I just feel like Devs downgrade games for PC because of consoles.

[F.E.A.R.]

In all my life I've been a PC gamer and I can't describe my passion for playing games and building PC's. However watching YouTube videos of games showcasing how they look in the Beta and after their release has led me to believe that developers downgrade games because consoles give them more money, because you cannot "pirate" file share games just like you can on PC and because corporations like MS and Sony buy game studios to make console exclusive games. Because of this, devs have not brought anything revolutionary to gaming. IDK I could be wrong but the last games that were revolutionary are Half-Life and Crysis, I don't see any revolutionary game today. Devs just put tons of unnecessary stuff into a game, which graphics cards can't keep up with and then people call those games "graphically" demanding, while I don't see anything graphically demanding. Prove me wrong, just look at Crysis 2. The game was made in 2012 and still looks better than a lot of games released today. Games that were specifically made for PC to be top notch always melted console hardware and looked ugly on the consoles like Crysis, Crysis 2, Battlefileld 3 and probably other games that I can't think of right now.

 

But games that have been epic on the PC are few compare to consoles, which leads me to the question, WHY? Why focus making games better on the console with limited hardware instead on the PC? Why when M&K is superior in almost every way to a controller (OK it's better to play a racing game with a controller). Look at the Silent Hill franchise. The original Team Silent made the games specifically for the PS2 while the PC ports were and are still crap. They didn't even bother making the games better on the PC (By "better" I mean optimization, ports). I mean we can see the same thing persisting even today RDR, Borderlands 3, Sekiro, you name them.

 

I'm really disappointed of what devs have been doing in these past 20 decades or more with PC launches, ports and optimizations and then they themselves cry over "piracy" while giving us half baked products for half baked game with DLCs. The day I'll see a revolutionary game is when devs stop favoring a backwater hardware instead of the PC. The PC is already a multi platform so there's no point pushing for consoles only because of them to get half baked products. Sitting and getting filled with money because of console hardware won't get devs to innovate. The clearest example is Intel.

 

I started this thread to know what your thoughts and opinions are on this subject because I can't be the only one that thinks and feels the same like this.

 

 

[cesh me inside b0z]

Gaming & PC's are a non productive passion to have, so even if i were to agree, i cannot.. i am grateful with what comes out and grateful that i live in enough comfort and in a place in the world where i can enjoy things.

 

The issue with folk like yourself is entitlement, oh you think consoles hold them back? it's an ego thing, you spent more so automatically think you are owed something.

 

Gamers are gamers, console are not holding anything back, especially with the direction they are going next gen.

[PlayStation 2]

Keep in mind that sometimes, and this was especially true with games out of the 6th generation, games that were designed for consoles didn't necessarily translate too well to PC because of the way they could take advantage of that hardware. The same is true in reverse and you see it commonly in things like MOBAs that make their way onto consoles, or Valve games specifically.

Silent Hill 2 in particular on the PS2 is an example of exploiting a specific hardware feature to make a game's atmosphere. The PS2 has a crazy high fill rate, from what I remember, so alpha effects like fog work excellently on that hardware. That wasn't the case for the Xbox and PC hardware at the time, which didn't have that crazy hardware trick to the same extent. Admittedly, its Windows port does kinda blow.

[Arika]

42 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

WHY? Why focus making games better on the console with limited hardware instead on the PC?

are you serious? you even said it yourself

 

42 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

because consoles give them more money,

 

 

42 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

Why when M&K is superior in almost every way to a controller (OK it's better to play a racing game with a controller).

absolute bullshit. i've used a controller more on my PC in the last year than M&K. M&K is better for some genres (like shooters) but it is not superior. it's down to preference.

 

 

47 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

But games that have been epic on the PC are few compare to consoles, which leads me to the question, WHY? Why focus making games better on the console with limited hardware instead on the PC?

Take a look at this graph

 

why would a dev lock themselves down to just PC when they can double their potential audience by also releasing on console? if anything, you're more likely going to see devs moving towards mobile, we already are, it's a rapidly growing market.

 

And with the big multiplayer games like battlefield and call of duty, you will find the player base is almost always bigger on console than PC. Consoles are accessible, Consoles are easy to just be able to sit down and play. PC gaming there is a lot more to worry about. are drivers up to date, is your hardware up to date, are all your graphics settings set to the right thing for the best FPS vs visual quality? and that's not for everyone.

53 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

The day I'll see a revolutionary game is when devs stop favoring a backwater hardware

well you're going to be waiting forever then. Game studios exist to make money, they will release games where ever will get them the biggest market share. and sure as hell isn't just PC. you'll get the occasional PC exclusive, sure, but it's never going to be the norm.

 

54 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

The PC is already a multi platform so there's no point pushing for consoles only because of them to get half baked products

get your PCMR bullshit out of here

[The1Dickens]

To add to the brilliant post from Arika, when you know what hardware you are developing for, it's easier to optimize for that specific hardware. Where do you draw the line at what not to support? Look at the market, and you'll see what build/partslist is most common, and it's stuff that is roughly equal to consoles, but different enough that you can't optimize to the same degree without spending that much extra time.

10 minutes ago, Arika S said:

get your PCMR bullshit out of here

Agree wholeheartedly.

[F.E.A.R.]

39 minutes ago, Erik Sieghart said:

Meanwhile I still have fun playing tetris and that game just has different colored blocks.
 

In the end this is just a meaningless rant about how great the PC master race is and how console people are plebs.

I don't give 2 cents about you playing tetris with different color blocks. You're one of those people that would defend let's say CDPR after downgrading the The Witcher 3 graphics and still lying to their customers that they didn't and you would still say I'd buy it. I didn't start a "rant" nor did I mention anything such as "PC master race" or "console plebs".

 

17 minutes ago, Arika S said:

are you serious? you even said it yourself

 

 

 

absolute bullshit. i've used a controller more on my PC in the last year than M&K. M&K is better for some genres (like shooters) but it is not superior. it's down to preference.

 

 

Take a look at this graph

 

why would a dev lock themselves down to just PC when they can double their potential audience by also releasing on console? if anything, you're more likely going to see devs moving towards mobile, we already are, it's a rapidly growing market.

 

And with the big multiplayer games like battlefield and call of duty, you will find the player base is almost always bigger on console than PC. Consoles are accessible, Consoles are easy to just be able to sit down and play. PC gaming there is a lot more to worry about. are drivers up to date, is your hardware up to date, are all your graphics settings set to the right thing for the best FPS vs visual quality? and that's not for everyone.

well you're going to be waiting forever then. Game studios exist to make money, they will release games where ever will get them the biggest market share. and sure as hell isn't just PC. you'll get the occasional PC exclusive, sure, but it's never going to be the norm.

 

get your PCMR bullshit out of here

This wasn't anything about PC master race and stop making bullshit up. Who knows maybe they don't lock themselves to PC because there's also money on other hardware right? It's unfair to show how good a games is and then downgrade the whole game a few months before launch just because of money. All the hard work that they've put into the game goes to oblivion and later lie to their customers that the game was not downgraded. Don't promise something only to let it slip away for money. 

 

'Dark Souls II' Was 'Unplayable And Broken' On Consoles Before Graphics Downgrade

Dark Souls 2 | April 2013 Vs Final Game Graphics/Lighting Comparison

 

CD Projekt tackles The Witcher 3 downgrade issue head on

The Witcher 3 Downgrade 3 years later - How CD Projekt lied and broke their promises to PC gamers

 

Ubisoft hits back at Assassin's Creed: Unity downgrade claims

Modder Discovers Pre-Downgrade Graphics Files In 'Watch Dogs' PC Code [Updated]

 

Get your bullshit bashing out of here. 

[PlayStation 2]

12 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

This wasn't anything about PC master race and stop making bullshit up. Who knows maybe they don't lock themselves to PC because there's also money on other hardware right? It's unfair to show how good a games is and then downgrade the whole game a few months before launch just because of money. All the hard work that they've put into the game goes to oblivion and later lie to their customers that the game was not downgraded. Don't promise something only to let it slip away for money. 

 

'Dark Souls II' Was 'Unplayable And Broken' On Consoles Before Graphics Downgrade

Dark Souls 2 | April 2013 Vs Final Game Graphics/Lighting Comparison

 

CD Projekt tackles The Witcher 3 downgrade issue head on

The Witcher 3 Downgrade 3 years later - How CD Projekt lied and broke their promises to PC gamers

 

Ubisoft hits back at Assassin's Creed: Unity downgrade claims

Modder Discovers Pre-Downgrade Graphics Files In 'Watch Dogs' PC Code [Updated]

 

Get your bullshit bashing out of here. 

Games go through development changes for various reasons. All three games probably needed their respective graphical downgrades for a reason, especially AC:Unity, which notoriously ran like total shite on every platform it was on. 

Is every excuse for graphics downgrading legitimate? No, not really, but games can go through many changes for many reasons.

I'll give you an example: Super Speedway from Gran Turismo 3: A-spec

Its demo incarnations look considerably different than the final game, which is, to say, the demo version of the track is an update of its original Gran Turismo 2 appearance.

Why they changed it, I dunno, but they did. Developers make changes to games in development all the time for nondescript reasons.

[Zando_]

3 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

All three games probably needed their respective graphical downgrades for a reason, especially AC:Unity, which notoriously ran like total shite on every platform it was on. 

Is every excuse for graphics downgrading legitimate? No, not really, but games can go through many changes for many reasons.

^^^ This. Also, in-game footage =/= actual game in the hands of gamers footage. Most of the Battlefront II 2017 trailers were shot in-game, in-engine. Final game is a slight downgrade because the devs want it to be playable. Being able to render at 30fps for a trailer/demo =/= good gaming experience for the average PC gamer who doesn't have a $2K+ god rig. And the console gamers and lower/midrange PC gamers make of most of the gaming market, of course they choose to appeal to them. 

 

I see now why CDPR slaps "demo build subject to change" on everything to do with Cyberpunk 2077 lol, purely to avoid this reeeing at any redesigns they have to do for any reason they choose to. 

[WkdPaul]

I'm not sure what's the whole "downgrade" thing is about??

 

Depending on the game, development will start with Xbox and PlayStation optimized build, when those are in beta, a "port" of the Xbox version is adapted for PC (I put port in quotes because the Xbox version is ran on standardized PCs and then ported to Xbox).

 

So a PC version is usually an Xbox version with better resolution textures and sometimes better models.

[dalekphalm]

@F.E.A.R. there are plenty of PC exclusives - and ones that look damn good. On top of that, there are other games still in development pushing the graphics department far beyond what we typically see in most games (Eg: Star Citizen - which just pushed out a new Alpha unlocking the first jump hole and a second system).

 

Besides all of that, when a game is demoed at E3, etc - that's not a game. Not a full game, anyway. Typically it's a "highly polished slice" - a glorified tech demo, half of the time.

 

This allows them to heavily invest in one single portion of a game, making it look amazing. Especially if this is a video, and not a playable demo.

 

Most game downgrading happens because the game doesn't run well enough with the higher graphics, or because the devs don't have time or enough resources to make the entire game look like the E3 demo, or because they ran into some bug that breaks shit caused by some element of the higher graphics that they end up having to pull.

 

And yes, sometimes, they downgrade graphics for nonsensical reasons or due to incompetence/bad management. But that's definitely not the norm.

 

Now, aside from all of that, even if a dev makes a multi-platform game that appears on both console and PC, so what? GTAV PC release blew the console version away. That was an example of a Console first game that ended up with a kickass really good PC Port. There are plenty of other examples of games with excellent PC Ports that also feature improved graphics.

 

So, ultimately, what's the problem here?

 

Also, cut the anti-console shit out. We're gamers - we love gaming. What a person chooses to game on shouldn't upset you. I proudly game on both PC and on Xbox. I've owned many consoles and many high end gaming PC's in my life. And I sure as shit won't feel bad about it.

[Arika]

49 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

his wasn't anything about PC master race and stop making bullshit up

when your entire post is "Consoles suck because devs hold back PC games because of them" yes it absolutely is PCMR.

 

49 minutes ago, F.E.A.R. said:

'Dark Souls II' Was 'Unplayable And Broken' On Consoles Before Graphics Downgrade

Dark Souls 2 | April 2013 Vs Final Game Graphics/Lighting Comparison

 

CD Projekt tackles The Witcher 3 downgrade issue head on

The Witcher 3 Downgrade 3 years later - How CD Projekt lied and broke their promises to PC gamers

 

Ubisoft hits back at Assassin's Creed: Unity downgrade claims

Modder Discovers Pre-Downgrade Graphics Files In 'Watch Dogs' PC Code [Updated]

none of this matters though. Devs have no obligation to do anything for a particular platform. There is a reason why they end up changing the final version, the more similar each version of the game is across all platforms, the easy it is to push updates at the same time and not break anything.

 

If you had a completely different set of textures and graphical values (even different lighting engines as some games have done) then each patch would have to be treated like a completely separate game, and then you run into the PC version being delayed on release and getting delayed updates. Plus then there's the compatibility layers that need to be built to ensure that it can run on a nearly endless list of different hardware configurations, the additional lines of code and testing for every single step on graphics setting, that takes massive amounts of time and time is money.

 

Pre-release trailers should never be taken at face value in terms of quality. nor should press events be used to determine the final look of a game.

 

If you want to look at a game that fits exactly what you want, look at star citizen.

• Development of the game began in 2011
• kickstarter campaign started in 2012
• first playable "module" (being generous) was 2013
• was supposed to be fully released in 2014
• still in alpha 2015
• still in alpha 2016
• still in alpha 2017
• still in alpha 2018
• still in alpha 2019
• squadron 42 (a game set in the same universe, but not even the SC game) has been postposted with BETA planned for Q2 2020
• Funding exceeded $250 million in 2019
• will likely be in alpha forever
• will likely never be fully released as originally pitched

do you really want more games to have a 8+ year development cycle and then still have things likely cut out because they just can't do it?

 

downgrades and back peddling will always exist in games, doesn't matter if it's PC only, or cross platform. since you mentioned it, lets look at crysis 2, because it doesn't look as good as you think it does.

 

these were compairon shots from because crysis 1 was released to show what it would look like (and crysis 2 used and updated engine)

 

 

 

now let's see what crysis 2 actually looked like

Spoiler

 

 

now i dont know about you, but that doesn't look like the proof of concept screenshots

 

i would say that FFXV is probably the best looking game (in my opinion) and guess what, it was released on PC and console

Spoiler

 

[PlayStation 2]

6 minutes ago, Arika S said:

-snip-

Ooooh, Crysis 2. The game that literally no one mentions because it was shunned at launch for focusing on consoles, despite the fact that this approach was a huge net benefit for its PC release. Holds up significantly better graphically than the first game, and it actually has proper optimization!

[Antistatic12]

The less propriety tech in consoles and the use of more mainstream hardware like the Xbox One does, the easier it is for Devs. I believe the next Xbox and PS5 continue that trend. My understanding is the new Xbox (formally Scarlett) will be x86, have an SSD and more RAM. Three things Devs should really be able to utilise better, than previous generations. 

 

I would love a new Crysis game, I always liked them and It was a good way to test my rig.

 

 

[IkeaGnome]

@F.E.A.R.

The other part to think about, that I haven't seen mentioned yet it optimization for hardware. It's a lot easier to optimize for consoles than PC. If you are making a game for XBONE, there is only 1 set of hardware you have to account for, 2 if you count the PRO. Same with the PS4 and PS4Pro. WIth PC, there is limitless combinations that each user can make. They have to make the PC game more general to run on more general hardware. They can just optimize it for the same CPU, 12 gigs of ram and the same GPU every time and make the most out of it. Much easier to do IMO.

[RonnieOP]

55 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

@F.E.A.R. there are plenty of PC exclusives - and ones that look damn good. On top of that, there are other games still in development pushing the graphics department far beyond what we typically see in most games (Eg: Star Citizen - which just pushed out a new Alpha unlocking the first jump hole and a second system).

 

Are people still holding out hope that Star Citizen will be released? lol.

 

I keep seeing reports on the funds its gathered and just cant imagine who is still donating to that project.

 

[Zando_]

4 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Are people still holding out hope that Star Citizen will be released? lol.

 

I keep seeing reports on the funds its gathered and just cant imagine who is still donating to that project.

 

People who care about it and are enthused about the tech. At least the ones who lay down the big bucks. 
 

 

[RonnieOP]

3 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

People who care about it and are enthused about the tech. At least the ones who lay down the big bucks. 
 

 

I hope the best for them. but at this point I wouldnt hold my breathe for it being released or living up to the hype its had for the past decade or so.

[Zando_]

1 minute ago, RonnieOP said:

I hope the best for them. but at this point I wouldnt hold my breathe for it being released or living up to the hype its had for the past decade or so.

The hype is on the part of people striving for controversy and clicks lol. The hardcore players I've spent a little time with back when I last played it seemed pretty content. Optimistic for the future, excited for coming updates, but not spitting hype and unrealistic shit all over the place. It's satisfied it's target playerbase thus far, and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't continue doing so. 

[wasab]

4 hours ago, Erik Sieghart said:

Meanwhile I still have fun playing tetris and that game just has different colored blocks.
 

In the end this is just a meaningless rant about how great the PC master race is and how console people are plebs.

Candy crush is the new tetris. Better than any triple A titles on pc or console. 

[wasab]

2 hours ago, Antistatic12 said:

The less propriety tech in consoles and the use of more mainstream hardware like the Xbox One does, the easier it is for Devs. I believe the next Xbox and PS5 continue that trend. My understanding is the new Xbox (formally Scarlett) will be x86, have an SSD and more RAM. Three things Devs should really be able to utilise better, than previous generations. 

 

I would love a new Crysis game, I always liked them and It was a good way to test my rig.

 

 

Can it play minesweeper at 60 fps? 

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, RonnieOP said:

Are people still holding out hope that Star Citizen will be released? lol.

 

I keep seeing reports on the funds its gathered and just cant imagine who is still donating to that project.

 

Disclaimer: I backed the initial Kickstarter with one of the basic starter packages but have not purchased any micro transactions or donated any further money to the project. 

 

Whether it’ll ever live up to initial expectations is still up in the air, but I follow the development moderately (usually just catch up on the big patch changes and of course the yearly con which always drops a massive patch) - I have no doubt the game will eventually be finished. 
 

They are making regular and steady progress, with the odd massive leap forward. 
 

The most recent version included a lot of the core mandatory end game tech. I expect them to start expanding available solar systems in 2020.

 

There’s still a lot of work and polish to be done - and I would guess there’s at least 1.5-2yrs of dev time remaining.

[ewitte]

IDK I think its better today especially with MS wanting to release on PC for windows and modern consoles are much closer to PC so the port is easier.  It will be even better with the new consoles as the hardware is better.

[Mark Kaine]

They do - especially for multi platform games.  Engines etc are made with consoles - the biggest common denominator - in mind, it's as simple as that. 

 

Of course PC gamers hate that idea so they usually flat out deny it,  stating that "PC will always be superior" ala "La la la, i can't hear you (over the noise of my $2000 system that's primarily used to play console ports or indies)" 

 

Me personally?  I have no issue I'm pretty much only interested in console ports and am usually happy over the improvements they usually provide (60fps,  higher resolutions are a given in 99%)

 

2 hours ago, ewitte said:

IDK I think its better today especially with MS wanting to release on PC for windows and modern consoles are much closer to PC so the port is easier.  It will be even better with the new consoles as the hardware is better.

thats true,  better console specs always raises the ceiling...  I think we'll actually get DEEP DOWN fidelity this time (gen's) around... Well at least I hope so, man that game looked good, Capcom makes the best engines always,  sadly PS4 netbook compute power wasn't enough, otherwise I'm sure they would have delivered,  not to say RE  engine is bad or anything. 

[Paul Rudd]

15 hours ago, F.E.A.R. said:

IDK I could be wrong

Nailed it.

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, Intransigent said:

Nailed it.

He formulated it wrong but the point stands,  vast majority of games (if we don't count lol indies) are made for consoles first and PCs second and as such will never use the full potential of the hardware, not even close. 

 

Due to this gens consoles being so weak graphics are stagnant as are games as a whole for the most part. 

 

Terrain deformation? Nope,  consoles too weak...  better clothings physics,  less clipping?  Nope,  consoles too weak... Better AI?  Nooooopeee.....

 

 and so on. 

 

 

Devs could add all those things to their PC ports but they don't,  they just set a few sliders higher for resolution and maybe unlock the framerates...  QC not necessary either,  PC community can and will fix the broken stuff for free.