Microsoft's arrogance

Technology and Gaming
#161

We never said PCs are worth skipping over for games (at least I didn’t). And if your older games work on your system you’re lucky, many older games don’t work without using programs like DOSBox or Windows compatibility settings.

Look at steam update logs every once in a while. “HL2: Fixed crashing for ATi 9800 Pro” is an example of things you would find (just made that up, but there are plenty of logs similar to that). So yes, they do extensive testing on a wide variety of hardware combinations before releasing the game, and quite often have to release a series of patches later for those people who own hardware/software that isn’t compatible

#162

To me… If you knock off all the console gamers are 16-17 and younger… then it will equal out to pc gamers… you dont see too many 15 and under pc gamers out there nowdays… I know there are some… but not NEARLY as many as the console gamers that are 15 and under… I dont count them… Mostly because they didnt even pay for their own console…

Also

Thats just Valve though (mostly)… Most games released now days on pc are made for newer pc’s… you dont see console releasong games on older consoles… (usually)… Ps2 i think still has a few coming out… but beside my point.

#163

That makes no sense… Half-Life 2 was released 6 years ago, unless they have a timemachine to travel to the future and test the game on future hardware it’s pretty obvious it’s going to need some updates (like you mentioned with the ATI card).

#164

…you’re proving my point. The fact that it will need updating to work with new hardware makes it more worth it to develop for consoles, because once it works with a console, it will ALWAYS work for that console.

And HL2 was just an example, I didn’t actually look at the logs, but you see these kinds of updates all the time. And other games also get these updates, I think some of the patches Crysis got were to improve performance with newer ATi cards, which is a concern console developers don’t have.

#165

Consoles do the same… It’s called buying a new console. Unless you use yours for over 6 years.

#166

…they aren’t going to update the game for a new console, they’re going to create a new game. And this generation of consoles IS supposed to last for 6 years.

Am I really making no sense?

#167

Making games for a computer is harder, because in 6 years you might need to update the game so that it works on modern hardware (using your Half-Life 2 example)

Yea, you’re making perfect sense.

#168

Sorry, but what the hell the actual consumer age has to do with sales?

Sorry? Six years? Make it, like, every 2-3 months.

#169

ODB is sorta right about that. It’s just ignorant to say there haven’t been plenty of issues in that regard.

#170

Cheers mate.

#171

Still waiting for that example…

#172

You can as well wait forever.
Why don’t you make your own research and finally see for yourself that we are a[i]ctually talking sense?

[/i]

#173

If you’re unable to give me an example, then what credibility do you have?

#174

We already gave you plenty of reasoning. It is you who are in this stuck up state of denying the obvious.

Or do you think that your persona bears so much significance that we must explain obvious things in detail?

#175

Once again, you ignore my question, and what does my persona have to do with anything. You’re talking about ‘obvious things’ again yet you can’t give me examples.

Here’s what you’ve been saying the last two pages, notice there’s not one example to support your claim:

P-thunder joins the game:

Russilker joins the game:

Russilker again:

Yeah… Lots of claims. Not even one example to support it.

edit:

Fancy colors added.

#176

Steam update logs example? You can’t ignore the constant patching and troubleshooting, for PC developers.

You’ve never proved our claims wrong. Ever heard of “guilty until proven innocent” policy? It’s fucked up and nasty. Likewise, unless you prove us wrong, your “hurr durr you’re wrong until proven right” attitude is stuck up and inapropriate.
So if you are so inclined to prove our claims false, go ahead and do it.
No one owes you anything.

#177

…I don’t see what other examples we could give. I think we were clear enough.

It’s as simple as this:
For PC, gaming developers have to keep in mind the constantly changing hardware and software, and try to make their game as compatible with it all as possible.

For a console, developers know that EVERYBODY who will be playing their game will have the same exact hardware and OS, which obviously (well, I guess not so obvious to you if you still don’t get it) is easier to develop for.

I feel like I’m repeating myself

#178

He’s just being a stuck up douchebag in denial.

#179

Good to know.

Just want to add that although creating a successful game for the PC would be more difficult for the console, if a developer put a lot of effort into it the quality would surpass anything on a console. They have a wider palette of hardware to work with, which can be both a blessing and a curse depending on how they want to use it.

#180

Patching games is usually not related to hardware issues, but rather glitches or mistakes in the game itself.

Besides, it has nothing to do with developing the actual game, because when a game is being patched it’s obviously already released and thus your claim that making console games is ‘so much easier’ (posted three times by different members) than consoles is wrong.

If you said something like: “the budgets for consoles are a lot lower (polycount budgets, shaders, available texture memory, physics limitations and so on.) and require artists to create a whole new set of game materials specifically for the PC because its hardware IS capable of rendering these higher quality materials.” In that case, yes you’d be right.

This is not the case however as I previously mentioned studios can’t be bothered to do this. They would rather just port the entire game to the PC without improving the graphics (besides the ability to increase the screen resolution and such)
Unless you do it the other way around like Crytek is doing with Crysis 2.

Sigh…

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.