PC Gaming is Not Dead (.com)
- Thread starter Frank
- Start date
- Status
Good point. Clearly they can get around the network issue if they try, though I don't know how analogous the FFXI/IV setup is to Battle.net.
And Dust 514 is clearly a step in the right direction regardless, and one that I would definitely like to work. All they have to do is let me orbital laser strike player-controlled infantry battalions, and I would turn my EvE sub back on right now.
C
Chibibar
those are the only example I have for MMORPG to exist on console. All other games that I have played are more of local network/system (like L4D series)
It is possible but mods would be an issue.
I don't, that LoL thing was an aside, and in my last post i was trying to say that either way it doesn't matter, as being able to run it on a console or not is not what makes a PC game a PC game...
And i don't think the nVidia people are referring to games that can't be made to run on consoles either, it probably more about games looking better on PC at Max settings etc.
But RAM is important too, and one of the main reasons this happens (also, loading in Skyrim):
Frankly Triple A is such a stupid terminology...
I mean there are plenty of 4x games that came out in the last few years that weren't labelled Triple A, and they where more of a PC game then any CoD like shooters...
C
Chibibar
I believe that gaming like anything else is being cater to the lowest denominator 
I am not saying that new gamers are "stupid" but I believe they want more instant gratification. Hence the linear path with cutscene. Now games like Oblivion and Fallout DO have "linear" path, you do have option to go on side quest or totally out of the way and do your own thing. This is kind of fun, but many "new" players won't like it and probably quit after getting "lost" for hours.
Which is sad so company want to cater to the lowest denominator and made it linear
I am not saying that new gamers are "stupid" but I believe they want more instant gratification. Hence the linear path with cutscene. Now games like Oblivion and Fallout DO have "linear" path, you do have option to go on side quest or totally out of the way and do your own thing. This is kind of fun, but many "new" players won't like it and probably quit after getting "lost" for hours.
Which is sad
so company want to cater to the lowest denominator and made it linear 
GasBandit
Staff member
If you want a game to tell a story, then there does at some point have to be linearity. But even if you don't necessarily have a story to tell, it still gets extremely complicated to juggle how the events of one action or story arc interfere with/change events and stories elsewhere. Full on open world with unlimited choice isn't actually always a good thing, sometimes it can hurt the gaming experience.
For instance, Gabe said on Penny Arcade last week:
Don't get me wrong, I like sandbox/open world games, but I don't like having a game decide NOT to serve me content based on past decisions. Right now, I can't decide whether or not to join the Thief Guild in Riften because of that one chick who's there to "clean up the town." If I join the thief guild, does that mean I don't get to clean up the town with her? Or if I clean up the town with her, does that mean I'll not be able to fence stolen property ever? (Answer, yes, unless I get 90 speech and invest 500g in a vendor, in which case to make my money back I would have to become a career criminal, IN WHICH CASE I MIGHT AS WELL HAVE JOINED THE THIEF GUILD)...
See, that's the kinda stuff that sounds good for marketing, and that developers jizz themselves to death over implementing because it's "so cool that we can do that..." but me, it just makes me feel like no matter what decision I make, I don't get to experience the whole game.
For instance, Gabe said on Penny Arcade last week:
That right there struck SUCH a chord with me. It's EXACTLY how I felt in Dragon Age, especially when it came to interacting with my party. If I am too friendly with X, does that mean I can't experience all the content with Y? I am of an age where I no longer have the time to do multiple playthroughs of a 40+ hour single player experience just to see the roads not traveled the first time. Maybe if I win the lottery and can quit my job.
Don't get me wrong, I like sandbox/open world games, but I don't like having a game decide NOT to serve me content based on past decisions. Right now, I can't decide whether or not to join the Thief Guild in Riften because of that one chick who's there to "clean up the town." If I join the thief guild, does that mean I don't get to clean up the town with her? Or if I clean up the town with her, does that mean I'll not be able to fence stolen property ever? (Answer, yes, unless I get 90 speech and invest 500g in a vendor, in which case to make my money back I would have to become a career criminal, IN WHICH CASE I MIGHT AS WELL HAVE JOINED THE THIEF GUILD)...
See, that's the kinda stuff that sounds good for marketing, and that developers jizz themselves to death over implementing because it's "so cool that we can do that..." but me, it just makes me feel like no matter what decision I make, I don't get to experience the whole game.
C
Chibibar
but isn't that part of re-playability? I do like things like that cause people can make different choice to have different outcome, but what I don't like is even these kinds of choice, the outcome is the "same" just different slice of ending.
Such a game doesn't exist yet, but if I made certain choices, the ending is totally different than the other choices. I do like that. It allows replayability.
GasBandit
Staff member
Did you see the part where I said that as I'm not 19 any more, I don't have time to play, replay, and re-replay a game that can typically go over 40 hours?
I might get a couple hours a night to play. Maybe more on weekends, maybe not. A game gets ONE playthrough. One.
Replayability is fine for a game like LoL where an entire round takes at most, 40 minutes. Not 40 hours.
C
Chibibar
I understand that so many company need to make game cheaper and linear for old folks like us
then I take it back, maybe it is not the newer generation that have a hard time playing old school open world, maybe it is our generation that can't play it multiple time and just want to play it once and done.
GasBandit
Staff member
Unfortunately, you're probably right. It's disheartening to know that games are being aimed mostly at the unproductive with tons of disposable income, but I suppose it's only common (business) sense to operate in such a manner. It would also explain why GOOD games are so few and far between, and why there is so many BattleCall: Gears of Halo sequels.
Have I mentioned I think the quasi-realism of having to cover 50% of your screen area with blurry back-end-of-gun is a game mechanic that is more than played out, recently?
GasBandit
Staff member
At that age, I was mostly playing games like Ultima Underworld, Doom, Duke3d, Carmageddon and Warcraft. I got out of consoles mostly after the NES, and didn't get back into them until I bought a dreamcast for my first apartment.
Which has very little to do with improving industry sales on the PC, but they were trying to link anyway. Easily accessible digital distro has far, far, more to do with it.
Not...quite. RAM is important, but we have far more RAM on everything today than we did when Doom came out. The rise of corridor shooters has more to do with game designers discovering that they could use graphical effects and art to make simple level design look dynamic rather than bother designing more art and effects to flesh out a level that 90% of the player-base won't visit. CoD isn't a corridor shooter because of the lack of RAM on consoles, it's a corridor shooter because Infinity Ward & Activision decided that a gaming experience designed around situational immersion would be more broadly appealing than complex level design. And they were right (sadly, depending your view of it).
A matter entirely of your own opinion. But I agree it's a stupid term. Unfortunately, a lot of the alternatives are dumber. "Hardcore games", "Core Games", "Tent-pole Games". "Premium games" is probably the best, because it admits it's all about money and media presence. But the industry doesn't like that term for that same reason.
GasBandit
Staff member
Heh, not exactly. Doom threw you in a level you had to hunt down keys for, which is far less linear than the current crop of "a hallway with cutscenes" FPSes. Ultima Underworld, for it's time, was just as open as Skyrim - provided you found the stairs, you could go anywhere in the Stygian Abyss from moment one (one could even make the argument that the entire Elder Scrolls line is spiritual successor to the underworld games). Carmageddon was the very definition of open... you could completely ignore checkpoints and range over every entire vast level squashing pedestrians, doing stunts and totalling opponents to gain time/win.
And of course there was Civ, glorious Civ.
C
Chibibar
It is hard for developers to really put in a linear system (main story) but have side quest that is not related into the game AND have replayability.
I remember that some game (like Japanese games) try to have different ending or depending on what you do you have certain ending. Of course such games usually have "best" ending and some "worst" ending, but some would have extra story telling about the characters/action you have chosen.
I remember that some game (like Japanese games) try to have different ending or depending on what you do you have certain ending. Of course such games usually have "best" ending and some "worst" ending, but some would have extra story telling about the characters/action you have chosen.
GasBandit
Staff member
I loved that one too, with the dismemberment cheat code it's endless fun. Light saber throw changes from a weed eater to a blender.
I was also a fan of using force grip to hold people over bottomless pits... and then letting go.
C
Chibibar
you know what I keep playing over and over? Resident Evil 4 (I love it and yes, it is Linear) I have every version of it cause I love it so much. I just bought the PS3 HD version (looks cool)
GasBandit
Staff member
Hey, the original Battlefield 1942 is still the best, especially if you have the Desert Combat mod.I have so many "go back to" games that I love finishing over and over, I haven't finished anything new since 2002
If that's true why does Portal 2 load every 5 minutes...i mean it only took 2 sec for it to do it on my 3 year old PC... so obviously it could have handled larger parts of the levels loaded to memory...
And Portal 1 didn't have that, only loaded between lifts...
Also, considering the lack of length of the SP in CoD games i'm pretty sure that's not what's more broadly appealing... just ask CS, which was way too popular for gaming's good way before CoD.
Likely because Valve included higher-resolution textures? Don't forget, that's always been the case with newer games, console and PC. You will always need *more* RAM as games get more technically capable. Corridor-shooting, however, is a much more a design choice for narrative and dealing with dev costs in general than a function of console RAM restrictions.
I think you misunderstood my statement, let me re-phrase:
Publishers don't make corridor-shooters because of RAM restrictions (though I imagine that could be additional incentive), they make corridor-shooters because it costs less money (primarily in time paid to programmers and QA) overall to design a level in a straight line and they discovered that if you make it "dynamic-feeling" enough, players (as a population) don't see it negatively enough to change their buying habits (possibly the opposite, in fact).
Length is only a small part of creating a gaming experience. If it was the primary draw, every current FPS, PC or console, would have a long campaign.
I think you misunderstood my statement, let me re-phrase:
Publishers don't make corridor-shooters because of RAM restrictions (though I imagine that could be additional incentive), they make corridor-shooters because it costs less money (primarily in time paid to programmers and QA) overall to design a level in a straight line and they discovered that if you make it "dynamic-feeling" enough, players (as a population) don't see it negatively enough to change their buying habits (possibly the opposite, in fact).
Frankly i'm more inclined to think that the reason they make the corridor shooters that last less the 5 hours is because they know that 99% of people are buying it for MP, so they can get away with it...
But the corridor aspect was just the 1st thing that came to mind, there are plenty of other limitations based on
not enough RAM... so moar RAM pls.
That was kinda my point, to make it look better on the same amount of RAM they had to include more loading
So it's not just WoW's fault...I have so many "go back to" games that I love finishing over and over, I haven't finished anything new since 2002
Me, i have to do a Storm of Zehir playthrough with the new char i started a few years back on the old PC, and i've had the game instaled for at least 3 years on my current PC... only finished it with my imported lvl 18 char.
I honestly don't think that's actually the case at all. I can't remember where I read it, some article somewhere that talked about how only about 30% of CoD players actually regularly played online. That's a HUGE amount of people buying a game for it's single player campaign.
Regularly being the main word...
Somehow i dont think that 4-6 hours in SP make up the majority of time spent playing the game for more then 30% of people.
Playing another game and taking break from it to play some CoD MP from time to time sounds more like what's happening...
- Status