This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Consoles hold back PC yet again with The Division

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Consoles hold back PC yet again with The Division

User Info: Pal 080

Pal 080
2 years ago#21
LazyyAmerican posted...
Why even game on PC then or spend.money on hardware if every game is just gonna be churned out at lowest common denominator standards?


Because we still get higher resolutions and better performance, and SOME extra visual flare in most games, as well as more options for control input, various peripherals, cheaper games and plenty of tweaking options with mods and the like...

Do most people seriously game on PC SOLELY because of the graphics...? I really doubt it...
"If we can hit that bulls-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"

User Info: KingDFizzle

KingDFizzle
2 years ago#22
LazyyAmerican posted...
Why even game on PC then or spend.money on hardware if every game is just gonna be churned out at lowest common denominator standards?


Because despite that, it's still a vastly superior experience. It's just frustrating that it could be even better.

User Info: Dorami

Dorami
2 years ago#23
/shrug

There are 3 kinds of non-indie developers for PC
1. Multi-plat developers that downgrade the PC version to avoid making the console versions look bad (e.g. Ubisoft and EA's studios).

2. PC exclusive developers that don't bother making the high fidelity assets in the first place because they know there aren't enough high-end PCs to justify the budget (e.g. Valve, Blizzard).

3. Graphics engine developers making glorified tech demos (e.g. Crytek).
C2D L7500 | GMA X3100 | 4 GB DDR2 | 250 GB Evo

User Info: SinisterSlay

SinisterSlay
2 years ago#24
KingDFizzle posted...
LazyyAmerican posted...
Why even game on PC then or spend.money on hardware if every game is just gonna be churned out at lowest common denominator standards?


Because despite that, it's still a vastly superior experience. It's just frustrating that it could be even better.


I feel sorry for the Devs because they had to put all the effort into making great visuals, then got an executive directive to remove it.
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence

User Info: Dorami

Dorami
2 years ago#25
SinisterSlay posted...
I feel sorry for the Devs because they had to put all the effort into making great visuals, then got an executive directive to remove it.

I feel sorry for the executives because they have to deal with devs that waste all their time and resources making visuals that the vast majority of the machines the intended consumer base has can't run.

Valve and Blizzard are fortunate. The people they have realize that most of their consumer base is on things like Intel integrated, AMD APUs, or entry level graphic cards and plan their graphics budget accordingly.
C2D L7500 | GMA X3100 | 4 GB DDR2 | 250 GB Evo

User Info: PathlessBullet

PathlessBullet
2 years ago#26
LazyyAmerican posted...
Why even game on PC then or spend.money on hardware if every game is just gonna be churned out at lowest common denominator standards?


1440p
ADD, no. Where is the thread for Fallout OCD players?
"We have to keep it on page 3 or it freaks out."

User Info: SinisterSlay

SinisterSlay
2 years ago#27
Dorami posted...
SinisterSlay posted...
I feel sorry for the Devs because they had to put all the effort into making great visuals, then got an executive directive to remove it.

I feel sorry for the executives because they have to deal with devs that waste all their time and resources making visuals that the vast majority of the machines the intended consumer base has can't run.

Valve and Blizzard are fortunate. The people they have realize that most of their consumer base is on things like Intel integrated, AMD APUs, or entry level graphic cards and plan their graphics budget accordingly.

They would have started the game 4 years ago.
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence

User Info: LazyyAmerican

LazyyAmerican
2 years ago#28
Yes higher resolution and framerate....I completely agree that's worth it but these two recent examples take the whole dumbed down argument even further which is depressing.
Quite the dilemma....to coexist in a world that ostracizes you into obscurity

User Info: darkus_f

darkus_f
2 years ago#29
Pal 080 posted...

The point is, too many overly entitled people expecting the world to revolve around their high end PC needs and capabilities when it's blatantly a niche market compared to consoles.

Don't know about niche but this.
2DS: 0447-5073-6549 | Steam: darkus_f | Rig: i7-3770, 12GB, GTX750, 700W
NP: Pokemon Y, Mass Effect

User Info: Majoras_pants

Majoras_pants
2 years ago#30
LazyyAmerican posted...
Why even game on PC then or spend.money on hardware if every game is just gonna be churned out at lowest common denominator standards?


because PC has better games and an open platform. The graphics settings is a nice little bonus but not the reason to game on PC.

And most games don't just churn out the lowest common denominator. Ubisoft is just dulling down their PC ports so their only slightly better than console versions.
"What's a strategy game? You mean like Mass Effect?"- A console gamer
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Consoles hold back PC yet again with The Division

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived