'I use PC Gamer stereotypes to insult pc gamers, but but but guys I'm also a pc gamer so its fine'
If you are going to use the generic excuse to troll, try to not be so obvious about it please.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bethesda is being extremely shady about The Evil Within's PC framerate
- Thread starter Grief.exe
- Start date
'I use PC Gamer stereotypes to insult pc gamers, but but but guys I'm also a pc gamer so its fine'
If you are going to use the generic excuse to troll, try to not be so obvious about it please.
This is a very narrow point-of-view in regards to an audience. PC owners like myself have to spend a lot of money investing on such hardware: We build the components, install them, troubleshoot them and get everything up-to-date to make sure it runs as optimally as possible. I don't think it's fair we get such unwarranted criticism because we don't sit idly by and wait for half-arsed attempts and wait for people like Durante to do the developers job.
I'm not defending developers here, nor attacking you personally. But there is a hell of a lot of knee jerk reactions to pre-release games being "shit optimized" even before anyone knows (Mordor being the most recent example). And there are also a lot of people that literally claim that they will refuse to buy a game, regardless of how good the game itself is, if it doesn't have a particular option. I think those perspectives are legitimately worth criticizing.
family_guy
Member
This is a very narrow point-of-view in regards to an audience. PC owners like myself have to spend a lot of money investing on such hardware: We build the components, install them, troubleshoot them and get everything up-to-date to make sure it runs as optimally as possible. I don't think it's fair we get such unwarranted criticism because we don't sit idly by and wait for half-arsed attempts and wait for people like Durante to do the developers job.
I guess the blessing is that this game is coming out on PC at all and day one at that. Used to be you couldn't count on a PC version coming out and even if it did, it ended up being 6 months to years later. If you have the right setup you're still getting a better version than console players would get and like you said, someone can try to make it better later.
I guess the blessing is that this game is coming out on PC at all and day one at that. Used to be you couldn't count on a PC version coming out and even if it did, it ended up being 6 months to years later. If you have the right setup you're still getting a better version than console players would get and like you said, someone can try to make it better later.
I don't think that's a blessing. It should be an expectation in the year 2014+. Those who don't do it are the ones who are behind the curve. The platform is the biggest in the world.
I'm not defending developers here, nor attacking you personally. But there is a hell of a lot of knee jerk reactions to pre-release games being "shit optimized" even before anyone knows (Mordor being the most recent example). And there are also a lot of people that literally claim that they will refuse to buy a game, regardless of how good the game itself is, if it doesn't have a particular option. I think those perspectives are legitimately worth criticizing.
You have to understand that the entire PC community is based off of an open-platform and consumer choice ideologies.
If you want to build a $500 system and limit yourself to console settings, use Linux/Hackintosh as your main OS, or run the latest and greatest at 144Hz, then those choices are perfectly viable.
When a publisher decides to arbitrarily limit framerates/resolutions, include extraneous DRM, or charge for online play, then these practices are seen as anti-consumer and directly conflict with the values of the playerbase.
Well firstly, I agree for the most part, however there are a couple of things I think you're overlooking. Publishers don't decide that stuff, developers do, and in this case, probably not even Tango, as game simulation being tied to framerate was an id decision while making the engine, and while I can't say for sure, I doubt Tango specifically wanted to use idTech, they just had to based on their publisher.You have to understand that the entire PC community is based off of an open-platform and consumer choice ideologies.
If you want to build a $500 system and limit yourself to console settings, use Linux/Hackintosh as your main OS, or run the latest and greatest at 144Hz, then those choices are perfectly viable.
When a publisher decides to arbitrarily limit framerates/resolutions, include extraneous DRM, or charge for online play, then these practices are seen as anti-consumer and directly conflict with the values of the playerbase.
Should Tango be punished for the sins of id? Maybe, that's for every individual to decide, but I think it should be noted anyway.
No matter how unhappy anyone on GAF is with the technological shortcomings of this game, I'm sure it's dwarfed by the frustration of the studio itself.
But this isn't about games that justify building your PC. I'm assuming most people already made that justification.You have to understand that the entire PC community is based off of an open-platform and consumer choice ideologies.
If you want to build a $500 system and limit yourself to console settings, use Linux/Hackintosh as your main OS, or run the latest and greatest at 144Hz, then those choices are perfectly viable.
When a publisher decides to arbitrarily limit framerates/resolutions, include extraneous DRM, or charge for online play, then these practices are seen as anti-consumer and directly conflict with the values of the playerbase.
It is pretty simple order of operations for me:
1) do I want to play game X?
If yes then:
2) is PC the best platforms I own for playing game x?
3) buy game on PC.
Seems like for a lot of people step one and two are reverses. That seems a bit absurd to me.
But this isn't about games that justify building your PC. I'm assuming most people already made that justification.
It is pretty simple order of operations for me:
1) do I want to play game X?
If yes then:
2) is PC the best platforms I own for playing game x?
3) buy game on PC.
Seems like for a lot of people step one and two are reverses. That seems a bit absurd to me.
It's a value judgement. Does a person feel comfortable paying 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 dollars - whatever the price - for a product where the developer has shown their intent wasn't to take full advantage of their system. It is indicative of the level of quality and effort of the port.
It's making your judgement on the merit of the work behind the port more than the raw comparison of the port to other things. It's similar to deciding whether you want to buy a game depending on the values of the developer. You don't want your money to support practices you don't support. It's the reason some won't buy Shadow Complex because the the game is based on the work of a writer who is a homophobe, why some people won't support Fez because they despise the way Phil Fish acts, why some people won't support Ubisoft because of their hostile treatment of PC gamers/past with PC ports, and why now some people won't support Tango/Bethesda in this game because of their showing that they aren't planning to put the effort into the PC version of the game required to support standard features that a person playing on PC can (and should) expect from the typical PC version of a game.
It's making your judgement on the merit of the work behind the port more than the raw comparison of the port to other things. It's similar to deciding whether you want to buy a game depending on the values of the developer. You don't want your money to support practices you don't support. It's the reason some won't buy Shadow Complex because the the game is based on the work of a writer who is a homophobe, why some people won't support Fez because they despise the way Phil Fish acts, why some people won't support Ubisoft because of their hostile treatment of PC gamers/past with PC ports, and why now some people won't support Tango/Bethesda in this game because of their showing that they aren't planning to put the effort into the PC version of the game required to support standard features that a person playing on PC can (and should) expect from the typical PC version of a game.
In my case, and presumably nbthedude's if you extrapolate a bit from his post, I'm so much more compelled to support what I'm thinking represents good game design (as best as I can deduce having never played it) than I am to punish what I consider to be sub-par porting and PR practices. It's similar to me buying enjoyable-looking console-exclusive games despite wanting every game to be on PC, or buying Steam games despite not wanting to deal with DRM, or owning a Wii U despite hating region-locking, and so on.
In my case, and presumably nbthedude's if you extrapolate a bit from his post, I'm so much more compelled to support what I'm thinking represents good game design (as best as I can deduce having never played it) than I am to punish what I consider to be sub-par porting and PR practices. It's similar to me buying certain console-exclusive game despite wanting every game to be on PC, or buying Steam games despite not wanting to deal with DRM, or owning a Wii U despite hating region-locking, and so on.
I get that, and that's different priorities. Both are understandable and defendable positions because they're entirely dependent on what a person as a consumer values most.
It's the same reason why some people won't get the PC version - even though from a technical aspect it will be better than console versions - and still get it on PS4 or Xbox One. It's important to them that their money doesn't go to support bad practices on the PC, and they do still want to support the game on the merits of it's design. As such, they'll do it on a platform where they believe both of those things are being rewarded, game design and effort of development.
I get that, and that's different priorities. Both are understandable and defendable positions because they're entirely dependent on what a person as a consumer values most.
It's the same reason why some people won't get the PC version - even though from a technical aspect it will be better than console versions - and still get it on PS4 or Xbox One. It's important to them that their money doesn't go to support bad practices on the PC, and they do still want to support the game on the merits of it's design. As such, they'll do it on a platform where they believe both of those things are being rewarded, game design and effort of development.
That's my stance on it. I don't want to support anti-consumer practices and bad PC ports. I don't have any other option to play the game so I just ignore it, there are plenty of releases that I can play, my backlog stretches back to the SNES era after all.
Has Bethesda released the cvars that will allow us to unlock the framerate yet or are we going to have to hunt them down?
They've said they will release them, but haven't yet to my knowledge.
Has Bethesda released the cvars that will allow us to unlock the framerate yet or are we going to have to hunt them down?
Not yet, but it might be com_synctotime and r_syncatendframe like Wolfenstein.
Makes me wonder if Tango just halved the regular framecap and doubled the timescale for their default settings.
I get that, and that's different priorities. Both are understandable and defendable positions because they're entirely dependent on what a person as a consumer values most.
It's the same reason why some people won't get the PC version - even though from a technical aspect it will be better than console versions - and still get it on PS4 or Xbox One. It's important to them that their money doesn't go to support bad practices on the PC, and they do still want to support the game on the merits of it's design. As such, they'll do it on a platform where they believe both of those things are being rewarded, game design and effort of development.
That's my stance on it. I don't want to support anti-consumer practices and bad PC ports. I don't have any other option to play the game so I just ignore it, there are plenty of releases that I can play, my backlog stretches back to the SNES era after all.
Perhaps I'm just overly cynical, but I think you are primarily doing a disservice to yourself and the kinds of games you want to enjoy on PC with this kind of perspective. Holding off on buying a PC game because you think it violates some kind of gaming principle doesn't make much sense to me (aside from extreme situations). Buy and play the games you want to enjoy and buy and play the best versions of those games available to you.
I save my consumer activism for things that have larger consequences: stuff like exploitation of labor, terrible environmental practices, etc. Actually that's the reason I became a vegetarian four years ago; I try not to be preachy about it but for many reasons I felt like my "money should be where my mouth is" in terms of environmental-industrial politics. But videogames? Videogames frankly don't seem important enough to stand on some kind of abstract notion of justice or principles. I'm more interested in simply playing the best ones I enjoy and the best versions of those games.
At the very least I do hope that people who want to boycott PC games for these kinds of reasons take a similar or more aggressive approach at boycotting products where it matters more (again, exploitation of labor or the environment or whatever larger issue you feel is important) and don't use videogame ports as their sole area that they are standing on consumer principle within. One only has so much energy for this sort of consumer advocacy thing and if too much of your activism mind share goes solely towards your entertainment hobby and nowhere else, I think that's kind of a shame and more than a bit shallow.
In my case, and presumably nbthedude's if you extrapolate a bit from his post, I'm so much more compelled to support what I'm thinking represents good game design (as best as I can deduce having never played it) than I am to punish what I consider to be sub-par porting and PR practices. It's similar to me buying enjoyable-looking console-exclusive games despite wanting every game to be on PC, or buying Steam games despite not wanting to deal with DRM, or owning a Wii U despite hating region-locking, and so on.
Well said. And that is precisely my stance.
ClaptoVaughn
Member
At the very least I do hope that people who want to boycott PC games for these kinds of reasons take a similar or more aggressive approach at boycotting products where it matters more (again, exploitation of labor or the environment or whatever larger issue you feel is important) and don't use videogame ports as their sole area that they are standing on consumer principle within. One only has so much energy for this sort of consumer advocacy thing and if too much of your activism mind share goes solely towards your entertainment hobby and nowhere else, I think that's kind of a shame and more than a bit shallow.
Oh I can only imagine the smug grin of self satisfaction you had on your face when you typed that paragraph out. A triumphant challenge to every snobby pc gamer, indeed.
But no, it doesn't work like that. No one is protesting outside the HQ of a game developer. No one is passing out fliers to passerbys on the street. Hell, I don't think anyone here is even blogging about it. There is no "aggressive" energy or activism to expend on "larger" issues. It is this:
- Game comes out
- Shit port? Yes? Don't buy. No? Maybe buy.
That's it, and YOU know it. When elaborated upon, it tends to sound a bit more involved because this is a discussion board but it really does just come down to "buy it or don't buy it."
Your dramatic comparison to labor exploitation works well to make our complaints seem incredibly petty because you're right, our issues with a lousy port ARE petty compared to labor exploitation. Problem is, they're YOUR comparisons. No one here said "this port is worse than exploitative labor." Or red meat.
This is a video game forum, and we are talking about video games. Until we get news that this developer is abusing their employees, bringing up labor exploitation in any shape, form, or fashion in an attempt to invalidate something as petty as a stance on a video game purchase is, quite frankly,
more than a bit shallow.
Oh I can only imagine the smug grin of self satisfaction you had on your face when you typed that paragraph out. A triumphant challenge to every snobby pc gamer, indeed.
But no, it doesn't work like that. No one is protesting outside the HQ of a game developer. No one is passing out fliers to passerbys on the street. Hell, I don't think anyone here is even blogging about it. There is no "aggressive" energy or activism to expend on "larger" issues. It is this:
- Game comes out
- Shit port? Yes? Don't buy. No? Maybe buy.
That's it, and YOU know it. When elaborated upon, it tends to sound a bit more involved because this is a discussion board but it really does just come down to "buy it or don't buy it."
Your dramatic comparison to labor exploitation works well to make our complaints seem incredibly petty because you're right, our issues with a lousy port ARE petty compared to labor exploitation. Problem is, they're YOUR comparisons. No one here said "this port is worse than exploitative labor." Or red meat.
This is a video game forum, and we are talking about video games. Until we get news that this developer is abusing their employees, bringing up labor exploitation in any shape, form, or fashion in an attempt to invalidate something as petty as a stance on a video game purchase is, quite frankly,
You completely missed point which was I thought was pretty clear: I personally don't find boycotting PC games in the name of larger justice principles justifiable but its fine if others do. As i said, I just hope those people practicing boycotting PC games they'd apparently otherwise really enjoy playing at least consider making the same kind of consumer sacrifices when considering purchases that entail more serious violations of justice. And I'm not talking about protesting or handing out fliers or whatever. I'm talking about doing exactly what they are purportedly doing here: abstaining from buying something they would enjoy on the basis that it violates some larger principle of justice they hold.
It could be that they absolutely do. I don't know. I wasn't meaning to imply for matter of fact that they don't. I just know I personally don't have the ability to practice that kind of conscientiousness in every aspect of my life or even every aspect of my consumer purchases. It would simply be too much. I didn't make my statements out of an elitist attempt to position myself as better than others (charges of elitism are often an easy ride to victory on public forums but they don't do much to effectively validate or deconstruct the potency of arguments one way or the other). Rather I was expressing a genuine concern (something taboo to admit on the internet in the age of ironic detachment, I acknowledge, but so it is). Is it not possible that some people may (unintentionally) substitute concerns over bigger issues for concerns and advocacy for those within their hobbies? That they devote far more time thinking about, talking about, and getting generally caught up in these smaller notions of "justice" within a subculture than they do thinking about more profound issues of societal justice?
I believe it happens all the time that people get caught up in the politics of their sub-culture to such a degree that it means more to them than anything else. It could very well be that I'm wrong, but honestly I do suspect that good number of people that get all up in arms about PC ports are NOT practicing that kind of consumer advocacy in any other aspect of their lives other than videogames. I would like to be proven wrong, but I doubt I am. But it's certainly not a problem limited to PC gamers or even videogames as a whole. Nor did I ever intend to imply that it was. Hell, I've seen it happen in academia time and time again. So I wasn't meaning to call out PC gamers in particular as being plagued with a problem that doesn't exist elsewhere. Rather I meant my post as gateway of discussing what is worth advocating and why.
ClaptoVaughn
Member
You completely missed point which was I thought was pretty clear: I personally don't find boycotting PC games in the name of larger justice principles justifiable but its fine if others do. As i said, I just hope those people practicing boycotting PC games they'd apparently otherwise really enjoy playing at least consider making the same kind of consumer sacrifices when considering purchases that entail more serious violations of justice. And I'm not talking about protesting or handing out fliers or whatever. I'm talking about doing exactly what they are purportedly doing here: abstaining from buying something they would enjoy on the basis that it violates some larger principle of justice they hold.
It could be that they absolutely do. I don't know. I wasn't meaning to imply for matter of fact that they don't. I just know I personally don't have the ability to practice that kind of conscientiousness in every aspect of my life or even every aspect of my consumer purchases. It would simply be too much. I didn't make my statements out of an elitist attempt to position myself as better than others (charges of elitism are often an easy ride to victory on public forums but they don't do much to effectively validate or deconstruct the potency of arguments one way or the other). Rather I was expressing a genuine concern (something taboo to admit on the internet in the age of ironic detachment, I acknowledge, but so it is). Is it not possible that some people may (unintentionally) substitute concerns over bigger issues for concerns and advocacy for those within their hobbies? That they devote far more time thinking about, talking about, and getting generally caught up in these smaller notions of "justice" within a subculture than they do thinking about more profound issues of societal justice?
I believe it happens all the time that people get caught up in the politics of their sub-culture to such a degree that it means more to them than anything else. It could very well be that I'm wrong, but honestly I do suspect that good number of people that get all up in arms about PC ports are NOT practicing that kind of consumer advocacy in any other aspect of their lives other than videogames. I would like to be proven wrong, but I doubt I am. But it's certainly not a problem limited to PC gamers or even videogames as a whole. Nor did I ever intend to imply that it was. Hell, I've seen it happen in academia time and time again. So I wasn't meaning to call out PC gamers in particular as being plagued with a problem that doesn't exist elsewhere. Rather I meant my post as gateway of discussing what is worth advocating and why.
I caught a pretentious tone in your statement, which to be fair, might not have been intentional or even present at all. I think the simple issue here is you think this topic justifies a much broader scope than I do.
However, to continue this inevitably lengthy discussion I would be contradicting the very point I was trying to make, which is...video games ain't that big of a deal, man. Certain topics related to games CAN be, yes, but I don't think this particular thread would benefit in going in that direction. So I'll just bow out before I inadvertently take it there myself.