I'm pretty annoyed that consoles are making PC gamers look dumb to be honest but there are a lot more players on consoles so if it keeps going that way there'll be a day where they don't release games on PC anymore.

A common misconception. "http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2010/04/19/hear-that-knocking-sound-its-pc-gaming/"

It will look better than the console version either way. And will have more content than the console versions.

If they don't spend time creating two different games then more can be made. In the end, that is basically what would be done if PCs were done into a separate thing than the consoles, as far as I have understood it.

I'm not so sure if the average console shooter consumer will really care if the textures appear a bit muddier than in the marketing footage. The industry has been rife with "bullshots" for many, many years anyway and there's never been any real outrage over it.

Just like the PC players get super defensive of their platform when talking about Beth's approach. :shrug:


It's flamey all around.... either way you do it, someone's going to be annoyed. (Which means the rational thing to do is base your decision on your market percentages - if your games sell more to PC, cater more towards that side; if your games sell more to console, cater more towards that. Since, no matter what you do, some forum crazyfolk are going to do the torches&pitchforks routine.)

No it wont

there is a difference between 5 year old hardware and modern day dx11 high end pc's. Why should PC games be held back to accommodate archaic hardware, it's like expecting a 5 year old phone to be as good as one that just came out.

then going "WAAAHHH why does my obviously inferior product not have the same features as this obviously much more expensive and newer product."
Another example
buy a 99 honda civic
friend buys a ferrari enzo
Rage over fact you dont have all the features of that ferrari enzo

Okay, so in your incredibly Liberal view of flaws in life (I'm incredibly Liberal too, just not insanely so), it's not okay to get -any- advantage over anything whatsoever, and you might as well just go for the maximum of the weakest (serious) link.

What?

So if an extremely ugly person wanted to be a model, you wouldn't tell them maybe they weren't cut out for it? You'd fire all the attractive models so it can be fair?

That's idiocy. If I payed more for a system, or my system can handle more, I expect to see it present within the game. Consoles take advantage of their minor advantages in most released games, why not crazy advantages for PCs? How can that alienate someone? They're running 5-6 year old hardware.

So did you forget that a lot of PC gamers just illegally download games and hardly pay anything?
Console gamers always go and buy the disc and hardly ever do anything illegal. They are more casual and wouldn't even think about it while PC gamers are often people with more knowledge who always look for ways to avoid paying.

There's just as much piracy on consoles, FYI.

I can make blanket statements, too.

Console gamers are often casual kids who play nothing except for casual and Modern Warefare titles.

The fact that piracy exists is irrelevant. All of the online game statistics can't be pirated - pirated games, with the exception of old titles - lack the ability of online play.

Console players: in this thread, don't worry, what Dice are doing won't make your games look any worse, this only concerns PC gamers. You guys still get to play a game that looks as good as it possibly can on your system.

Isn't it only going to look better for the PC, if you have a top notch computer?

My main concern about skyrim being made primarily for the consoles, is that it will be ported/dumbed down to the pc. Like having identical graphics on all 3 versions. I'm not a "graphics is everything" person but why don't they make it primarily for the pc and then scale it UP to the consoles, instead of making it mainly for consoles and then scaling it down for the pc version, not taking advantage of the superior hardware that the pc has to offer. I also read this the other day:

IGN: Will the PC version support DirectX 11?

Todd Howard: Yes, but I guess the real question here is do we take advantage of DX11's big new features and the answer is 'not specifically'. Our graphics work centers around doing things that will look the same regardless of platform, and sometimes that implementation will be different on the 360, PS3, and PC.

It made me wonder why on earth they are making skyrim for dx11 when they are not gonna take advantage of things like tesselation and other nice features that it brings. Sounds like a sales gimmick to me. "Here.. take dx11 with no dx11 features, enjoy" come on..
Witcher 2 is made for dx9 only and it looks freaking amazing, so if their not gonna use dx11 features then they should have focused on dx9 instead and make that dx version the best that it can be.

If you mean the misconception that you need a $4000 rig to play PC games, then no.

Well your blanket statement is actually correct!
MW3 is based on scripted action and videos of things exploding which gets the attention of casual people who don't know what scripted means. They see an explosion and think "I MUST HAVE THIS GAME". This is why PC gamers care more about BF3 than about MW3. Because they want to see what tha game is capable of and not a random explosion and yelling that you won't even see in the game.

I don't mean that expensive, but not any old computer will do.

Console war more like it.

It would be great if both companies could outreach to both potential. But if they went ot right to get all the PC potential it would make the console version just make it looked half done. But if we keep everything at console level PC users will not even bother with it for the most part.

Just give the PC users mods and they get much much more than the console user. Of course only if theirs a good modding community.

This is from the eyes of a console only player. I don't like that we console users only get a gist of what the PC users can do but that just plain up tech problems. But PC users feel left out if the company decide to half-ass it and not include somekind of editor or top of the line graphics or even a big problem that really should be addressed is a PC interface so they don't have to scroll like crazy.

Any old gaming computer will achieve the visuals that consoles had, considering it's not older than the consoles themselves and wasn't bad.

or maybe they decided to not deliberatly nerf the PC version like alot of other developers do. if you put the same effort into all the version the consoles will NEVER look anywhere as good as the PC version...........EVER. im glad that cdprojkt and DICE have decided to not screw over PC gamers anymore. as far as upsetting console gamers..........they need to get over themselves and wake up and realize that their systems are old and obsolete. if they complain enough maybe microsoft and sony will get cracking on their next consoles even quicker. God knows that they need to release some new hardware now.

What amuses me the most is how people will get into a massive pissing contest based on how a game looks.

Yeah, visuals are important. Stack them up against gameplay, story and fundamental mechanics though and graphics mean exactly nothing. Is Minecraft such a huge success because of it's graphics? Maybe in part due to the retro nature of it, but the real draw is that the basic mechanics are simple to learn while there is an icnredibly deep and rich game there for players to master.

I couldn't care less if the PC version of a game looks better, if it plays better on my PS3 or my 360 I'll use one of those systems. Skyrim will most likely run like ass on my current PC (Laptop, quite powerfull but still mainly used for academic work) but you can bet I'll be playing it on PC. Why? Modding, that's it. If it wasn't for modding I would choose the PS3 or 360 version in a heartbeat, no matter how much better the PC version could have looked.

If people have to bicker about something, bicker about something important.

I like how often people prove that the 'PC gamers are elitists' stereotype is true.

I agree that those of us using PC shouldn't be ignored in an attempt to make everything the same for everyone. I'm not asking for ULTRA SUPER GRAPHICS in comparison or anything, I just want them to do things like make the interface look proper on the PC. I mean, look at the default UI for Oblivion, Fallout 3, and NV. Compare to DarnifiedUI. Which looks like it's meant for a PC, and which belongs on the console versions?

In addition, PCs do have more resources at hand which could be utilized. Why use DX11 for Skyrim if you're not going to bother taking advantage of anything new?

Not a good idea for a developer to say something like that publicly. For whatever reason people tend to get really sensitive about their gaming platforms...as though it's somehow tied directly to their ego. While the DICE developer in the article is just stating the obvious (that the average gaming PC has a lot more processing power than current-gen consoles), people will go ahead and interpret that as, "OMG they're favoring platform X over platform Y now I'm not buyin' their gaem!!!!" That same person wouldn't have a problem saying that their PS3 had more processing power (and thus the potential for better visuals and faster framerates) than a Wii. Hypocritical, no? When the PS4 comes out people are going to talk about how much faster it is than the PS3. It's no different. The PC is a dynamic platform that's evolved a lot since the consoles were released. In a http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6318725/e3-2011-john-carmack-talks-wii-u-playstation-vita-and-next-gen-rage he stated that from a developer's perspective the PC is around 10 times as powerful as current-gen console hardware. The fact that it's so dynamic also comes with a higher learning curve and potential for hassles.

My question is why people take something like that so personally? If you want the additional potential of a bit of hassle in return for more powerful hardware, then game on a PC. If you don't, then game on a console. What's the point in buying a Lexus instead of a Ferrari and then complaining when someone says the Ferrari is faster? You decided on the Lexus...if you wanted the Ferrari then you should have bought the Ferrari, otherwise enjoy the car that you decided you liked in the first place and don't let the fact that it's not the fastest car on the planet bother you.


Just want to point out here that there is a huge difference between being a "PC elitist" and pointing out the obvious fact that there are big differences in the capabilities of the hardware.

I'd rather have Bethesda learn from some game company that builds the game from the ground-up to make full use of each platform's strength and pay more attention to the PS3 version instead of giving us a port. The only difference I see with DICE is that they're designing their game with PCs in mind and simply porting it to the two consoles... resulting in console versions weaker than they could be. I wonder... why is that any better than porting from the 360 to the other two?

I think this sums it up nicely
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109304-DICE-Battlefield-3-Looks-Better-on-Consoles-Because-Were-Making-it-for-PC