Jump to content

I contend that GRAW PC will be a jolly good game.


Recommended Posts

I think it's clear now that GRAW PC is gonna be pretty special.

it seems from all the media and interviews that it's shaping up to be about as close to the game we wanted as is possible, and maybe lot's of extra features that we never even dreamed of.

As well as being delighted about this i hope that it will also encourage the games industry to be remined that PC style games can still be worthwhile developing.

If GRAW PC makes big money then many of the publishers who have been turning away from PC development as primary platform well get back into the swing of things.

I forsee GRAW PC as being a major factor this year in championing the PC as a games market worth investing in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I forsee GRAW PC as being a major factor this year in championing the PC as a games market worth investing in.

There hasn't been one year since the first PC videogame that they were't a worthwhile market. Seems wasteful to try and convince Ubi of what they clearly already know.

As for 'Pc style', it's a myth. The only thing truly PC exclusive would be cumbersome flight sims with 203202 page manuals. Which, while awesome, actually do lack a market nowadays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for 'Pc style', it's a myth. The only thing truly PC exclusive would be cumbersome flight sims with 203202 page manuals. Which, while awesome, actually do lack a market nowadays.

And driving sims....I love 'em rischio.gif.

And they have good sales I think..... :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for 'Pc style', it's a myth. The only thing truly PC exclusive would be cumbersome flight sims with 203202 page manuals. Which, while awesome, actually do lack a market nowadays.

And driving sims....I love 'em rischio.gif.

And they have good sales I think..... :yes:

Yeah, but driving sims do play pretty well on consoles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your first point were true then what explains the mass exodus to console land with many games being a 'minimum expense, half hearted port to the PC platforms. There are different degrees of 'viable'.

And your second point. With due respect, you are dreaming if you think there is no diferent between the PC and consoles as far as the end result goes. I've heard people state that it's a myth before. Why would loads of people rather spend three times to cost to ensure they get to play PC games if that's the case?

PC games have a very very distinct sensibility to them that is lacking in console games. I don't wanna go deep into the console/PC debate. That's your opinion, fine. Most disagree i would guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic can be talked into circles and go nowhere as it always does. As soon as topics like this even begin to sound like "bashing", then it just hits a brick wall. Topics like this can only be discussed from a balanced point of view. We all have similar gaming needs, but we still want different things from our games. This is simply what dictates what platform (or platforms) we buy.

The one thing that UBI has done right with GR:AW was to not attempt to make GR:AW the same on PC and console platforms. Some game genres translate well to both platforms, not all do.

Sure the lower consoles received the worst versions of GR:AW. However that was only because they couldn't deliver what the 360 could. In PC terms, can a low end eMachine deliver what a high end Alienware system can? If all the consoles were equal then they would have the same 360 GR:AW. There is only one reason why any developer or publisher would even want to make the same exact game for all console platforms. They all belong to a very similar if not exactly the same audience.

Now making the PC version of a game like GR:AW different from all console versions makes a lot of sense and should always be that way. The PC gaming market may be a minority in comparison to the console gaming market. However, it is still a valuable market with lots of money to be made. People who play PC games in general tend to want something more or different from their games compared to the console version of the same game (not always, depends on genre). If developers started making "console" style games or making "console" ports to PC for everything. The PC gaming market would dry up and be pointless. For example, if I wanted to play SOCOM 3 or GR2 (in their current forms) on a PC, why should I? I'd rather buy a console and spend $300 instead of $3000 for my gaming platform then. There would be no point in even making PC games if the games offered nothing different from the consoles'. At those price differences, if I wanted console style games, I'd by a high end console then. I think it goes the other way around as well. If developers made straight PC ports to consoles, then they would end up loosing a lot of that market as well. Clearly, not as many console players want FPWVs in their tactical shooters as do PC players. That is just one small game play detail. A small detail that caused all sorts of forum bashing for no reason.

The PC and console audience are different markets with at times, a cross over in gaming needs (again depending on the genre). Game publishers and developers would be wise to always pay very close attention to the differences and make the best games for each. For UBI, Lockdown was a good example of what could happen (and did happen) if you don’t understand or refuse to understand the different audiences.

I think GR:AW will do very well on the PC, it just simply looks good based on everything that we have all seen and read (plus the PC GR audience is starving for a new GR). I knew the 360 version would do well on the 360s, it was all so obvious from everything that I (we all) saw and read about it during the build up. What this means is that UBI just may accomplish what they intended to do in the first place. Make big profits and solidify their name and reputation in both platform markets. Don’t forget, big and small companies will always need to please the consumer market, to continue to fight for market share and market dominance.

Now I've done my circle dance. <_<

silent_op

Edited by silent_op
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but driving sims do play pretty well on consoles.

Serious sims are not on consoles, I'm talking about GPL, Papyrus Nascar, GTR, GT Legends, rFactor, LFS, and the imminent (tomorrow ........:drool: ) king: netKar Pro. These titles are PC only.

Gran Turismo and Toca are NOT simulators, only games.

As far as i know only exeption is Richard Burns Rally, a total fiasco on consoles.....

End of OT ;)

Edited by =3dS=rOOk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious sims are not on consoles, I'm talking about GPL, Papyrus Nascar, GTR, GT Legends, rFactor, LFS, and the imminent (tomorrow ........:drool: ) king: netKar Pro. These titles are PC only.

They would run fine on a console, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they would but that's the point. they don't get made.

To be fair a few very PC like games do tend to get 'floated' on consoles. HL2 bombed, OpFlash Elite probably did only ok.

It's nothing to do with hardware as far as i'm concerned.

Anyway this thread wasn't started as console basher. It ws meant to discuss the status of pc games and the impact that GRAW PC might have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would run fine on a console, though.

Don't get it. We are not talking about hardware capabilities, but market appeal, right? :huh:

Btw, some driving sims needs tons of processing power, actual PC processors are at their limit and programmers have to simplify physics, many of them are waiting for PPU's for getting a step futher, don't think that a good sim with many cars (Richard Burns Rally simulate one car at a time) could run on a console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway this thread wasn't started as console basher. It ws meant to discuss the status of pc games and the impact that GRAW PC might have.

I think the implication of the discussion, though, is that PC games have a shaky status to begin with that GRAW might have an impact on. I think people's fears for the well-being of PC games is a bit irrational. The "consoles are killing PC games" argument/fear comes up all the time. I've seen it here a couple of times over the last few months. It's rubbish. Here's why PC games are in no danger: console technology is static for 3-5 years at a time while new PC technologies/improvements come out every couple of months. That's it.

Basically, because hardware innovation happens steadily in the PC market and software/gaming innovation is primarily a response to the capabilities of new hardware, software innovation also takes place primarily in the PC market. The console market needs the PC market. The industry needs the PC market. Bill Gates needs the PC market. Programmers need the PC market. Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, Creative Labs, Asus, Abit, Gigabyte, DFI, Biostar, MSI, etc., etc., need the PC market. Millionaires everywhere need the PC market. The sky is not falling. PC games are alive and well. :thumbsup:

--Logos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, some driving sims needs tons of processing power, actual PC processors are at their limit and programmers have to simplify physics, many of them are waiting for PPU's for getting a step futher, don't think that a good sim with many cars (Richard Burns Rally simulate one car at a time) could run on a console.

The x360 has 10ghz of pure power, plus a lot more than that would imply in actual effectiveness...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure the console industry needs the pc industry. Just like the loggin industry needs forests to exist. That doesn't mean that ambition and greed won't blind them to the long term results of their actions.

The PC industry had Halo stolen away as early as the the early days of the Xbox along with Abes oddysey or whatever it was called. Not only that but many many games that started on the pc had late versions done for consoles with a limp and tepid version 'knocked out' for the pc. So obviously the PC games scene is being impacted negativly from those examples if not actually in danger.

Microsoft get nothing for every pc game sold but they get ten dollars for each 360 or xbox game sold. You can't tell me that Microsoft wouldn't love to see the pc games scene dissapear even if it mean they only got a third of that pie and the rest went to Sony and Nintendo. They would love that . . why do you think they are making the 360 so 'PC like'. Geez stood up it even kind of resembles a slim pc case.

Ironically their biggest impediment is their refusal to cater to certain pc sensibilities. I would actually love to be a console player if they just would include a mouse and also design games with pc sensibilities. I get to sit on the couch in front of a massive hd tv. Don't have to worry about upgrades for at least four years. Whats not to like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Ironically their biggest impediment is their refusal to cater to certain pc sensibilities. I would actually love to be a console player if they just would include a mouse and also design games with pc sensibilities. I get to sit on the couch in front of a massive hd tv. Don't have to worry about upgrades for at least four years. Whats not to like.

And there you have it...in a nutshell, the BIGGEST reason why PC games and console games differ so dramatically is the control model.

With a console game, I have a grand total of 14 buttons that I can use in various combinations to impliment features. On a PC, I have many times that.

For me, it comes down to - quite simply - the mouse. I can't stand targetting with a joystick...it's too herky-jerky. My mouse is dead on, all the time. So, to level that field a bit, the console games assist your targetting...which is sometimes counter-productive. Ever run into a situation where the guy in back was the more dangerous target, but your reticule was locked into the guy in front? Not on the PC you haven't.

I don't like console shooters...not in the least. Sports sims are the opposite, they seem to play much better on consoles. Flight sims and Mechwarrior type games are again PC oriented. Everything else appears to be a wash.

What is unfortunate is that Developers are taking console ideology and transposing it to the PC games. They spit out wave after wave of unoriginal and unprovoking titles, designed only to lure players in for a week or two (to the tune of $50.00 each) before they tire and move on to the next piece of eye-candy laden simplicity disguised as a game. I saw this happen first hand in Joint Operations when NovaLogic tried like sin to cater to the transitory whims of the 12 year olds and turned a potentially great FPS into aracade candy. Ever heard the phrase, "appeal to a broader market"? That's a games death knell.

Truthfully, I hesitate to rush out and buy GRAW. After being let down so many times with games that were "supposed" to be the next great thing, I don't feel like risking yet another $50-60 on yet another "made for kiddies" twitch shooter with "gee whiz" graphics and weapons that blow up entire city blocks. I'm going to wait until a demo is released...or overwhelming public acclaim from trusted sources comes gushing forth.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed...but I'm not holding my breath.

Caine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree................but IMHO, I believe its just a style preference.

It seems as if the "console" gamers want to 'plug-n-play' a lot. Not a lot of stuff to do , just play the game.

It seems the "PC Crowd" likes a more deliberate, "tactical(?)" style, take more time, set up your team, etc.

I believe this may be why games, IMHO, donot cross-over well in the ................as SUP put it, the GAMES MARKET. Each group wants different things.

I think UBI (and GRIN) have a Game of The Year on PC...............and UBI has one on the console. GRAW will take all the awards.

.................................... :thumbsup: ...........................kingkat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The PC market is and always has been viable. It's also still, and always has been viable, to produce 'proper pc titles' like flight sims, driving sims, and of course good tactical sims like ghost recon. The problem is that publishers can make more money for less effort by churning out crap generic titles and just marketing them, instead of like in the old days where if a game was actually good then it got hyped by it's fan base.

At least there was a perception that that was true anyway. Hopefully GRAW will show that a unique, well made game can dominate the sales charts, and bring in much more money than than some average generic shooter that tries to be like every other shooter out there, but doesn't do it aswell (I'm thinking specifically of Lockdown here, I've never seen it's sales figures, but I wouldn't be surprised if GRAW preorders have already eclipsed them).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Microsoft got paid for the PC games they make??? and the operating systems they make.?? :)

Seems viable to me.

Its simple just a different market thats all.

Later on this year I would be real interested to see a 360 game ported to a PC Real interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft get nothing for every pc game sold.  You can't tell me that Microsoft wouldn't love to see the pc games scene dissapear.

That's exactly what I'm telling you, Poita. And while MS might not make money on individual copies sold, they make a lot of money off selling products that support PC gaming.

Microsoft makes a fair share of money from the operating systems that run those games. They make money from the keyboards and mice and joysticks and keypads that play those games. MS is developing DirectX10, which will put the PC's capabilities ahead of the 360 in terms of game development again. People buy new computers when their old ones aren't powerful enough anymore, and Gates sells a copy of Windows with almost every one. MS will sell millions of copies of Vista for pre-existing computers, in part because DirectX 10 is usable only on Vista, and peope will want to be able to play DX10 games. PC games are a big part of making hardware and operating systems obsolete, and MS sells a new OS every time that happens. Basically, PC games make Bill Gates boatloads of money, and billionaires are not in the practice of cutting off revenue streams.

So obviously the PC games scene is being impacted negativly from those examples if not actually in danger.

Because of Halo and a game whose name you can't remember? And some other lame games that got ported to PC's? :blink: C'mon, Poita, you're looking at PC-gaming like (A) it's an entity in direct competition with console gaming, and (B) any of this is new. Halo is the only major title I can think of that PC's lost. Big deal. As far as the other games go, bad games have always existed for PC's, ports or not. Executives, devs, and marketers have always made poor decisions as well as good ones. Disappearing titles and bad games are not new. Console and PC games are the same industry. As long as there's a demand for PC games, someone will be making PC games, and as long as PC's advance technologically at a rate faster than the consoles, PC games will be on the leading edge -- as they have always been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make some great points Logos. A worthy adversary indeed ;)

Ok so my impact examples weren't the best. What about this. We have to wait three times as long for a sequel to many games because the dev houses are busy converting a sucessful pc title to all the consoles. Look at GR for example. 5 years to get a sequel.

Ok so Microsoft make big money from the PC market. I agree but come on you just knowwwwwwwwwww wthat Bill gates is seething every time he hears of companies making big bucks of a title or product that he doesn't have a piece of. I really get the impression that he thinks Microsoft has some kidn of 'entitlement' because everything uses windows (cept linux of course). Windows is like a net he casts far and wide to tangle everything, jeez he's even got the One laptop per child in his clutches now.

Sure Microsoft make money from their own games and products. But despite this my point still stands that blind greed can cause a person to devour even his own cash cow.

Surely you can't deny there is a sense that the 360 has ambitions to replace the PC games scene. I don't think it's 'just another console' to microsoft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft makes a fair share of money from the operating systems that run those games.  They make money from the keyboards and mice and joysticks and keypads that play those games.  MS is developing DirectX10, which will put the PC's capabilities ahead of the 360 in terms of game development again.  People buy new computers when their old ones aren't powerful enough anymore, and Gates sells a copy of Windows with almost every one.  MS will sell millions of copies of Vista for pre-existing computers, in part because DirectX 10 is usable only on Vista, and peope will want to be able to play DX10 games.  PC games are a big part of making hardware and operating systems obsolete, and MS sells a new OS every time that happens.  Basically, PC games make Bill Gates boatloads of money, and billionaires are not in the practice of cutting off revenue streams.

In addition, MS knows that they don't "own" the gaming market. If MS stopped supporting gaming for its OSs, they know that another OS will give the support lacking from MS. They're already loosing some market share with many users turning to Linux, and now the Intel based Macs(mostly for purposes other than gaming). Right now, those competitors don't really significantly cut into the gaming market for Windows, but if MS stopped supporting games, it would lead even more customers away from MS. Not that MS couldn't survive without it's gaming support, but it would definately start to hurt them... and they're not about to let something slip that easily when they're already losing some customers.

Edited by riptide
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Ironically their biggest impediment is their refusal to cater to certain pc sensibilities. I would actually love to be a console player if they just would include a mouse and also design games with pc sensibilities. I get to sit on the couch in front of a massive hd tv. Don't have to worry about upgrades for at least four years. Whats not to like.

And there you have it...in a nutshell, the BIGGEST reason why PC games and console games differ so dramatically is the control model.

How can you possibly think that? Do you really think a simple interface device is the reason why there are more PC players on the PC side of the GR.net site (as an example)?

You know you can buy all sorts of console style game controlers for PCs. Are the console guys rushing over to play PC versions of the same games that are on their consoles? The biggest reason why console players and PC players don't go switching over to the other platform has to do with their preference in games. It is all about the games and the style of the games. It has nothing to do with game version or hardware, playng on a platform of choice depends on whether or not you like the games.

silent_op

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there you have it...in a nutshell, the BIGGEST reason why PC games and console games differ so dramatically is the control model.

How can you possibly think that? Do you really think a simple interface device is the reason why there are more PC players on the PC side of the GR.net site (as an example)?

I think he meant more the games themselves than how many people play and/or switch between platforms, that the difference in the way the games play is because console game designers are designing for one type of controller and PC designers for another.

The biggest reason why console players and PC players don't go switching over to the other platform has to do with their preference in games. It is all about the games and the style of the games. It has nothing to do with game version or hardware, playng on a platform of choice depends on whether or not you like the games.

Many of us do switch. I have no loyalty to a platform. I play certain types of games on a console and certain types on PC's. Shooters I play on PC's.

I'll give you guys something else to think about. IMHO, the reason console games are cookie-cuttered and turned out much faster than PC games is this -- if a PC game sucks, they might not make enough to get the development investment back, so much more care and time must be taken with a PC game. On the other hand, if a console game sucks, they have a safety net -- video store corporations like Blockbuster that will buy twenty thousand copies whether or not the game is any good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd just wish that the PS3 would have mouse capablities, I'd love to play killzone 2 with one.

And about PC flight sims not selling very well, think again, lead pursuit sold quite alot of copies of Falcon4: allied force, lomac has sold well aswell, not to mention msfs etc etc.

Ok they're not selling like wow, but which games are?

Falcon 4.0 is the hallmark of simulation, doesn't matter what genre you look at, you wont find a sim with more depth anywhere...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...