The man is right. The 'hardcoe' PC gaming consumer is outnumbered by the console gaming consumer. In the business world 'leading' is a simple word for 'larger consumer base' more often then not. He makes a very good point about development resources verse hardware. Look at some of the very first Playstation games (PSOne) released on launch and then look at the games that came out near the end of its run. Huge difference. The same went for the XBox and PS2. Any system, actually, has evidence that the first games on it look very similar to the last games on the system behind it. That is because developers get better at utilizing what is in a console, or are granted more and more access to it, or are just willing to push their comfort zone more and more. Because console hardware is static, a developer can put much more effort into using every square inch of that console (not to say they all do by any means) and make games that look unbelievable and, more importantly, work identical for every single consumer using that hardware. On a PC, while the high end market hardware is unbelievably leaps and bounds ahead of any console, they'd be targeting a very small group of people that even bother throwing that stuff in their machines if they develop completely around that. Not to mention all the other bits and bobs tossed in that are different from one person's PC to the next. It isn't all about the graphics card and processor. All of that interfaces with each other and any one thing that makes the system pissy will ruin the game, no matter how great of a development or on what hardware.

It is just unrealistic for a company to design a product for an audience that is definitely the minority (top of the line PC users).

As far as id is concerned and how all their products prior to RAGE were PC exclusive, it is quite likely they took a step back and looked at the way things were developing from a marketing and financial aspect and decided that they would reach more people targeting most of the whole spectrum, rather then a fraction of the gaming base. I know people will despise this remark and tear it to pieces any way they can, but that is just the way things have turned out. PC gamers are the minority compared to console gamers.

Observe:

"At E3, Carmack told us why [RAGE] will run better on PC, and explained why the PC is the future of gaming, saying that they’re now “an order of magnitude” beyond consoles." http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/19/carmack-attacks-snooty-attitude-towards-mainstream-shooters/

And then:

"I've noticed that among those people who aren't enjoying the PC experience, I wrote to the developers, the underlying issue seems to be one driven by expectations. People seemed to have been hoping that this would be a game that proved the value of owning a PC over a console. But instead they got a game that they feel cut some corners to level the experience between console and PC. Do you think that is a fair assessment? Does id still see the PC as the leading platform to make games for? ... "We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games," Carmack added. "That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version. A high end PC is nearly 10 times as powerful as a console, and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it. Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on. A game built with a tenth the resources on a platform 10 times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases." http://kotaku.com/5847761/why-was-the-pc-launch-of-rage-such-a-cluster

Maybe Carmack's head was hit by shrapnel from the "cluster !@#$"?

I think it's his stance that PCs should be THE platform but it isn't mainly because it is inefficient because of all the Driver overhead. He knows exactly what he is saying--just have to read between the lines.

So of course the company has to tailor for the console market, it would be dumb not to. id software employes 200+ high salary workers, they need a hit and they need to insure the best chances of recouping their money. Believe it or not small companies like id care about what's at stake here, it's not just their reputation and wanting to make a great game but it's caring for the well being of their employees and their families...

RAGE was first shown off the year consoles came out if I remember correctly, and id said that they were focusing on something like 75% consoles 15% PC, but after so many years in development they wished they had focused equally on both the platforms as consoles weren't such a big deal. Hell let them cater to consoles for this one, they need some money in the bank after so many years, and even RAGE didn't run as bad as Red Orchestra 2 and STALKER, hell even Half-Life 2 cut off many people that bought the game because steam wasn't working properly.

Salient points, though I still think there is a P ^ -P statement in there. You're right, though, the company clearly wanted the game to do well. I'm sure they're pretty cheesed off that there are so many issues with the PC version.

Carmack seems pretty cheesed off, as do the rest of the id team that the launch did not do well. But other PC exclusive games have had worse launches, Half-Life 2 was a horrible launch but do people accuse Valve of abandoning the genre they helped popularize? You bet your ass they don't, but only because Half-Life 2 was a PC exclusive at the time. If Valve had coincidentally had a console version of Half-Life 2 at the same time, people would be acting exactly the same.

Keep up the good work id! I'm very much enjoying myself! :thumbsup:

What was bad about hl2's release? The delay?

Everyone is up in arms about the lackluster textures altho' the game does look nice enough. The real issue tho' is that the game itself just isn't very good. It's a bit boring and the shooting is miles behind id's previous games. A cardinal sin for a shooter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg7__CLI-7c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeEOX9_MV1s

Carmack is nothing without a Romero to balance him out.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/08/carmack-pissed-about-rage-issues-but-admits-id-doesnt-see-pc-as-leading-game-platform/

He basically says "we don't develop for PC anymore".

Kind of expected something else. :flamethrower: :flamethrower: :flamethrower:

What was wrong about HL2's release? When it came out it ran flawlessly on my pretty outdated computer... it was a perfect game on release day. People didn't accuse valve of abandoning anything because they didn't abandon anything, and they still haven't.

WOW, I think one of the things i'm most happy about is the Gameplay...The introduction of an off-hand makes you feel godly! You can run into a room, throw a grenade, throw wingstick, circle strafe to another target and give him some buckshots to the dome! Ultimate, room clearing FPS at it's best. I also love the mini sniper elements with the pistol--which I think is the best Pistol done in any game even better than the 007 Golden Eye. Kudos to id!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD2pb9vV1GU

Did you even read and understand the article?

He basically says, "If we want to stay in this business and be a competitor we can't think PC first anymore."

I think that sums it up a bit better.


Edit - Oh and, "Damn you graphics drivers!!111one1!!one!!!exclamation point!"

Carmack......http://youtu.be/EVfgQjFzF4Q

I don't care if consoles make more money. I only care about the games being good. If that is sacrificed in any way, then consoles are in the way and they must be eliminated. I'd rather pay 10 dollars and play Minecraft for ever than pay 60 dollars and spend several frustrating days getting it to work only to finish it in 10 hours. End of story. If Romero were here he'd tell Bethesda to svck it down, and then remember that DESIGN IS LAW, before immediately pulling out and teaming up instead with Valve or something.

Well, sure as long as most of the entertainment biz plays stock exchange, consoles will be the leading platform and we'll be swamped with low quality quickshots
until all hardware platforms suffer equally from customer-loss. It isn't the devs or the publisher who decides what a game looks like, it is the investor and the stockholder
with their never-sated hunger for quick cash every quarter of a year. Cloud games via OnLive et cie. will not change that.

So imho it makes more sense to stop pre-ordering games and wait for gamer reviews / watch the tech support boards instead.
All a matter of demand and deliver: just buy the titles wich match your expactions and ignore the rest.

I can't find any great new in this.
This games lacks too much things. Play it and tell me if this seems a 2011 game.
Texture is awful, illumination and shadows are the worst I seen in years, shaders are awful, particles are sufficient, where is DOF?,
is it normal that human heads are angular in a world that is switching to tessellation?, where is ambient occlusion?, where is phisics? where is ecc. ecc. ecc.?

This is not an ID software game, this is an "uncomplete work" just released to make some money.