MasterDex Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Crysis 2 could be a great game, Yant, and I don't think that's the thrust of the complaints against it. It is possible for a game to be, at its core, fun and engaging, while still having flaws that jade its quality a little bit in the eyes of PC gamers, or any gamers for that matter. I don't think anyone's arguing that Crysis 2 isn't fun--at least, I am not. I think that it is a valid complaint to say that it lost the sandbox appeal of the first game due to its consolization, without knocking the other aspects of the game. That's exactly it. I don't think that thinking such a thing is elitist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saturnine Tenshi Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 Expecting a PC game to have PC features is in no way elitist. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted June 29, 2011 Report Share Posted June 29, 2011 "It wasn't terrible but it wasn't what it could have been and should have been and that's what PC gamers are angry about." That's kind of the heart of the elitism. You said it yourself, you have standards. When those standards are set too high that can be elitism. Who says whether they are too high? Well it's all subjective but personally, I think Crysis 2 is a better game than the first but critically it got very good reviews as well so most critics think it's a pretty good game too. And that's kind of the heart of what people are talking about. You just said "standards that are too high" is completely subjective, then why call someone "elitist" because they expect things you normally wouldn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 Sorry, I didn't intend to say anyone here was elitist. I was more referring to people on many other forums who are calling crysis 2 garbage. I agree that loosing the sandbox design is a legitimate complaint. I don't think the developers made that change to accommodate consoles thou though. I think they were just trying to make the game more like call of duty. That is even more evident in the multipayer. Blaming the design changes on console integration seems elitist. Is there any evidence that the design changes were because of consoles? Also, "pc features" is elitist. It implies that pc games have a different standard. That is the heart of the argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saturnine Tenshi Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 That in no way hugs the contours of the definition of elitism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 (edited) Sorry, I didn't intend to say anyone here was elitist. I was more referring to people on many other forums who are calling crysis 2 garbage. I agree that loosing the sandbox design is a legitimate complaint. I don't think the developers made that change to accommodate consoles thou though. I think they were just trying to make the game more like call of duty. That is even more evident in the multipayer. Blaming the design changes on console integration seems elitist. Is there any evidence that the design changes were because of consoles? Also, "pc features" is elitist. It implies that pc games have a different standard. That is the heart of the argument. You could be right, the direction may have been one driven by hopes to make it more like Call of Duty but the level design of the original Crysis wouldn't work on consoles with the level of polish and the framerate it has so I'm inclined to think it was a technical decision. I don't think it's elitist to assume that in the absense of any contradicting evidence, especially when console driven development and quick and dirty PC porting is becoming an industry norm. I also think my assumption is backed up by the other changes to Crysis. The "Press start" thing, the lack of graphics customisation at release, the lack of high textures and DX11 support at release as well as the total facepalm of not having cheat protection for the multiplayer still. I'm not disavowing Crytek or Crysis 2 however. They've done some work and we're getting a the SDK but there's reason to voice complaint, disappointment and anger at Crytek I feel. I feel it's important to let a developer know how we feel about their products. "PC features" definitely is not elitist. It implies that PC games have a different standard because PC games do have a different standard. Wii games have different standards to the 360 and PS3 games, they all have different standards to handheld games and they have different standards to phone games. The existence of different standards of games isn't elitist, it's just the way it is. Why waste the technology we have right now not trying to see what we can do with it? Let's see what we can get out of the latest smartphones, let's see what we can get out of the handhelds and consoles, why is it wrong to want to see what we can get out of PCs? Also, as an aside, PC gaming has laid, and should be allowed to lay, a foundation for the consoles to follow and improve upon. Without PCs, gaming would be a whole lot different. A lot of games may never have been created, a lot of genres may never have been created. I like to think of the PC as generation 0. PC gamers are willing to put up with some headaches, we're willing to jump through a hoop here and there to enjoy a great game. Hell, sometimes we enjoy the act. We don't like being treated with disrespect and indignation by the industry. As consumers, we're just as valuable as any other gamer. *Sorry if this sounds a bit rantish, I'm tired and I've been debating this issue on slowtaku the last few days so I'm pretty riled up right now. Nothing personal though, we'll agree on something eventually! Edited June 30, 2011 by MasterDex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 I feel it's important to let a developer know how we feel about their products. I totally agree. I also agree about getting the most out of our PCs and think it would have been best if Crysis 2 had launched with all the features it has now. What I believe console gamers resent is when they are blamed for a PC game not living up to the standards PC gamers have. We don't like being treated with disrespect and indignation by the industry. As consumers, we're just as valuable as any other gamer. I don't think EA would see it that way though. I still think that because consoles are more profitable they see PC games as a secondary market. A PC gamer's $60 is still $60 but it's far more rare to see a PC game sell 6 million copies than it is to see a console game do the same. Also, I'm not defending EA, that's just my guess on how they see it. Thursdaynext might know better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 Also, "pc features" is elitist. It implies that pc games have a different standard. That is the heart of the argument. You're implying that PC = consoles in terms of expected features, which is grossly inaccurate. Again, I'll point you to my "let's say the industry revolves around the DS" hypothetical scenario. Consoles have features that are generally standard that aren't found on current-generation handheld systems. If developers only catered to the needs of a handheld game, you would most definitely feel shortchanged when you see consoles not performing to their fullest potential. PC's =/= consoles. What works for one doesn't work for the other. There's no one-size-fits-all approach to making PC games and console games. They're very different platforms, with different expectations of features. It's not elitism, it's simply recognizing that the PC platform has never been and will never be merely a "souped up" console. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 PC's =/= consoles. What works for one doesn't work for the other. There's no one-size-fits-all approach to making PC games and console games. They're very different platforms, with different expectations of features. It's not elitism, it's simply recognizing that the PC platform has never been and will never be merely a "souped up" console. That's what opens the door to elitism. Blaming console games when a game doesn't live up to "potential" is where the elitism begins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 PC's =/= consoles. What works for one doesn't work for the other. There's no one-size-fits-all approach to making PC games and console games. They're very different platforms, with different expectations of features. It's not elitism, it's simply recognizing that the PC platform has never been and will never be merely a "souped up" console. That's what opens the door to elitism. Blaming console games when a game doesn't live up to "potential" is where the elitism begins. I've seen a few knee-jerk reactions of "CONSOLES DID THIS" when anything on a PC game generally goes awry, but for the most part it's incredibly easy to see exactly what was the result of a poor port job, particularly things like aim assist, forced matchmaking, and no AA or 16:10 resolution support. A basic expectation of standard PC features isn't elitism. Using consoles as a constant scapegoat, even when it doesn't make any sense, is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 "forced matchmaking" to me is more choice than blunder. Console users generally prefer not having to go through a server list and hope they'll find a decent server. Stuff like no WS support is ridiculous though. I really don't know how they fuck that up so badly with parts (this happened with Dead Space and Bioshock IIRC.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgamemnonV2 Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 (edited) PC's =/= consoles. What works for one doesn't work for the other. There's no one-size-fits-all approach to making PC games and console games. They're very different platforms, with different expectations of features. It's not elitism, it's simply recognizing that the PC platform has never been and will never be merely a "souped up" console. That's what opens the door to elitism. Blaming console games when a game doesn't live up to "potential" is where the elitism begins. It's where the facts begin, actually. Frankly I'm a little tired of you playing the ignorant console-only gamer. If you bought a triple-A title for the Wii and it didn't support the motion function you'd complain. If you bought a PS3 game and it asked you to connect to Xbox Live you would complain. And if you bought an Xbox game that had too many key functions for your controller, thus forcing you to use a USB keyboard just to play the game well enough, you'd complain. When features of PC games that have been the staple of gaming norm before consoles were even a glimmer in the video game industry's eye are absent, why the hell is it then "elitist" to complain about the lack of BASIC features we have come to expect for the last thirty years? Edited June 30, 2011 by AgamemnonV2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 What is a basic feature that was left out of Crysis 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P4: Gritty Reboot Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 From the sound of it, graphics settings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 Also, we had a topic on matchmaking vs. custom servers but I prefer matchmaking. http://board.pressxordie.com/topic/664-matchmaking-vs-hosted-servers/page__p__31998__hl__matchmaking__fromsearch__1#entry31998 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
excel_excel Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 For me, its like I think a lot of console gamers don't realise just how influential the PC is and has been over the years of the gaming industry. Portal 2 wouldn't be getting any fanmade levels or free DLC if it was a console exclusive. These days PC gamers criticize games that intentionally limit the experience of gaming on a PC for no reason, or even worse give us a WORSE experience than their console counterparts. I think somewhere deep down the console gamers who go on about PC elitists are actually mad in some cases when PC gamers get the better experience. Look at all the poo slinged around because of superior 360 multiplatform titles by PS3 fanboys. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 (edited) I do believe there is elitism. However, before anyone casts stones, I also believe elitism isn't merely a phenomenon in PC gaming. Truthfully, the "elitism" we talk about most likely isn't real elitism, but instead it's frustration and jealousy under the guise of elitism. If something doesn't turn out desirable, rather than addressing the issue, the individual will instead go into a tangent of how their platform of choice is "superior" and so forth. So yes, I do believe there are PC elitists. Also, there are "console elitists." Simply put, they merely express their "elitism" differently, but that's only because of how different such problems persist between PC and console. I like to think that the PC elitist is more notable because they have to be more outspoken about an issue. Console elitists come off as rambling jerks; jerks that find company with others and proceed to bemoan, and etc. So yeah, that's my thoughts on "elitism." Edited July 1, 2011 by Atomsk88 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 (edited) @Excel, Yeah, there's some jealousy in there but I think the Crysis issue is more one of anger towards a sequel that is not what people wanted and it's being directed at consoles. The redirection of anger away from a developer toward a third party is what seems improper. I keep hearing from multiple people that there's console elitists but I don't really see a good example. There is fanboyism which is surely nothing more than jealousy. Clearly if you have to settle for only one console then you console yourself with thoughts that your choice is clearly the correct one. I think that's different from redirecting anger at a disappointing game onto consoles. The thought rationality proceeds to the idea that "If only consoles didn't exist then I would have gotten the Crysis 2 I always wanted." It may not be what people say outright but it's the heart of what they believe. The truth of that statement is what's in question. If it's a baseless accusation then it's a form of elitism and since it can't really be proven then to make that accusation further betrays your assumption. Had Crysis 2 merely been a bad game and the complaints levyed against it were as simple as "it doesn't have _______ features" then there'd be no discussion but the fact of the matter is that some PC gamers resent current gaming trends and as a scapegoat for their anger they blame consoles. We talk about things like sandbox, rechargeable health, quicksaves and so on. These are all design choices and regardless of whether consoles existed we'd probably still be debating what gameplay types we prefer. Consoles aren't robbing PC gamers of the games they think should exist. Edited July 1, 2011 by Yantelope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 (edited) I do think some PC gamers get a little too carried away blaming consoles for basically everything (though I don't see anyone here doing it. I'm more talking about PC fanboys rather than the average PC gamer). At the same time, it's completely undeniable that the focus is on consoles and there ARE a ton of half-assed console ports. I think what's healthier is to look at the lazy developers themselves and complain to them, rather than bickering between one group of gamers and the other over who's to blame for a developer's laziness. Edited July 1, 2011 by RockyRan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 I think for a while even cross-platform console ports were shitty. It's just a matter of what sells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 (edited) I went onto Penny Arcade tonight because sometimes they'll put Friday's comic up early. They did, but "Gabe's" blog post for Thursday was interesting. I’ve had a few people ask about the Alienware laptop in the strip. Some people want to know if I have one and if so, do I like it. A couple have even asked if I am getting some kind of payment for putting it in there. It’s probably worth mentioning that advertisers can not purchase space in the comic strip. That’s just not something we offer. The truth is I do have a couple Alienware machines and as far as my experience with them, it’s been sort of mixed. I purchased an Alienware M17x laptop about a year ago because I knew eventually the Old Republic would be a real thing and I’d need something to play it on. That’s no joke, either. I remember seeing the game on the floor at PAX back in 2009 and thinking “holy shit I need a PC!” I haven’t had a PC around for years and so there was a certain amount of novelty in setting up a Steam account and checking out what was available. Almost immediately I remembered why I had quit playing PC games. The first game I tried was Rift which eventually ran decent but getting it to that point was a chore. I spent multiple nights searching forums and fiddling with drivers. Apparently my laptop has two video cards configured in a “crossfire” configuration but it was only actually seeing one of the cards. Eventually I got it working but I realized that once again I had not purchased a gaming machine, I had purchased a hobby. Next I tried Brink which suffered from what people were calling “The Grid” making it unplayable. That bug got worked out but by that time I’d picked it up for my 360. I tried the Witcher 2 but it wouldn’t run in full screen. League of Legends has the same problem. I can play it in a window but if I switch to full screen I can only play one game before my machine freezes up. It has seriously been one frustration after another. I’ve had people tell me “that’s what you get for buying a machine with a Radeon in it.” or “You should have built the machine yourself.” These are nice thoughts but I’m not a computer guy. I don’t know any of this stuff. So I brought the machine in for Tycho to take a look at. He spent two days working on it and I’m still playing LOL in a window. When it came time to get Kara a PC I did some homework. The new Alienware M14x got a lot of great reviews but I was hesitant about getting another Alienware. Eventually I gave in and I have to admit it’s an incredible laptop. Compared to my M17x from just one year ago it’s like Hal from the movie 2001. Honestly it’s like it wasn’t even made by the same fucking company. Her sleek little machine sports a much cooler design, it didn’t come bogged down with bullshit software like mine, and it plays every game she tries without a hitch. I guess it is indicative of their new line of machines. If that’s the case, I can highly recommend them. Meanwhile, I’m sick of trying old versions of drivers or new versions or fucking experimental versions. I don’t want to edit command lines or create .cfg files full of custom tweaks. I just want to play games. I guess I just bought the wrong machine or bought it at the wrong time... or maybe both. -Gabe out Personally, I think this is a good example of the dividing line in PC gaming. When things don't work at first, it's a large deterrent to the enjoyment you could be experiencing. Onto that are comments like "that's what you get..." and "build it yourself" which (I feel) adds pressure to gain more knowledge than you intended to ever expect from simply playing games. Rather than receiving eustress from a pleasant gaming experience, you're receiving distress from fiddling around with a machine. Edited July 1, 2011 by Atomsk88 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 He also bought a laptop, so it's his fault for trying to game on it in the first place. It's like buying a Wii and attempting to get Uncharted to work on it some other terrible analogy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 (edited) He also bought a laptop, so it's his fault for trying to game on it in the first place. It's like buying a Wii and attempting to get Uncharted to work on it some other terrible analogy. Can you blame him when Alienware laptops are marketed as "ultimate gaming machines?" I think we've all seen the commercial with the guy spazzing out in the coffee shop, but for good measure... I don't think any analogy could work if you're going to compare it to consoles, both home and handheld. Of course you're not going to get Uncharted to work on a Wii because that is a PS3 game. Yeah there are both PC towers and PC laptops, but they're both "PC." Unless someone tells them not to start PC gaming on a laptop, or services like Steam say something like, "Oh by the way, you really shouldn't play on a laptop," then people are always going to make that "mistake." Edited July 1, 2011 by Atomsk88 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgamemnonV2 Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 What is a basic feature that was left out of Crysis 2? Straw man says what? This conversation is not about a game I haven't played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 He also bought a laptop, so it's his fault for trying to game on it in the first place. It's like buying a Wii and attempting to get Uncharted to work on it some other terrible analogy. This one is really not the consumers fault. If you want to blame anyone then, it's PC devs for making games for the highest spec machines and expecting the consumer to catch up, and the hardware manufacturers for claiming that their PC is the highest spec available even though this claim is usually no longer valid by the end of the day it is made. EA went through a phase of making "Laptop Friendly" games (mostly The Sims 2 titles) but I don't think they do them any more. Public perception is that Laptops are slimline PC's, so this is more like buying a PS3 slim and expecting it to play PS3 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.