were shown, weren't being run off a ps3...

Can't find a link for it and my details may be slightly off. But it's always been happening, they're just being honest about it now.

Hawke · 08-06-2012 10:53am

Stuff like the Watchdog presentation looked way too good for a 360 to be cranking out.

Dcully · 08-06-2012 11:00am

hooradiation wrote: »

Everybody knows, nobody cares.

You sure nobody cares?

Retr0gamer · 08-06-2012 11:02am

It's not a secret, sure the games are built on development PC's, I'd be more surprised if they were running on actual hardware since it would mean they were very close to launch. It's not even a new thing either.

hooradiation · 08-06-2012 11:04am

Dcully wrote: »

You sure nobody cares?

Nobody worth listening to, anyway.

This just in - E3 is a trade show and it's purpose is to generate hype for upcoming games.
If that means running the PC version then so be it.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's not a secret, sure the games are built on development PC's, I'd be more surprised if they were running on actual hardware since it would mean they were very close to launch.

...wat?

Forest Demon · 08-06-2012 11:21am

Its not a secret of E3. Consoles are cheap optimized and standardised gaming PCs. Consoles make sense for competitive and casual gaming. Its good knowing it will run a game and that you are set for a number of years. I play console and pc games but to be honest the better graphics on pc don't make the games any better. Controls are a different story.

I prefer mouse and keyboard control myself but will forgo that for relaxing in a recliner with a 50" screen. Its an even playing field. With the next generation of console the lines will be even more blurred. I think the next consoles will probably be the last consoles. Cloud computing and gaming will come as soon as internet speeds get fast enough and then it will be a controller and TV and maybe a tablet device like they are all pushing at the mo.

johnny_ultimate · 08-06-2012 11:23am

Heh. I always find it amusing that the only people who seem 'outraged' by this sort of trivial nonsense and continue to futilely attempt to wage a one-sided 'war' are the self-proclaimed (that bit is key) 'PC gamers'. Pretty sure they're the only ones responsible for this increasingly tired argument that clogs up discussion forums internet wide, while most of us are more eager to just talk about games and the actual playing of them. Format be damned - we go where the games are.

Most of us are just happy to get on with playing our games, and don't give two ****s about what format is being utilised at industry or trade events. No-one talks about it because it's wholly unimportant.

Creamy Goodness · 08-06-2012 11:24am

hooradiation wrote: »

...wat?

He means that for the game to be actually running on an actual ps3/xbox they'd have needed to create a disc for it, there's a whole load of post processing done to a game to get it to fit on a disc and it's a long process that would be wasteful as they'd have to do it again before they ship.

using their dev pc's is easier and less wasteful.

Shiminay · 08-06-2012 11:26am

Yea, Retro was on the money - these are unfinished games and they're built on PC's anyway, so they run the unfinished code on the PC to give you an idea of what the finished product is aiming for.

hooradiation · 08-06-2012 11:36am

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

He means that for the game to be actually running on an actual ps3/xbox they'd have needed to create a disc for it

or, y'know, just load the demo build onto a dev kit and use that?

Shiminay · 08-06-2012 12:19pm

In most cases (afaik) they need to be quite a way along to be dev kit playable too though.

Retr0gamer · 08-06-2012 12:26pm

I always looks a lot more impressive if your game is running nicely on a PC rather than struggling unoptimised on a development console. Also gives a better impression of what the final game will be like. It makes sense to run the code on a PC rather than waste time creating a build for a one off show.

Nobody remember E3 2005 when all the Xbox demos were running on PC hardware? Nothing new here.

hooradiation · 08-06-2012 12:45pm

Shiminay wrote: »

In most cases (afaik) they need to be quite a way along to be dev kit playable too though.

If your game is far enough along to be shown at E3 and can't be compiled and run on your dev kit then you have majorly fucked up.

Not that running them on a PC at a trade show isn't the right thing to do (they're cheaper and disposable in comparison to dev kits, so if they get fucked in transit nobody cares) but this idea that if you have it running on a dev kit it must be almost ready is so amazingly wrong and stupid I'm surprised the actual post itself hasn't removed itself from the internet out of shame.

Corkfeen · 08-06-2012 12:46pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I always looks a lot more impressive if your game is running nicely on a PC rather than struggling unoptimised on a development console. Also gives a better impression of what the final game will be like. It makes sense to run the code on a PC rather than waste time creating a build for a one off show.

Nobody remember E3 2005 when all the Xbox demos were running on PC hardware? Nothing new here.

I must have been thinking of the Xbox demos.

Dcully · 08-06-2012 1:01pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Heh. I always find it amusing that the only people who seem 'outraged' by this sort of trivial nonsense and continue to futilely attempt to wage a one-sided 'war' are the self-proclaimed (that bit is key) 'PC gamers'. Pretty sure they're the only ones responsible for this increasingly tired argument that clogs up discussion forums internet wide, while most of us are more eager to just talk about games and the actual playing of them. Format be damned - we go where the games are.

Most of us are just happy to get on with playing our games, and don't give two ****s about what format is being utilised at industry or trade events. No-one talks about it because it's wholly unimportant.

Well sorry for clogging up your discussion forum i was simply sharing a gaming related article that i found rather interesting,i thought others might have found it interesting too.
Everyone knows there is nothing new to this but its not very often we see an article about it,whether you see it as important or not some people might find it a tad interesting.

johnny_ultimate · 08-06-2012 1:06pm

Dcully wrote: »

Well sorry for clogging up your discussion forum i was simply sharing a gaming related article that i found rather interesting,i thought others might have found it interesting too.
Everyone knows there is nothing new to this but its not very often we see an article about it,whether you see it as important or not some people might find it a tad interesting.

It's a topic worth raising in some observational ways, although I feel a loaded title such as 'dirty little secret' automatically skews the discussion towards an agenda. IMO.

Dcully · 08-06-2012 1:07pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It's a topic worth raising in some observational ways, although I feel a loaded title such as 'dirty little secret' automatically skews the discussion towards an agenda. IMO.

I simply used the title that RPS used, take a chill pill and dont be so paranoid that everyone has an agenda.

johnny_ultimate · 08-06-2012 1:09pm

Dcully wrote: »

I simply used the title that RPS used, take a chill pill and dont be so paranoid that everyone has an agenda.

Well then I will simply suggest that Rock Paper Shotgun has an agenda and should lay off the tabloid levels of hyperbole

Shiminay · 08-06-2012 2:24pm

hooradiation wrote: »

If your game is far enough along to be shown at E3 and can't be compiled and run on your dev kit then you have majorly fucked up.

Not that running them on a PC at a trade show isn't the right thing to do (they're cheaper and disposable in comparison to dev kits, so if they get fucked in transit nobody cares) but this idea that if you have it running on a dev kit it must be almost ready is so amazingly wrong and stupid I'm surprised the actual post itself hasn't removed itself from the internet out of shame.

I would fundamentally disagree with that. I've never worked on a game, but I have worked in software development and I can tell you there are a practically limitless number of reasons why you could have a game running very well on a PC that wouldn't even start on a Dev Console. The main one I would suggest is that you still need to wrap the game up in whatever platform specific stuff it needs to make it work with the hardware of a dev console when it's already working just fine in the IDE you have running on the development PC. That's not a small job. If you've got some actual experience in this industry that you can use to shed some light on it rather than a bad attitude and uncivil tone because you happen to disagree, I'm all ears of course, I'm just offering guess work based on my own experience from the software industry.

Reekwind · 08-06-2012 2:45pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Heh. I always find it amusing that the only people who seem 'outraged' by this sort of trivial nonsense and continue to futilely attempt to wage a one-sided 'war' are the self-proclaimed (that bit is key) 'PC gamers'

"War"? I'd pause before throwing around charges of hyperbole if I were you

This is not a rehash of the crowing that marked much of the previous decade (when apparently the PC 'died' twice a year) but a perfectly legitimate complaint that console specs are holding back game development. Few if any of the games previewed will look that good on their final platform; the console hardware is not good enough. Publishers are happy to preview their games on the PC but refuse to take advantage of the same capabilities when actually designing them. We're waiting for Microsoft and Sony to cease holding up the industry... and in the meantime have some images in no way representative of how the final game will actually look

hightower1 · 08-06-2012 2:52pm

johnny_ultimate · 08-06-2012 3:13pm

Reekwind wrote: »

"War"? I'd pause before throwing around charges of hyperbole if I were you

This is not a rehash of the crowing that marked much of the previous decade (when apparently the PC 'died' twice a year) but a perfectly legitimate complaint that console specs are holding back game development. Few if any of the games previewed will look that good on their final platform; the console hardware is not good enough. Publishers are happy to preview their games on the PC but refuse to take advantage of the same capabilities when actually designing them. We're waiting for Microsoft and Sony to cease holding up the industry... and in the meantime have some images in no way representative of how the final game will actually look

They're certainly closer to what the retail builds will look like than any non-optimised versions will

The reason 360 and PS3 control pads are being used are two fold. Firstly, they're easier to pick up and play at a demo booth / on-stage demo than a mouse and keyboard (easier, not necessarily better). And secondly, that is ultimately how a majority of consumers will play these multi-format titles. It is not, as RPS unfortunately insinuates, an insidious attempt to mask the superiority of PC technology.

It's no more 'dishonest' (using RPS's words here) than similar activities you'd see at any marketing / demo event. E3 isn't 'the brutal truth' show. Would be nice if it was, but it isn't. The aim is to show off new titles in the most attractive way possible in order to gain maximum media attention. Of course the PC version is going to look best, no-one is denying that, and it's always going to be that way, even when the fabled next-gen of consoles arrive. In general, every game developer that has been asked whether they're running on a PC have told the truth. Fairly positive no-one ever said Watch Dogs would be a current gen title? Open to correction if not, but like BG&E2, it seems like an indicator of things to come within the forseeable future. To me it's a non-issue that RPS has blown out of proportion with a loaded article full of understandable but misguided idealism.

Yes, the two big consoles continue to show their age, but they also continue to enjoy an overwhelming majority of the market share. Indeed, the best selling PC titles have time and time again shown themselves to be the casual, technically undemanding games.

Developers don't necessarily move with the tech. They move with the market. And currently the market isn't demanding a next-gen. A subset of a market is, but they're currently a minority. The likes of Crysis illustrate that the PC market alone cannot necessarily subsist big-budget, technically ambitious titles. It'll shift in a year or so - I'd be amazed if next year's show doesn't see the next-gen formally announced - but currently the mass market isn't all too worried with tech, and E3 is a market show. For every tech demo, there was three or four Nintendolands or dance sims. If anything, the resounding commercial failure of the Vita coupled with the success of the mobile market / slowly building 3DS sales illustrates that more isn't necessarily best.

Ideal it isn't, and I'd count myself amongst the ranks that are beginning to get a little antsy that the next-gen is at least eighteen months away. It is, however, from a market and practical standpoint completely understandable.

Retr0gamer · 08-06-2012 3:27pm

I for one always feel the next generation comes around too early. I'd be happy to spend my money next year on more games than a new platform.

VinLieger · 08-06-2012 3:33pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I for one always feel the next generation comes around too early. I'd be happy to spend my money next year on more games than a new platform.

Huh? this is by far the longest weve had to wait between generations, i dont understand how you can say this time its too early? Especially after developers have pretty much capped out the resources of both machines, and specifically on the xbox are being held back by the format. As said above games should be moving on by miles on PC but its all being held up by the need for multiplatform games. Everyone has seen how good skyrim can look with all the different mods and upgrades that the community have made for it on PC and the only reason the devs didnt do this themselves i because of the console constraints

johnny_ultimate · 08-06-2012 3:39pm

TBH, the whole 'tech' appeal of PC gaming is lost on me anyway. Been a long time since a game with revolutionary tech has been the best gaming has to offer - maybe Half Life 2?

To me, the real continued strength of PC gaming is its rich, unrestricted stream of AAA independent titles. Give me one game with the invention of Spacechem over the vapid aesthetics of Skyrim any day of the week (except Sunday, because my brain is usually frazzled on Sundays). That to me what defines the format these days over its console counterparts, and continues to trail blaze in that regard.

Retr0gamer · 08-06-2012 3:45pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Huh? this is by far the longest weve had to wait between generations, i dont understand how you can say this time its too early? Especially after developers have pretty much capped out the resources of both machines, and specifically on the xbox are being held back by the format. As said above games should be moving on by miles on PC but its all being held up by the need for multiplatform games. Everyone has seen how good skyrim can look with all the different mods and upgrades that the community have made for it on PC and the only reason the devs didnt do this themselves i because of the console constraints

It's not all about graphics. I'm perfectly happy playing the games that are coming out now and it's a fact that the best games come during a consoles twilight years. When we get new hardware it's going to be slim pickings and lots of mediocre titles until it picks up, I remember playing and buying a lot of crap on the PS3 and 360 when I first got them just to have something to play.

Another few years of last years quality games and I'll be happy, even if they don't have DX11 bells and whistles.

hightower1 · 08-06-2012 3:47pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I for one always feel the next generation comes around too early. I'd be happy to spend my money next year on more games than a new platform.

You see thats the issue, MS and Sony say there are years left in their consoles yet but look at the quality of those years left... filled with Wonderbook and smart glass??? We are seeing a downturn on games output in both terms of quality and quantity which will continure until these consoles are put to bed. The declining price points means MS and Sonys target demographic will continue to become more and more casual with each drop.

When a new gen of consoles come out the price point will be high as usual so they will target the people who will be willing to pay a premium first.... gamers, and how will they target them? ... with games. THATS why the new gen cannot come fast enough.

A few more years left in this gen.... yeah the ****ty twighlight years filled with motion controlls and apps. Consoles are starting to sound more and more like smartphones as the twilight years dwindle on. Bring on the new gen, better horsepower, more possibily of new IPs and a return to gaming actual games for gamers (for a while at least)

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's not all about graphics. I'm perfectly happy playing the games that are coming out now and it's a fact that the best games come during a consoles twilight years. When we get new hardware it's going to be slim pickings and lots of mediocre titles until it picks up, I remember playing and buying a lot of crap on the PS3 and 360 when I first got them just to have something to play.

Another few years of last years quality games and I'll be happy, even if they don't have DX11 bells and whistles.

Agreed its not ALL about graphics but a lot is, if its not about graphics then why bother buy a new gen at all? There are more old gen games with ****e graphics but good gameplay to keep the average gamer occupied for years to come. There is another reason...gameplay options increase as the generations increase.

No games to play on new gen consoles? Eh, have you looked at the 3DS line up? Its stacked and thats under a year old. You get a few months dip in games post launch titles but thats it and even so Id rather a swath of launch title games (with a few months quiet period) that are for actual gamers than years of motion ****e to come.

VinLieger · 08-06-2012 3:47pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's not all about graphics. I'm perfectly happy playing the games that are coming out now and it's a fact that the best games come during a consoles twilight years. When we get new hardware it's going to be slim pickings and lots of mediocre titles until it picks up, I remember playing and buying a lot of crap on the PS3 and 360 when I first got them just to have something to play.

Another few years of last years quality games and I'll be happy, even if they don't have DX11 bells and whistles.

Im not talking about graphics specifically, how many games on the 360 now come with more than 1 disc simply because of the ancient format that cant fit the size of whats expected?

Shiminay · 08-06-2012 3:49pm

I'd sooner see the "next gen" of consoles be held back a year in order to not die after 2 or 3 years due to whatever the next gen "RROD" or "YLOD" is... Let's not forget it was the race to be out first that lead to these sorts of issues in the first place - no time for proper stress testing and I'm not sure if either company cares about how much it actually cost them this time around enough to be bothered about making sure that doesn't happen again

(says the owner of 4 xboxes, only one of which works)

hightower1 · 08-06-2012 4:16pm

Shiminay wrote: »

I'd sooner see the "next gen" of consoles be held back a year in order to not die after 2 or 3 years due to whatever the next gen "RROD" or "YLOD" is... Let's not forget it was the race to be out first that lead to these sorts of issues in the first place - no time for proper stress testing and I'm not sure if either company cares about how much it actually cost them this time around enough to be bothered about making sure that doesn't happen again

(says the owner of 4 xboxes, only one of which works)

Id still put up with that before putting up with 2 more years of "skittles":mad:
At least when my xbox RROD they took it back and replace hassle free asap. Was offline for about a week in total. A small price to pay to boot the casuals out of gaming for a while.

Grumpypants · 08-06-2012 6:47pm

Pretty much every game played at E3 during a press event is running on a PC, a serious beast of a PC. If you ever go to any of these events the PC's arrive on their own trolley because they are so big and expensive. They use controllers because they are standing up and its very hard to use a mouse when you are not at a table.

hooradiation · 08-06-2012 6:49pm

Shiminay wrote: »

I would fundamentally disagree with that. I've never worked on a game,

Yet you're in a position to fundamentally disagree with things? Hmm....

Shiminay wrote: »

The main one I would suggest is that you still need to wrap the game up in whatever platform specific stuff it needs to make it work with the hardware of a dev console when it's already working just fine in the IDE you have running on the development PC.

Out of interest, what platform specific stuff do you imagine could be "wrapped up" ?

I mean aside from; the graphic engine being able to send information to the hardware (as such), peripheral support, profile support, licensing support , creating lobbies, invite and friend systems, host migration, leaderboards posting and retrieving, transmission of VoIP and camera data, trueskill (or it's equivalent), sound systems, achievements, personas and certification compliance as these all would have to be pretty well developed and embedded into the game in order for it to be even remotely functional on your target platform and leaving such stuff to be simply handled in the latter part of the project seems... silly.

But what do I know?
I'm just a simple man who happens to think that leaving the "platform specific" things that actually make up the bulk of a functional game as a task to be done at towards the end of a project to be, well, moronic.

I wish i could get across exactly how silly it would be to not develop this stuff in tandem, i wonder if there's a succinct way of doing that...

Shiminay wrote: »

That's not a small job.

Thank you Shiminay, that's perfect.

It's not a small job at all and frankly, I am surprised that anyone claiming to be in any way related to a software development field would think it to be a good idea.

Shiminay wrote: »

If you've got some actual experience in this industry that you can use to shed some light on it rather than a bad attitude and uncivil tone because you happen to disagree, I'm all ears of course, I'm just offering guess work based on my own experience from the software industry.

Well, feel free to have a good cry about that.
Or maybe I'll get another ban for being "mean" again. That'd be funny.

Grumpypants · 08-06-2012 7:16pm

hooradiation are you mixing up a Dev kit (which is a PC) and a preview console which is used to play code that isn't finalised. Usually used to showcase games and by reviewers to play games early.

Cuddlesworth · 09-06-2012 12:24am

hightower1 wrote: »

Id still put up with that before putting up with 2 more years of "skittles":mad:
At least when my xbox RROD they took it back and replace hassle free asap. Was offline for about a week in total. A small price to pay to boot the casuals out of gaming for a while.

A lot of people had a very hard fight to get you to that point.

gizmo · 09-06-2012 2:20am

Grumpypants wrote: »

hooradiation are you mixing up a Dev kit (which is a PC) and a preview console which is used to play code that isn't finalised. Usually used to showcase games and by reviewers to play games early.

A dev kit isn't a PC for starters...

Grumpypants · 09-06-2012 5:26am

gizmo wrote: »

A dev kit isn't a PC for starters...

sigh go on so gizmo tell me what it is that developers run their development software on ?

Helix · 09-06-2012 6:26am

a dev kit is a console which developers run code they've built on their development workstations (which tend to be pcs) on

here's an xbox 360 slim dev kit:

i think theyre the same as debug consoles used by us in the media to play things early, but ive never specifically had something labelled a dev kit and a debug side by side to compare. they look the same though

Helix · 09-06-2012 6:28am

Grumpypants wrote: »

Pretty much every game played at E3 during a press event is running on a PC, a serious beast of a PC. If you ever go to any of these events the PC's arrive on their own trolley because they are so big and expensive. They use controllers because they are standing up and its very hard to use a mouse when you are not at a table.

funnily enough, the pcs driving most of the demos where i was able to grab a look at the tech running them were dainty little buggers, and in some cases micro pcs

im not sure if that holds any bearing on how powerful they were though

gizmo · 09-06-2012 12:38pm

Grumpypants wrote: »

sigh go on so gizmo tell me what it is that developers run their development software on ?

Development software? You mean Visual Studio et al? That'd be their PC. That doesn't make it a dev kit though, that's what Helix describes below.

Helix wrote: »

i think theyre the same as debug consoles used by us in the media to play things early, but ive never specifically had something labelled a dev kit and a debug side by side to compare. they look the same though

Not actually sure what you guys are using these days Helix, there was a reviewer kit a while back but that was discontinued afaik.

As for the difference between debug and dev, depending on the revision they either look identical or have one of the ports blocked off on the back. In practice the former simply allows you to connect to PartnerNet and run unsigned code whereas the latter allows you access to all development features.

ShadowHearth · 09-06-2012 1:30pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Heh. I always find it amusing that the only people who seem 'outraged' by this sort of trivial nonsense and continue to futilely attempt to wage a one-sided 'war' are the self-proclaimed (that bit is key) 'PC gamers'. Pretty sure they're the only ones responsible for this increasingly tired argument that clogs up discussion forums internet wide, while most of us are more eager to just talk about games and the actual playing of them. Format be damned - we go where the games are.

Most of us are just happy to get on with playing our games, and don't give two ****s about what format is being utilised at industry or trade events. No-one talks about it because it's wholly unimportant.

You do realise its not about format war?

It's about taking the glory and power of pc and slaming a console badge on it so " sheep " can buy overpriced old hardware and then expect it to look as cool as pc.

I am pc gamer and I love my pc. Half year layer of dust on my Xbox and ps3 is a prove of it. It's just a shame those self proclaimed " we care about games, not hardware ", can't see further then their beloved console. Where's most of pc gamers seen both sides of the story and I can't see many of them going back to console.

I don't mind console players playing on their consoles, whatever tickles their fancy, but I really don't like pure lie marketing tactics. It can be applied everywhere. You can show fiat punto 1.2 going 0-60 mph in 2.2 seconds and show it doing 200mph and say how cool it is, but them hide that it wasn't a fiat punto, but a buggattiveyron under the bonnet.

hooradiation · 09-06-2012 2:03pm

Grumpypants wrote: »

hooradiation are you mixing up a Dev kit (which is a PC) and a preview console which is used to play code that isn't finalised. Usually used to showcase games and by reviewers to play games early.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvdf5n-zI14

And as gizmo said, a dev kit is not a PC and because we've covered the 360 stuff, here's what sony have

This is an older model PS3 dev kit (the picture does not do justice to the size of the bloody thing)
196217d1282241133-new-ps-jailbreak-discussion-thread-ps3-devkit.jpg

196217d1282241133-new-ps-jailbreak-discussion-thread-ps3-devkit.jpg

and the newer debug kit

they are more or less the same, but the bigger one has some funky additions like two separate network devices so you can simulate having the device disconnected from the PSN but yet still be able to connect to it for debug.

Because those are the kind of things you need to be able to handle happening.

Oh and as an aside this is comedy gold

It's about taking the glory and power of pc and slaming a console badge on it so " sheep " can buy overpriced old hardware and then expect it to look as cool as pc.

glory and power?
It's a piece of consumer electronics, for fucks sake.
Grow up.

gizmo · 09-06-2012 2:04pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I am pc gamer and I love my pc. Half year layer of dust on my Xbox and ps3 is a prove of it. It's just a shame those self proclaimed " we care about games, not hardware ", can't see further then their beloved console. Where's most of pc gamers seen both sides of the story and I can't see many of them going back to console.

Generally speaking the people who proclaim "we care about games, not hardware" are those who own multiple consoles and/or a PC whereas the "pc gamers" are the ones going "lol consoles" most of the time. Seeing "both sides of the story" would imply they realise that despite the "glory and power" of their PCs it's utterly useless when games are released only on consoles.

For instance, you own a PS3 with six months of dust on it. This implies you haven't played Journey. This alone makes total **** of most of your argument above.

ShadowHearth · 09-06-2012 2:09pm

gizmo wrote: »

Generally speaking the people who proclaim "we care about games, not hardware" are those who own multiple consoles and/or a PC whereas the "pc gamers" are the ones going "lol consoles" most of the time. Seeing "both sides of the story" would imply they realise that despite the "glory and power" of their PCs it's utterly useless when games are released only on consoles.

For instance, you own a PS3 with six months of dust on it. This implies you haven't played Journey. This alone makes total **** of most of your argument above.

just because my taste does not like 1 game it makes my argument invalid? that is just most stupiest thing i ever heard on boards.ie and i heard a lot.

The reason i still have those consoles, is to play exclusives when they come out. i like forza, so i got forza 2,3,4. i liked the dark souls, so i got it. and yes, i see both sides of the story and on any multy platfrom game i just go PC, not just because i am PC fanboy, but because i prefer that platform as multy platfrom games will allways be more superior to console versions. if i pay fixed price i might as well get the best version of it. ( pc version is sort of cheaper too, ups )

johnny_ultimate · 09-06-2012 2:13pm

I like it when people further prove a point when intending the complete opposite.

ShadowHearth · 09-06-2012 2:16pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I like it when people further prove a point when intending the complete opposite.

i hate people in general... :rolleyes:

gizmo · 09-06-2012 2:25pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

just because my taste does not like 1 game it makes my argument invalid? that is just most stupiest thing i ever heard on boards.ie and i heard a lot.

How do you know you don't like it if you haven't even played it? You also own a 360 too, no Fez or Trials Evolution?

The reason I brought it (and the 360 examples above) up is that you somewhat sarcasticly referred to those who "care about games, not hardware" yet by owning the above consoles and completely ignoring both them (and the critically lauded titles on them) in order to stick with your platform of choice, you've demonstrated the complete opposite standpoint.

On top of that Journey is a fantastic example of a game which features some of the most beautiful visuals in any game ever released. Yet, despite the "glory and power" of the PC, such a game doesn't exist on the platform. This obviously isn't a power issue, it's simply an example of how artistic direction is just as important as the number of polys your GPU can push. Same can be said for the likes of Fez, Limbo, Braid, Okami etc...

So yes between those two points, it completely disproves your argument.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to give Max Payne 3 another playthrough on my shiny new 670. :pac:

ShadowHearth · 09-06-2012 2:45pm

gizmo wrote: »

How do you know you don't like it if you haven't even played it? You also own a 360 too, no Fez or Trials Evolution?

The reason I brought it (and the 360 examples above) up is that you somewhat sarcasticly referred to those who "we care about games, not hardware" yet by owning the above consoles and completely ignoring both them (and the critically lauded titles on them) in order to stick with your platform of choice, you've demonstrated the complete opposite standpoint.

On top of that Journey is a fantastic example of a game which features some of the most beautiful visuals in any game ever released. So, despite the "glory and power" of the PC, such a game doesn't exist on the platform. This obviously isn't a power issue, it's because artistic direction is just as important as the number of polys your GPU can push. Same can be said for the likes of Fez, Limbo, Braid, Okami etc...

So between those two points, it completely disproves your argument.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to give Max Payne 3 another playthrough on my shiny new 670. :pac:

i am not playing those games, not just because they are not on PC, but because i dont like them. Its same thing if someone would tell me to play fifa games, i just DONT LIKE that game. Its the matter of taste, not platform.

Same way I LOVE DIABLO 3 and i got 100h++ in to it and game is not even out a month, but i wont be pushing that game on anyone who does not enjoy hack and slash with hoarder syndrome mixed in.
I love my ps vita and i bough Mortal kombat on it, even if i already own it on xbox360! Its a console too, but i buy game, because i love it.

My argument was: Dont use PC to show of graphics, and put on console badge on it, then bash how pc is **** and how PC gamers are fanboys, because they dont like to be LIED to.

deathrider · 09-06-2012 4:07pm

So, this whole "consoles are holding gaming back" situation- What would happen if they weren't? If the new gen was chucked onto selves today in complete working order, and no fear of it fecking up, so that they were no longer holding gaming back... What would be the big difference then? What would we get? Anything other than simply better graphics?

E3′s Dirty Little Secret

Comments