xXBatmanXx wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 07:17:

nin wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 04:46:

Fantaz wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 04:36:

CrimsonPaw wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:27:
Even though I don't play the games, I really wish Sony/Microsoft/EA/Activision/Etc would release a solution to allow players to set up their own servers and continue playing. Then again, I'm sure the MP landscape for these games is desolate at best.

this... Resistance 3 is still pretty new, i haven't played it yet and waiting for a deal on it so i can try multiplayer .

You got until the end of March.

Full collection is $31 on amazon...

Is the game MP only? Or is there a SP component that will still work?

I believe there's SP, but I've not tired them. But since he mentioned multi, I thought I'd point out the limited time frame.

Beamer wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 10:30:

Steele Johnson wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 03:56:

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 22:42:
Google "consoles are" the 4th autocorrect is "ruining PC gaming."


just search thus forum. Prevailing belief is that graphics haven't advanced because games are written to 10 year old consoles. Even if ports are improved they're still not as powerful as if designed for a PC.

you really deny ever hearing this?

I don't agree with this. It's not that the console hardware is holding tech back, it's the fact that developing a triple A game nowadays cost a 1000 times more than it did back in the golden age of pc gaming. So when you're in business to make money, you have to choose the client base that will get you the most return, and that is consoles (and now even phones and tablets). Game developers back in the day created pc games with innovation and science. These days, it's based on "what will sell the most". You can't blame it on a freakin' box of hardware. It all comes down to money. I think something like the Oculus Rift is the closest thing we have to games being designed with innovation and science, but I have my doubts about that development platform as well. The golden days are over, so don't keep thinking it's just going to come back. I personally think something completely different is going to replace games in general when it comes technology driven entertainment. But I don't think it will be the Rift.

frankly, I think its a bit of both. Consoles slowed progress, but it would have slowed due to cost regardless. Cost is the bigger issue. If you search my history I've argued that with people here numerous times.

but the squeaky wheels out there that think consoles are evil and console gamers are sheep like to find any evidence loosely supporting their argument and trumpet it. You won't find the more reasonable people doing it, but its a common argument used by very loud people that think platform choice makes someone superior or more "hardcore."

I own consoles. They are fun. They are not hardcore. Cry if you want Beamer, but the greatest COD player on xbox would get destroyed by most decent players on PC if using their own platform.

Now if we're talking about closed circuit, fine then the nintendo DS can be considered hardcore for tournaments as well as the xbox or ps3, wii whatever. Not stating skill doesn't exist, but it's nothing compared to the PC for a slew of reasons. All inclusive across all platform, PC is the only platform for pure hardcore gaming.

Steele Johnson wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 03:56:

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 22:42:
Google "consoles are" the 4th autocorrect is "ruining PC gaming."


just search thus forum. Prevailing belief is that graphics haven't advanced because games are written to 10 year old consoles. Even if ports are improved they're still not as powerful as if designed for a PC.

you really deny ever hearing this?

I don't agree with this. It's not that the console hardware is holding tech back, it's the fact that developing a triple A game nowadays cost a 1000 times more than it did back in the golden age of pc gaming. So when you're in business to make money, you have to choose the client base that will get you the most return, and that is consoles (and now even phones and tablets). Game developers back in the day created pc games with innovation and science. These days, it's based on "what will sell the most". You can't blame it on a freakin' box of hardware. It all comes down to money. I think something like the Oculus Rift is the closest thing we have to games being designed with innovation and science, but I have my doubts about that development platform as well. The golden days are over, so don't keep thinking it's just going to come back. I personally think something completely different is going to replace games in general when it comes technology driven entertainment. But I don't think it will be the Rift.

frankly, I think its a bit of both. Consoles slowed progress, but it would have slowed due to cost regardless. Cost is the bigger issue. If you search my history I've argued that with people here numerous times.

but the squeaky wheels out there that think consoles are evil and console gamers are sheep like to find any evidence loosely supporting their argument and trumpet it. You won't find the more reasonable people doing it, but its a common argument used by very loud people that think platform choice makes someone superior or more "hardcore."

Not worth it.

This comment was edited on Jan 7, 2014, 07:23.

nin wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 04:46:

Fantaz wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 04:36:

CrimsonPaw wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:27:
Even though I don't play the games, I really wish Sony/Microsoft/EA/Activision/Etc would release a solution to allow players to set up their own servers and continue playing. Then again, I'm sure the MP landscape for these games is desolate at best.

this... Resistance 3 is still pretty new, i haven't played it yet and waiting for a deal on it so i can try multiplayer .

You got until the end of March.

Full collection is $31 on amazon...

Is the game MP only? Or is there a SP component that will still work?

Fantaz wrote on Jan 7, 2014, 04:36:

CrimsonPaw wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:27:
Even though I don't play the games, I really wish Sony/Microsoft/EA/Activision/Etc would release a solution to allow players to set up their own servers and continue playing. Then again, I'm sure the MP landscape for these games is desolate at best.

this... Resistance 3 is still pretty new, i haven't played it yet and waiting for a deal on it so i can try multiplayer .

You got until the end of March.

Full collection is $31 on amazon...

CrimsonPaw wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:27:
Even though I don't play the games, I really wish Sony/Microsoft/EA/Activision/Etc would release a solution to allow players to set up their own servers and continue playing. Then again, I'm sure the MP landscape for these games is desolate at best.

this... Resistance 3 is still pretty new, i haven't played it yet and waiting for a deal on it so i can try multiplayer .

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 22:42:
Google "consoles are" the 4th autocorrect is "ruining PC gaming."


just search thus forum. Prevailing belief is that graphics haven't advanced because games are written to 10 year old consoles. Even if ports are improved they're still not as powerful as if designed for a PC.

you really deny ever hearing this?

I don't agree with this. It's not that the console hardware is holding tech back, it's the fact that developing a triple A game nowadays cost a 1000 times more than it did back in the golden age of pc gaming. So when you're in business to make money, you have to choose the client base that will get you the most return, and that is consoles (and now even phones and tablets). Game developers back in the day created pc games with innovation and science. These days, it's based on "what will sell the most". You can't blame it on a freakin' box of hardware. It all comes down to money. I think something like the Oculus Rift is the closest thing we have to games being designed with innovation and science, but I have my doubts about that development platform as well. The golden days are over, so don't keep thinking it's just going to come back. I personally think something completely different is going to replace games in general when it comes technology driven entertainment. But I don't think it will be the Rift.

Google "consoles are" the 4th autocorrect is "ruining PC gaming."


just search thus forum. Prevailing belief is that graphics haven't advanced because games are written to 10 year old consoles. Even if ports are improved they're still not as powerful as if designed for a PC.

you really deny ever hearing this?

harlock wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 19:59:

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 17:19:
No Harlock, completely and utterly wrong. Beamer was talking about capabilities specifically "power" -- read in context before you reply please.

no, YOU are wrong.. so laughably, insanely wrong

graphics are more than "just textures".. they include geometry, lighting, frame rates, etc.

but dont worry i wont bother explaining this anymore to you, as you clearly cant even comprehend something as simple as that

im actually surprised you are able to even turn on a computer to post comments in the first place

Harlock, do you ever bother to comprehend? Not worth repeating, you're on auto denial and your insults are infantile.

And Beamer where exactly? Cause I sure don't hear that talk among pc gamers, that's absolutely the silliest shit ever. Maybe during the "PC's are dead" or some other stupid consolite fad, but not among PC peeps.

Ports are locked for most options, PC games are not. Open up options on 90% of PC games and there's a billion tweaks you can make from resolution, physics, vegetation, fov, distance, lighting etc. Absolutely bullshit I'm calling on you.

The only complaint everyone hears about are shitty ports. I'd rather not see a port at all if it's like a console -- we don't need shit games with locked frames, busted controls and crappy fov with no options regardless of how "wonderful" they are on a console. But PCs and PC games have NEVER been held back by consoles, PCs are the platform of innovation.

This comment was edited on Jan 6, 2014, 22:36.

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 17:19:
No Harlock, completely and utterly wrong. Beamer was talking about capabilities specifically "power" -- read in context before you reply please.

no, YOU are wrong.. so laughably, insanely wrong

graphics are more than "just textures".. they include geometry, lighting, frame rates, etc.

but dont worry i wont bother explaining this anymore to you, as you clearly cant even comprehend something as simple as that

im actually surprised you are able to even turn on a computer to post comments in the first place

robdot wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:48:
My ps4 isn't boring at all , after ac4 i have , injustice, nba 2k14, killzone, resogun, flower,contrast, pinball arcade, skylanders, Lego marvel, trine 2 in 3d, escape plan, need for speed rivals, trine in 3d is wicked awesome. Your ps4 must be broke, you should take it back.

PC gamer, not impressed. But good to see you are enjoying.

Redmask wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 16:58:

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
I know of no one, ever, in my circle of hardcore pc gamers and clanners who ever complained about PC's being held back by consoles, what a ridiculous notion. Sounds like a console chat on xbox live, certainly not among PC gamers.

This is wrong, it's one of the most repeated things you'll see on PC gaming enthusiast sites and part of the reason why PCs are cited as the better platform due to the customization and capability of the hardware. To say that game development isn't held back by console hardware is stupid, we just spent years hearing from developers complaining about their constraints and how they wanted access to more resources. You would be better off saying that we get great games regardless of those constraints which is certainly true.

More resources doesn't just mean 'more graphics' (which are not just textures by the way), it also means everything from more complicated physics implementations to larger levels to less generic design in many genre types which were ram constrained for years. It opens up many possibilities.

For a while, it was mentioned on this board daily.
I'd say it's now more like every other day. People say that graphics don't look better because devs code to the consoles, and the consoles can't do better graphics.

harlock wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 16:33:

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
I know of no one, ever, in my circle of hardcore pc gamers and clanners who ever complained about PC's being held back by consoles, what a ridiculous notion. Sounds like a console chat on xbox live, certainly not among PC gamers.

consoles have certainly held back game design itself, and saturated the market with dumbed down bullshit

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
And graphics always improve, they are just textures -- nothing special needed.

wtf? graphics are far more than "just textures".. talk about a "ridiculous notion".. actually thats more like "batshit crazy"

No Harlock, completely and utterly wrong. Beamer was talking about capabilities specifically "power" -- read in context before you reply please. But it takes a half insane person to actually understand his jumble of contradictions most of the time so you're forgiven.

However to your point, consoles have not held back game design on the PC at all. Most ports suck, but well designed PC games always come along to prove the superior platform.

And if you bothered to read you'd see I mentioned the "far more" part afterwards for things that matter that actually improve over time with a console's architecture (again specific to the conversation, not generalizing as you did), need to take stuff in context not just cherry pick and make a mountain out of your molehill.

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 14:38:

BitWraith wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 13:05:
I'll be curious to see how this generation pans out. The boxes are selling well, but I'm not sure how the casual crowd is going to react fully to the seemingly lackluster upgrades from last gen. South Park said it best when they said "The graphics are 10% better!"

I'm also curious to see how Steam Machines affect the landscape.

The graphics are 10% better... now.
People seem to forget how things work in the 3D era. It isn't like the jump from NES to SNES anymore. But go look at the 360 or PS3 launch titles and compare them to late Xbox or PS2 titles, then to current 360 or PS3 titles. They look much more like the earlier generation than like current titles.
In other words, what we're seeing now is significantly worse than what these consoles are capable of and will be doing.

The bigger issue will be gameplay changes.
NES -> SNES: More buttons, meaning more ways to interact
SNES -> N64/PS: 3D
N64/PS -> PS2/GC/Xbox: Standard dual stick, allowing for better interaction with 3D worlds, enough RAM to do larger 3D worlds like GTA3
PS2/GC/Xbox -> PS3/360: Standardized and utilized online, enough RAM to do larger 3D worlds
PS2/360 -> PS4/Xbone: ???


Not really sure what this generation will offer that last generation couldn't do. I don't know if anyone is sure. Previously, there were clear signs and clear things being pushed. Now, everything is done better, but better isn't new. The new stuff is more out-of-game, like streaming and recording, but that doesn't change games.

Streaming and making it easier for independent developers will both encourage risk-taking in games. Streaming is at least like word-of-mouth help for a game and possibly it can reach thousands of people in more popular streams. Spreading out the attention and money means that more unusual ideas can get funding so we will see what comes out as worthy to hold on to.

IMO larger worlds is just now happening in a way that makes them fun to control which takes good frame rates for anything with real-time movement. Red faction guerrilla was the first I actually liked to play on a console and that still is very rudimentary in many ways. Imagine Red Faction Guerrilla with better and more NPC AIs. I loved the way they would help you, pick up arms and join in the fight against their oppressors. I imagine richer interactions like in an elder scrolls game where NPCs have lives and things to do and Walk around doing their own stuff. Then Mix that with the ever-changing "mood" of the AI in Guerrilla and the more fluid action. Run it smooth and let weird interactions between the player and the AI to happen as many as possible. That will be a brand new experience because of the pieces working together to make this fast, co-operative (or hostile) fluid experience. From talking to action to building support for the cause and organizing defenses, you just get an exponential increase in combinations of behaviors (end result)when you make things faster and with a finer granularity of possibilities.

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
I know of no one, ever, in my circle of hardcore pc gamers and clanners who ever complained about PC's being held back by consoles, what a ridiculous notion. Sounds like a console chat on xbox live, certainly not among PC gamers.

This is wrong, it's one of the most repeated things you'll see on PC gaming enthusiast sites and part of the reason why PCs are cited as the better platform due to the customization and capability of the hardware. To say that game development isn't held back by console hardware is stupid, we just spent years hearing from developers complaining about their constraints and how they wanted access to more resources. You would be better off saying that we get great games regardless of those constraints which is certainly true.

More resources doesn't just mean 'more graphics' (which are not just textures by the way), it also means everything from more complicated physics implementations to larger levels to less generic design in many genre types which were ram constrained for years. It opens up many possibilities.

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
I know of no one, ever, in my circle of hardcore pc gamers and clanners who ever complained about PC's being held back by consoles, what a ridiculous notion. Sounds like a console chat on xbox live, certainly not among PC gamers.

consoles have certainly held back game design itself, and saturated the market with dumbed down bullshit

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:45:
And graphics always improve, they are just textures -- nothing special needed.

wtf? graphics are far more than "just textures".. talk about a "ridiculous notion".. actually thats more like "batshit crazy"

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:33:

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:20:
No beamer, the xbone and ps4 will not have a drastic improvement as you saw with the last gen, not even close. These new consoles were only filling a gap in hardware specs, they are sub-par Pc's in architecture posing as 'next gen' consoles.

You will, however, see major improvements with the wii U over time. Not an endorsement for you haters, just telling it the way it is.

Oh, and the Wii U outsold the Xbone the week before Christmas. Again no endorsement, just facts : )

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:33:
This makes no sense.
How, exactly, is the WiiU hardware so much more special? Because it's less like a PC?

Yes, new architecture, dev time needed, optimizations, blah blah blah -- same as it always has been with consoles for the most part, common knowledge. You just made the same comment about the old consoles, but now it makes no sense?

Beamer wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:33:
What really confuses me is that people have been complaining for years that PCs are capable of so much more, but held back by consoles. Now the consoles are significantly more powerful, and close to the average PC, and you're saying that this won't improve graphics?

Which is it - were graphics held back by old consoles, or are they at their limit and won't improve at all?

I know of no one, ever, in my circle of hardcore pc gamers and clanners who ever complained about PC's being held back by consoles, what a ridiculous notion. Sounds like a console chat on xbox live, certainly not among PC gamers.

And graphics always improve, they are just textures -- nothing special needed. It's everything else that matters (ai, physics, optimizations, engines, etc).

Axis wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 15:20:
No beamer, the xbone and ps4 will not have a drastic improvement as you saw with the last gen, not even close. These new consoles were only filling a gap in hardware specs, they are sub-par Pc's in architecture posing as 'next gen' consoles.

You will, however, see major improvements with the wii U over time. Not an endorsement for you haters, just telling it the way it is.

Oh, and the Wii U outsold the Xbone the week before Christmas. Again no endorsement, just facts : )

This makes no sense.
How, exactly, is the WiiU hardware so much more special? Because it's less like a PC?

What really confuses me is that people have been complaining for years that PCs are capable of so much more, but held back by consoles. Now the consoles are significantly more powerful, and close to the average PC, and you're saying that this won't improve graphics?

Which is it - were graphics held back by old consoles, or are they at their limit and won't improve at all?

Beyond this, the ported games (which are most of them), look identical to the ones on the older gen. But the new consoles are, factually, a good amount more powerful.

CrimsonPaw wrote on Jan 6, 2014, 11:27:
Even though I don't play the games, I really wish Sony/Microsoft/EA/Activision/Etc would release a solution to allow players to set up their own servers and continue playing. Then again, I'm sure the MP landscape for these games is desolate at best.

Console people always seem to be happy when games are released that have outside servers for multiplayer. Peeps seem to hate P2P multiplayer, but at least with P2P it will always work. I can't see closed systems like consoles allowing the general public to host dedicated servers.