Is TW3 getting downgraded for the sake of consoles?

[Thebull94]

I see where you are coming from, and it is a wildly debatable subject, that I feel is flawed to begin with due to this main reason.

Whenever you have a PC gamer stating that "PC games are cheaper etc" they always unfairly judge the prices. By this I mean they say "I can go onto steam and buy a game for like $10-30 cheaper than a console game because of deals" yet they don't factor in the fact that console gamers have so many ways of purchasing games (at ridiculously cheaper prices also) that simply *going to a retail store and paying the full retail price* is quickly becoming a redundant argument. I buy all my games (unless I am super hyped for the game like Witcher 3 or MGSV) from ebay, or PS+. PS+ for example is incredible (borderline rivaling steam due to the amount of free triple A games you get a year), like I bought Splinter Cell Blacklist (special edition or some crap) for like £6 and Dishonored GoTY edition for £8.

The main reason Consoles are as a viable medium as PC for gaming is primarily due to it's 3 biggest pro's.

1. Pure simplicity of gaming. No need to upgrade drivers, etc just plug in and play.
2. Console exclusives (both exclusive to one system i.e PS3 and consoles in general meaning PS360), which in terms of (due to this being subjective) pure commercial and critical success, the past few years has been far better than PC exclusives.
3. Price. There is no other gaming machine that will rival a console in terms of longevity for the same price. Consoles will continue to push out gorgeous looking games for the next 5-10 years without the need of any upgrades etc, with the only other accessory being PS+ (which has it's own list of ridiculous benefits, mainly the free games) which will cost $350 for something like 7 years, taking the price in total of a console up to $700-750 (less if the consoles get a major price drop like they usually do).

EDIT: Yea, just noticed it is getting off topic, my bad.

 

[moonknightgog]

You are perfectly right, but I prefer console exclusives.
Fortunately a dear friend of mine is a PCist, so I can play at his house the few games that I like on PC.
We have beaten The Witcher 2 together.

Anyway, I understand your preference: The Witcher 2 played on the highest settings is on another planet visually, compared to the Xbox conversion.
In the end both of our choices are reasonable, with their pros and cons.

Well, I say that the best choice would be buy both PC and a console.
Without a PS3, I can't play The Last of Us or RDR, but without a PC, I can't play The Witcher, Total War, To the Moon etc...

 

[aegiskleais]

To counterpoint you..

1. Console drivers ARE updated. It would be foolish for you to ever assume that 1 set driver is (a) bug-proof or (b) as optimized as a subsequent version of the driver could be down the line. Because consoles are static pieces of hardware, there's less issues with driver compatibility, as there is more finite and strict QA due to the singular hardware spec. And I don't know why so many console-centric gamers think PC driver updates are difficult. You download a file. You double click it. Next, next, finish, you're done. You don't even have to restart you PC nowadays. How is this tough?

2. This is a cause/effect of myopic developers who are either not skilled enough to develop across platforms or are taking bribes to ensure their content is only delivered on 1 platform (this is why PC gamers scoff at Microsoft repeatedly publicly apologizing for not "bringing gaming to PC" when they are among one of the core reasons it is where it is (and that's because other PC-centric developers have furthered the platform, not Microsoft)

3. Not at all true. For the price, a PC can be built which has already outclassed the "next gen" consoles. And what's worse, the fact that their hardware sits stagnant for the next half a decade means that, since software developers are coding to those (then ancient) specs, consoles end up being single-handedly one of the worst conventions known that limits the progress of what games can be. They do not evolve or have dynamic qualities like PCs do, they are static, stale and finite.

The bottom line isn't that consoles are better than PCs, it isn't that PCs are better than consoles. They each have pros and cons, and most people simply discount the others as a way in which they can justify to themselves the purchase that they made. It's all ego-centric. All that matters, whether you choose console or PC, is that you personally get a good return on your investment. It shouldn't matter what others choose, and too much of today's consumer ego comes from wanting to be a part of a perceived "in crowd". To me, being yourself is always more important than proudly declaring "Look at me, I'm a part of the herd!".

 

[Thebull94]

To counterpoint you..

1. Console drivers ARE updated. It would be foolish for you to ever assume that 1 set driver is (a) bug-proof or (b) as optimized as a subsequent version of the driver could be down the line. Because consoles are static pieces of hardware, there's less issues with driver compatibility, as there is more finite and strict QA due to the singular hardware spec. And I don't know why so many console-centric gamers think PC driver updates are difficult. You download a file. You double click it. Next, next, finish, you're done. You don't even have to restart you PC nowadays. How is this tough?

2. This is a cause/effect of myopic developers who are either not skilled enough to develop across platforms or are taking bribes to ensure their content is only delivered on 1 platform (this is why PC gamers scoff at Microsoft repeatedly publicly apologizing for not "bringing gaming to PC" when they are among one of the core reasons it is where it is (and that's because other PC-centric developers have furthered the platform, not Microsoft)

3. Not at all true. For the price, a PC can be built which has already outclassed the "next gen" consoles. And what's worse, the fact that their hardware sits stagnant for the next half a decade means that, since software developers are coding to those (then ancient) specs, consoles end up being single-handedly one of the worst conventions known that limits the progress of what games can be. They do not evolve or have dynamic qualities like PCs do, they are static, stale and finite.

The bottom line isn't that consoles are better than PCs, it isn't that PCs are better than consoles. They each have pros and cons, and most people simply discount the others as a way in which they can justify to themselves the purchase that they made. It's all ego-centric. All that matters, whether you choose console or PC, is that you personally get a good return on your investment. It shouldn't matter what others choose, and too much of today's consumer ego comes from wanting to be a part of a perceived "in crowd". To me, being yourself is always more important than proudly declaring "Look at me, I'm a part of the herd!".

1. The driver again all goes to my plug and play point. You turn on the Xbox and it updates automatically. You put a game disk in, it updates automatically. Also PC drivers have the potential to cause problems towards certain games (depending on what driver, be it sound which would cause sound problems, GPU drivers etc. Also driver problems usually happen due to the specific piece of hardware you are updating, making it harder to locate a fix.)

" It would be foolish for you to ever assume that 1 set driver is (a) bug-proof or"

Nobody is assuming that. IT would be foolish of you to do it also.

"You don't even have to restart you PC nowadays. How is this tough?"

I will counter point your question with your own answer.

"You download a file."

How do you know which file and for which piece of hardware? You see the whole point you were attempting to debate was my 'plug and play', statement which so far still stands. Consoles you turn them on everything is automatic. No need to manually do anything. PC on the other hand you do. Same goes for the installation of hardware, OS boots, service packs etc. Consoles all do it automatically. I feel your counter argument did not succeed in countering my initial point which was the pure ease of which it is to console game in comparison to PC's which at the moment still stands.

"This is a cause/effect of myopic developers who are either not skilled enough to develop across platforms or are taking bribes to ensure their content is only delivered on 1 platform (this is why PC gamers scoff at Microsoft repeatedly publicly apologizing for not "bringing gaming to PC" when they are among one of the core reasons it is where it is (and that's because other PC-centric developers have furthered the platform, not Microsoft)"

I agree. I still don't see how this counter acts my argument. Instead of you finding a PC equivalent or solution you simply acknowledge the problem which was already known.

"3. Not at all true. For the price, a PC can be built which has already outclassed the "next gen" consoles.

I always hear this statement but whenever I ask somebody to build me a PC (using the internet) they ALWAYS fail to meet the $350-399 price mark and always end up in the $450-500 price mark, and their PC still tends to be inferior due to the consoles customized hardware. So i ask, please build me one so your statement holds some validity? Also, developers will continue to find new tricks and ways of manipulating the consoles 'static' hardware due to the constant need for visual updates and the fact that console gamers are stuck with these consoles for multiple (5-10) years. If you on the however simply build a PC equivalent to the console, the developers will not be developing their games around your hardware leading to your PC needing an upgrade in order to keep up. Proof of this, is the fact that Witcher 3 will be able to run on consoles on the 'high' settings at 30 (or more) frames per second, which I doubt any GPU +CPU you price me up will be able to do, due to the game being optimized better with specific hardware in mind.

"consoles end up being single-handedly one of the worst conventions known that limits the progress of what games can be."

I agree. Again you simply acknowledge an already known problem which I was not intending to debate in the first place.


All my three points still hold up.
1. Consoles are much more convenient (ready to go / plug and play) when it comes to pure gaming than PC's.
2, Consoles in terms of critical and commercial statistics receive better exclusives (during the past few years).
3. Consoles are cheaper (unless you build me a PC, this statement still stands) and cost efficient than PC's. Basically meaning you will not be able to build a PC for $350-399 that will continue to run gorgeous games for the next 5-10 years when the inevitable console counterparts arrive in the form of PS5 etc.


However with that said I 100% agree with your statement:

"The bottom line isn't that consoles are better than PCs, it isn't that PCs are better than consoles."

 

[prince_of_nothing]

. Consoles are cheaper (unless you build me a PC, this statement still stands) and cost efficient than PC's. Basically meaning you will not be able to build a PC for $350-399 that will continue to run gorgeous games for the next 5-10 years when the inevitable console counterparts arrive in the form of PS5 etc.

As a PC gamer, I will readily admit that consoles provide more bang for the buck for gaming; mostly due to them being a fixed platform which opens up higher levels of optimization.

However, your statement also unknowingly reveals one of the biggest downsides of consoles. Their life expectancy is too long, and are subject to obsolescence..

Unlike the last generation which had somewhat equivalent or even better technology than what was available on PCs at the time of their release, the PS4 and Xbox One were already significantly behind current midrange PC gaming machines, and WAY behind high end machines in terms of capability and performance..

Current high end PC gaming rigs are capable of running 4K resolution (the next big thing a long with VR) if configured properly. This is something the PS4 and Xbox One will NEVER be able to do, as they just don't have the resources to be able to run such an intensive resolution. And while a PC that can run 4K costs a pretty penny right now, in 5 to 10 years, 4K capable gaming rigs will be cheap and common place as GPUs will be 10x more powerful than they are now.

Heck, in 5 to 10 years, we may have 8K resolution, while the PS4 and Xbox One struggle to run even 1080p comfortably.. So you see, the longevity of the consoles isn't necessarily as advantageous as you think. Games are a curious combination of technology and artistry. There will come a point where the static nature of the consoles will begin to hold back the evolution of games because while tech industry evolves at a furious pace, consoles don't...

Case in point Witcher 3. To preserve their vision for Witcher 3, CDPR had no choice but to cut the last gen consoles out of the picture even if it meant greater profits as last gen are incapable of running the game without severe compromises which would affect game quality and developer intent..

 

[Thebull94]

As a PC gamer, I will readily admit that consoles provide more bang for the buck for gaming; mostly due to them being a fixed platform which opens up higher levels of optimization.

However, your statement also unknowingly reveals one of the biggest downsides of consoles. Their life expectancy is too long, and are subject to obsolescence..

Unlike the last generation which had somewhat equivalent or even better technology than what was available on PCs at the time of their release, the PS4 and Xbox One were already significantly behind current midrange PC gaming machines, and WAY behind high end machines in terms of capability and performance..

Current high end PC gaming rigs are capable of running 4K resolution (the next big thing a long with VR) if configured properly. This is something the PS4 and Xbox One will NEVER be able to do, as they just don't have the resources to be able to run such an intensive resolution. And while a PC that can run 4K costs a pretty penny right now, in 5 to 10 years, 4K capable gaming rigs will be cheap and common place as GPUs will be 10x more powerful than they are now.

Heck, in 5 to 10 years, we may have 8K resolution, while the PS4 and Xbox One struggle to run even 1080p comfortably.. So you see, the longevity of the consoles isn't necessarily as advantageous as you think. Games are a curious combination of technology and artistry. There will come a point where the static nature of the consoles will begin to hold back the evolution of games because while tech industry evolves at a furious pace, consoles don't...

Case in point Witcher 3. To preserve their vision for Witcher 3, CDPR had no choice but to cut the last gen consoles out of the picture even if it meant greater profits as last gen are incapable of running the game without severe compromises which would affect game quality and developer intent..

I get you, but that is the thing. The same PC gamers and reviewers said after MGS4's release that

"MGS4 maxed out the PS3!?"

Then Uncharted 3 came out.
Then Killzone 2 -3 came out
THen The last of Us came out
Then MGSV came out.

The same will happen this generation. The consoles always get underestimated and turn out to drop, gorgeous visuals. Look at Killzone 4 and Infamous Second Son, in the first damn year of the consoles release. It is bloody impressive and the consoles will continue to be bloody impressive until their bitter end.

Also, a PS4 is " significantly behind current midrange PC gaming machines,"?

Really? Is this statement true can I get a source? How is that possible if a mid range PC (never mind, significantly behind a mid range PC) would not be able to run Witcher 3 on Medium let alone High @ 1080p and 30 fps. So how is this possible?

 

[shinobi2u]

I get you, but that is the thing. The same PC gamers and reviewers said after MGS4's release that

"MGS4 maxed out the PS3!?"

Then Uncharted 3 came out.
Then Killzone 2 -3 came out
THen The last of Us came out
Then MGSV came out.

The same will happen this generation. The consoles always get underestimated and turn out to drop, gorgeous visuals. Look at Killzone 4 and Infamous Second Son, in the first damn year of the consoles release. It is bloody impressive and the consoles will continue to be bloody impressive until their bitter end.

Also, a PS4 is " significantly behind current midrange PC gaming machines,"?

Really? Is this statement true can I get a source? How is that possible if a mid range PC (never mind, significantly behind a mid range PC) would not be able to run Witcher 3 on Medium let alone High @ 1080p and 30 fps. So how is this possible?

I've seen a lot of articles with comparisons on hardware and stats that do concur on that point, though one thing I have noticed is that they are never adjusted for the fact that a PC's hardware is not just dedicated to gaming unlike consoles (or at least as much as consoles). It never seems like a true apples to apples comparison.

This is just in general to the topic - will consoles ever reach what PC could do if it was taken to the brink of current technology? No, of course not. Though like you said, consoles will continue to push and surprise people as developers get used to them and stop developing for the last generation of consoles. Optimization, no matter the platform, means more than anything.

And sure, you probably could build a PC that has better specs than consoles, but I feel like that only applies if you build it yourself. When it comes to pre-made items (including PCs and consoles), there is always a premium that will always apply in the case of consoles that doesn't always apply to PCs.

 

[GuyNwah]

We don't know whether a "mid range PC" is capable of equaling the PS4 or Xbone performance yet. I would be surprised if it could not.

But I join those who disagree with assertions that you can build a PC of comparable performance for the price of a console. You can't. The consoles are priced below any reasonable gaming-capable PC that you can make or buy.

Some adjustments need to be made for the fact that certain console components (mainly the CPU) do not have exact desktop counterparts.

CPU: AMD A8, 4 cores but clocked twice as fast as the 8-core "Jaguar" $100
GPU: PS4 is closest to the AMD R7 265 $150
Motherboard: FM2, A55 chipset, minimal features needed $50
RAM: 8GB, RAM prices are volatile, currently $70
HDD: 500GB, least expensive $50
Blu-Ray, least expensive $35
Power supply, minimum decent model with a PCI-e connector $30
Case, least expensive case that will house a decent GPU $25

We're at $510 before the cost of a keyboard, mouse, controller, or Windows license. Add those in, and you're over $600.

So no, the argument that you can build a PC with price and performance comparable to a PS4 does not hold up.

(Prices are current Newegg. You won't get more than a few dollars below at retail; and if you're an integrator buying wholesale, you have to price your finished goods at a markup for profitable sale. No argument that you can get sufficiently better prices to erase a difference of $200 or more (once you add Windows and peripherals) will fly.)

 

[Thebull94]

Agreed, which is why I shudder whenever I see the comments from PC elitists suggesting that PC gaming is the only viable means of gaming, when it isn't. They both have their pros and cons, with the PC's pros being more obvious (powerful ass machines) and the consoles pros being that it is primarily built with gaming in mind, which is evident in the amount of developer support consoles get as well as the ridiculously cheap price for a console that is capable of gorgeous visuals.

So yea, consoles are the perfect example of phrase: 'Full bang out of your buck'

On topic. I 100% believe that Witcher 3 will not get downgraded for consoles.

 

[prince_of_nothing]

On topic. I 100% believe that Witcher 3 will not get downgraded for consoles.

I agree with this, as I said many pages back. Current gen consoles aren't nearly as powerful as Sony and Microsoft says they are, but they aren't weak enough so as to limit the Witcher 3.. Of course the PC version will have a wider range of effects and at higher quality and resolution, but the console versions will definitely be capable as well..

But it's inevitable that the PC will eventually surge past consoles; even at the low end. It's just a matter of time.. NVidia and AMD's next cycle of GPUs will offer higher performance and be more energy efficient than anything on market now. And when 20nm is available (and DX12), you can forget it. PCs will blow past consoles when that happens.. You will be able to build a PC at a similar or slightly higher price point as the PS4 and Xbox One, which will absolutely destroy it in terms of performance and capability..

That's the strength of the PC, the fact that it's a constantly evolving platform. And that's why PC gaming grows so fast during the mid to late life cycle of the consoles, as gamers inevitably become bored by the lack of progress and static nature of the consoles. Whereas on the PC, that's where all the progress and innovation is occurring..

 

[Thebull94]

I agree with this, as I said many pages back. Current gen consoles aren't nearly as powerful as Sony and Microsoft says they are, but they aren't weak enough so as to limit the Witcher 3.. Of course the PC version will have a wider range of effects and at higher quality and resolution, but the console versions will definitely be capable as well..

But it's inevitable that the PC will eventually surge past consoles; even at the low end. It's just a matter of time.. NVidia and AMD's next cycle of GPUs will offer higher performance and be more energy efficient than anything on market now. And when 20nm is available (and DX12), you can forget it. PCs will blow past consoles when that happens.. You will be able to build a PC at a similar or slightly higher price point as the PS4 and Xbox One, which will absolutely destroy it in terms of performance and capability..

That's the strength of the PC, the fact that it's a constantly evolving platform. And that's why PC gaming grows so fast during the mid to late life cycle of the consoles, as gamers inevitably become bored by the lack of progress and static nature of the consoles. Whereas on the PC, that's where all the progress and innovation is occurring..

I agree and disagree. By the time 'low end Pcs' start overtaking current gen the current gen will have most likely underwent a massive price drop, like they always do. I also disagree with the notion that console gaming slowly begins to die as the years go on which is evidently wrong due to games like Last of Us which are regarded as the best games of last generation (regardless of the platform) and it only came out last year.

Console gaming evolves in different ways from PC gaming, PC gaming evolves more in the sense of 'more graphix more powa!' and console gaming evolves in the fact that the developers begin to understand the consoles like the back of their hand allowing the graphics to never look stale or dated and the same goes for the games / gameplay.

 

[ilayoeli]

http://youtu.be/Nglw-xX3A2U?t=3m15s
Fuck me

 

[didymos1120]

http://youtu.be/Nglw-xX3A2U?t=3m15s
Fuck me

Oh, settle down. Witcher games have always had difficulty settings.

 

[Scholdarr]

and the same goes for the games / gameplay.

Really? Then why do we get the same fuckin gameplay for years now since the consoles took over? Sorry pal, but gameplay on consoles is all the same. You only can do so much with your petty controller. It's always a first person game, a third person game or a sidescroller. That's it. That's not gameplay variety, that complete lack of innovation called stagnation. Each and every innovation in games is leading on PC and only some of its results can even be applied on consoles.

And no, PC is not all about graphics or visuals. It never was and it never will be (although many seem to fall for that crap). PC is first and foremost about freedom. Freedom for the developers and the gamers. Freedom in creating stuff and playing stuff. Freedom of hard- and software. Freedom of control. Freedom of changing games to your liking. Freedom of business and marketing. Freedom of transparency. Freedom of communication and interaction. Actually freedom in almost every decision you could make. Consoles are the opposite of that. They are stale, corporate shells. Everything you can do with them is dictated by the corporations making them, for both developers and gamers. They are not evolving. There is no freedom to evolve on consoles. There is only the hope of developers and gamers that they can make the best out of that dictatorship. It's actually pretty bad that CDPR now supports that crap and these corporate policies.

And The Last of Us best game of the last generation? Surely not, not even close. And when we take a closer look at it, both technical aspects and gameplay in The Last of Us are just mediocre. Only the storytelling is kind of good and you don't have to understand a console for that. You could deliver the same basic experience on a 10 year old PC or even a tablet...

 

[dragonbird]

Uuhhh, calm down?
I think you may be overstating the importance of such things for the average user, who just wants to play games he/she enjoys.
And whether or not you think that a particular game, or even a particular genre, is good or not is definitely moving into personal opinions that can't be reconciled and waaay off-topic.


@didymos1120 - Thanks, I was wondering what I was supposed to be looking at the video. No, I can't see anything controversial, except possibly for the fact that IGN considered it worth discussing.

 

[Scholdarr]

Uuhhh, calm down?
I think you may be overstating the importance of such things for the average user, who just wants to play games he/she enjoys.

Well, you could say that for everything. Why bothering buying a t-shirt for 5 bucks? The average customer just wants to have a cheap shirt and using the money they safe for something else. But reality is that the actions of single persons form the world we live in. Buying a t-shirt for 5 bucks means that there must be some injustice connected to it somewhere in the world.
It's imo not so simple to say "hey calm down, they just want to have some fun". The world is complex and connected and each of our decisions has consequences. We might not think about that very often and most people probably don't do so when they decide on which platform they want to game on but that's the exact reason why the gaming industry is now what it is. That's the exact reason why some of use praise CDPR for "being diferent". We as customers and gamers are responsible for that, and not only the anonymous "we" but each one of us who acts just for their direct and unreflective enjoyment...

Short: the way you or everyone else play/consume defines what I can play as well. We as a number of customers build up a demand and it's up to you how that demand looks like. I actually thought people who like and praise CDPR would know about that...

Of couse you can just say: I don't give a shit. But that's just highly egoistical and I can't say that I like such behaviour.

 

[dragonbird]

As a PC gamer, I value the diversity of PC games. I also acknowledge the diversity of games on other platforms, whether it's mobile, console, whatever, and the diversity of platforms available.

As a forum moderator, I will make one more request for this conversation NOT to drift into a debate, discussion or accusation that console gamers are in any way responsible for perceived shortfalls in gaming. That request will turn into something stronger if not followed.

 

[Sardukhar]

Console gamers are to be blamed for height differences in my office chairs.

No, really.

I did a comprehensive study of office-chair height ranges from 1982 to 2000 and, sure enough, EXACTLY AS I'D BEGUN TO SUSPECT, chair ranges now offered a substantial 0.82 mm less in height maximum.

My theory is that chair-height resources went into couch-padding departments. You...BASTARDS.

 

[prince_of_nothing]

I agree and disagree. By the time 'low end Pcs' start overtaking current gen the current gen will have most likely underwent a massive price drop, like they always do.

Price is one thing, performance another. Bang for the buck will squarely be in the PC's favor when 20nm parts become available.. You can bet on it.

I also disagree with the notion that console gaming slowly begins to die as the years go on which is evidently wrong due to games like Last of Us which are regarded as the best games of last generation (regardless of the platform) and it only came out last year.

I never said console games slowly begin to die, so I don't know where you got that comment from. I said that consoles' limitations usually begin to become apparent during their mid to late life cycle.. A good game is a good game regardless of technical shortcomings though (just look at Nintendo games) as games are primarily designed to be entertaining. And the Last of Us is undoubtedly a very good game. But was it innovative, progressive or revolutionary? No.

Console gaming evolves in different ways from PC gaming, PC gaming evolves more in the sense of 'more graphix more powa!' and console gaming evolves in the fact that the developers begin to understand the consoles like the back of their hand allowing the graphics to never look stale or dated and the same goes for the games / gameplay.

Graphics is merely one pillar of gaming. There are others, such as gameplay, story, art direction etcetera... All of these factors usually rely on technology in one way or another though, and that's where the PC's strength becomes apparent.

For example, look at Star Citizen. The game as Cloud Imperium intends, could not run on any console without massive compromises.. The sheer scale of the game is too great for the consoles' memory and computational capabilities..

 

[GuyNwah]

Media tags don't work anymore?

vBulletin 4 replaced

[media]

tags with

[video]

.