Support NeoGAF

[Dictator93]

Out of those the only one that has any merit in this discussion is Star Citizen because it's the most successfully crowd funded thing ever by a huge margin and it still doesn't even approach a traditional AA game, budget wise.

I don't think that point has been proven.

Budget doesnt matter at all. It is about content and ambition and the ability to prove the game will be the way the devs intend and present it,.

Everything points to SC, megaman (cough cough), and Elite being incredibly ambitious games which have production values and content far beyond "AAA" games with similar budgets. In fact, Star Citizen is looking to be one of the most complex/highest fidelity games ever made.

Shitting on crowd funding games as not being as impressive as AAA-tripe genero-brand stuff reads like you have never played or even looked into any of these games design documents or goals. Or hell, the amazing examples of incredibly impressive released kickstarter projects.

 

[benny_a]

Budget doesnt matter at all. It is about content and ambition and the ability to prove the game will be the way the devs intend and present it,.

Everything points to SC, megaman (cough cough), and Elite being incredibly ambitious games which have production values and content far beyond "AAA" games with similar budgets. In fact, Star Citizen is looking to be one of the most complex/highest fidelity games ever made.

Viveks was talking about why Microsoft would stop thinking it makes economical sense.

Megaman or Elite are not good counter arguments for why Microsoft would continue to fund those kind if video games at that budget.

Shitting on crowd funding games as not being as impressive as AAA-tripe genero-brand stuff reads like you have never played or even looked into any of these games design documents or goals. Or hell, the amazing examples of incredibly impressive released kickstarter projects.

Uh ok

 

[viveks86]

Wait, this has been proven to not be true. You can play those games as long as the will to make them from fans and devs exist.

Games that people want can exist without the current console exclusive/publisher paradigm. Star Citizen, elite dangeorus, planetary annihilation, Megaman (cough cough), etc...

I'm not claiming that no game can exist without console exclusivity/publisher paradigm. But the paradigm exists for a reason and it works well for many developers.

Also, it isn't selfish to want something for everyone. I'm just saying it's unrealistic and pointless. And we are talking about games here. Not healthcare. Seems really odd to even take a moral/ideological stand over entertainment.

 

[Denton]

I don't understand this line of thinking. It's up to the creators to make whatever they want on whatever platform they want. It's their creation after all. It's up to the consumer to buy it or not buy it. There is no use in discussing who should publish what on which platform.

As evidenced by almost daily occurence of various threads about games being published on various platforms, apparently there is some use in it.

Of course it is up to creators to release their games wherever they want. And if these creators want me to play their games, they should release it on platforms I own. If they don't, that's ok too.

 

[Dictator93]

Viveks was talking about why Microsoft would stop thinking it makes economical sense.

Megaman or Elite are not good counter arguments for why Microsoft would continue to fund those kind if video games at that budget.

But the point of this argument doesn't matter in a world where incredibly high quality games can be funded by the audiences which actually want them. Thereby tuning the game for the niche audience and not blanding/commericalizing it out so it breaks even on its marketting budget.

BTW, I say you are shitting on crowd funded games because you state this:

Out of those the only one that has any merit in this discussion is Star Citizen

Just because of budget? That seems like arguing to the publisher hand. More money for budget =/ better/more content filled/quality game.

Destiny should ahve taught us all this.

 

[benny_a]

But the point of this argument doesn't matter in a world where incredibly high quality games can be funded by the audiences which actually want them. Thereby tuning the game for the niche audience and not blanding/commericalizing it out so it breaks even on its marketting budget.

The point of the argument is in a thread about a game that was fully funded by Microsoft.

Of course it's relevant what Microsoft does in this very thread.

The mere presence of this discussion in this very thread means that Microsoft has taken the risk to fund a title that you apparently think is omg awesome enough to be a top 3 poster in here.

BTW, I say you are shitting on crowd funded games because you state this:

Just because of budget? That seems like arguing to the publisher hand. More money for budget =/ better/more content filled/quality game.

Destiny should ahve taught us all this.

I have not argued quality. I have argued the publisher perspective because that's the post you replied to. That you think crowdfunding can produce great games does not matter about whether or not Microsoft will continue to think it's feasible to front several tens of millions of dollars per video game project.

 

[Dictator93]

The point of the argument is in a thread about a game that was fully funded by Microsoft.

Of course it's relevant what Microsoft does in this very thread.

The mere presence of this discussion in this very thread means that Microsoft has taken the risk to fund a title that you apparently think is omg awesome enough to be a top 3 poster in here.

His argument was that games will not be made unless exclusivity/console locking exists. AKA that the current publisher model cotinues.

Hence why I counter that indies of great ambition prove this incorrect. And my posting here has to do with my trying to argue a point, not argue a platform.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Umm Microsoft loses out? Tell me do you think people not buying their console is good? That is what you're saying. Also how was Dead Rising 3 and Ryse Son of Rome coming to Pc good for Microsoft? Since they aren't publishing it for Pc then they aren't getting money. They are getting money but it's so insignificant to the amount they would be getting if people bought those two games on Xbox because they are publishing.
You guys remember when Microsoft said that they are funding Dead Rising 3 100% yet they didn't publish it for PC. That was so bs, it was more like here, take this money and don't release on PlayStation.

The exclusives Microsoft usually buy are first on xbox so they get their moneys worth. They spend a lot on Call of Duty, Madden (?), and such for first on xbox stuff. Timed exclusives and the like are part of their strategy. I think they are ok with this type of thing happening especially if it's just ports to PC and not another console (speaking of games like Ryse, Dead Rising, and Alan Wake).

 

[viveks86]

The point of the argument is in a thread about a game that was fully funded by Microsoft.

This. Can always count on Benny to be the voice of reason. Also, welcome to the club of corporate cheerleaders and slaves. We are pathetic, you and I

His argument was that games will not be made unless exclusivity/console locking exists. AKA that the current publisher model cotinues.

Hence why I counter that indies of great ambition prove this incorrect. And my posting here has to do with my trying to argue a point, not argue a platform.

Eh? My argument was specifically in context of THIS game. Godelsmetric said he wants to play THIS game on PC so that he doesn't have to get an xbox. That's what started this conversation. I'm pro-indie BTW, if my avatar wasn't any indication

 

[Dictator93]

This. Can always count on Benny to be the voice of reason. Also, welcome to the club of corporate cheerleaders and slaves. We are pathetic, you and I

I would not call you a slave or a corporate cheerleader. But rather, listen to the evidence and chance of going beyond the exclusivity/AAA production model.

Arguing that the current way it is done is the only way seems to ignore the great chance you can have to making gaming better for all. More games to more platforms is more people having fun, and when split from the publisher, a greater way for creativity and audience interaction.

Eh? My argument was specifically in context of THIS game. Godelsmetric said he wants to play THIS game on PC so that he doesn't have to get an xbox. That's what started this conversation.

So you think this game could not theoretically exist without it being exclusively locked to any one console?

 

[benny_a]

His argument was that games will not be made unless exclusivity/console locking exists. AKA that the current publisher model cotinues.

Hence why I counter that indies of great ambition prove this incorrect. And my posting here has to do with my trying to argue a point, not argue a platform.

I believe you have misread that post.

The discussion was about why should anyone care about Microsoft's perspective and he said people should care because it's their game and they fund it and if it stops making economical sense they will stop funding those games. The part about it being the superior publishing model or a perceived dig at Star Citizen is all in your head.

So you think this game could not theoretically exist without it being exclusively locked to any one console?

What's with this theorycrafting? It did not exist prior to Microsoft contracting an independent developer to develop it for several millions of dollars. Just like all games that are created under this model.

 

[David___]

So you think this game could not theoretically exist without it being exclusively locked to any one console?

Considering we're talking about devs who developed Fuse, no.

 

[Dictator93]

I believe you have misread that post.

The discussion was about why should anyone care about Microsoft's perspective and he said people should care because it's their game and they fund it and if it stops making economical sense they will stop funding those games. The part about it being the superior publishing model or a perceived dig at Star Citizen is all in your head.

This is the part that I have a contention with. Sorry for not expressing myself clearly in this quote marathon. lol

I agree that that could and probably would happen. But! Who cares!
Basically I would say, them seeing no economic sense in it and not funding it is not necessarily a loss. Rather, I see it being a better opportunity to make a better game by having it be funded and created in tandem with a niche community. Imagine fuse being created without all the genero stuff? Wouldn't that be cool!

What's with this theorycrafting? It did not exist prior to Microsoft contracting an independent developer to develop it for several millions of dollars. Just like all games that are created under this model.

Theory crafting comes from all the devs who have said, "no AAA person would allow us to make this game, hence we turn to you the fans." I partially and indirectly answer this better below btw!

Considering we're talking about devs who developed Fuse, no.

Obviously, insomniac shot a lot of credit they oculd ever have had in the foot with that game. True, that definitely would affect their ability to get good word of mouth in some way to allow for crowd funding to be successful.

But in that same vein, why the fuck is microsoft funding them given this same history?

 

[viveks86]

So you think this game could not theoretically exist without it being exclusively locked to any one console?

Theoretically, sure. But in reality, who knows? The AAA industry is broken, but that isn't because of the publisher/exclusivity model. It's because of ever expanding scope and greed. The model itself is just fine. It has its place, like in every other entertainment business.

 

[benny_a]

Theory crafting comes from all the devs who have said, "no AAA person would allow us to make this game, hence we turn to you the fans." I partially and indirectly answer this better below btw!

Obviously, insomniac shot a lot of credit they oculd ever have had in the foot with that game. True, that definitely would affect their ability to get good word of mouth in some way to allow for crowd funding to be successful.

But in that same vein, why the fuck is microsoft funding them given this same history?

I'm all for more creative control for the developers.

I think many roads lead to Rome and a platform holder funding games that huge multiplatform publisher turn down is one such way.

See for example Demon's Souls or Super Mario 64 or various other games that defined sub-genres and spawned heavily inspired derivates.

I don't agree that the publisher pays for the funding of a title and then when I think it's great I will buy it is a bad model nor do I think publishers are inherently evil. That in turn doesn't mean I think crowdfunding is bad.
One model spawned Grand Theft Auto and the other model spawned Wasteland 2, Broken Age, etc.

 

[viveks86]

LOL. This discussion isn't really about Insomniac anymore, is it?

 

[Dictator93]

LOL. This discussion isn't really about Insomniac anymore, is it?

your fault bro. Also, NEOGAF.

Spoiler

I AM TO BLAME

I'm all for more creative control for the developers.

I think many roads lead to Rome and a platform holder funding games that huge multiplatform publisher turn down is one such way.

See for example Demon's Souls or Super Mario 64 or various other games that defined sub-genres and spawned heavily inspired derivates.

I don't agree that the publisher pays for the funding of a title and then when I think it's great I will buy it is a bad model nor do I think publishers are inherently evil. That in turn doesn't mean I think crowdfunding is bad.
One model spawned Grand Theft Auto and the other model spawned Wasteland 2, Broken Age, etc.

I will agree with you that the world is more diverse than the pictures we paint. But I think that in the end the better made game in a competition of the same game under different publishing options, would be the one that connects with the fans and devs ambitions the most.

 

[viveks86]

your fault bro. Also, NEOGAF.

Time for me to get back to work, then!

 

[FlamingHawk]

Edit.

 

[Dynomutt]

So....I have a question GAF. How does a company grow its brand without exclusives?

I just dont think the impact would have been there for games like The Last of Us if it was multi-plat. I'd say the same for a franchise like Halo I think its exclusivity helped both it and MS platforms.

Also, while browsing the forums of both GAF and reddit I noticed that PC gamers are more vocal about receiving console exclusives than the other way around?

No favorites here just want to learn. Thanks.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Yes, that's exactly what I said...

Crytek is a dev with a big history of releasing on PC. So try again? In fact, people were surprised to see Crytek going console before PC. So pointing out my Avatar doesn't exactly prove anything, unless of course you somehow expect every game that's exclusive to the Xbox One to head to PC.

 

[Dictator93]

So....I have a question GAF. How does a company grow its brand without exclusives?

Well in an open platform environment there realy isn't a brand to grow. Rather, the wealth, diversity, and quality of games (that even are multiplatform) combines with convenience to make people choose I would imagine. Just a good econsystem makes the brand grow rather than exclusivity (steam, windows to an extent)

In a closed environment, you kinda already limit the ways your company can grow by limiting how fans/devs interact with the platform. You either need some insane group of fans buying on image alone like apple, or like you said, probably with making exclusive content. Or a killer/price performance profile.

 

[FlamingHawk]

I could give two fucks about a multi-billion dollar company losing out if it means the developers get the money they deserve and the consumers get the games on the platform they prefer.

Why do you care about Microsoft's bottom line?

If Microsoft isn't making money they will leave the gaming industry, that is why you should care about them losing money. The gaming industry has survived because of these "fucking" multi-billion dollar companies backing the gaming industry with their fuckin billions of dollars. You think PC gaming saved the gaming industry back when it was about to fail, no it was Nintendo with their console, not pc. You think if Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and every other multi-billion dollar gaming company left, the gaming industry would survive? You pc gamers think you guys are so relevant to the gaming industry but you guys didn't even matter until like a couple of years ago. Why the fuck do you guys think you guys get shifty ports and games late? Consoles are the priority with AAA titles. You guys keep saying the PC gaming industry is making more money than the console industry but that is pure bs. Most of the money comes from MMOs and MOBAs. You guys also think that AAA games make more money on pc than consoles, LOL.
Take this link as reference.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-addressing-your-questions-and-concerns/2/
What I'm about to say will go for EVERY AAA title. I'll just give you a few examples.
Lets take Skyrim for example, a game pc gamers love to boast about it being better on pc. It sold 6 million on PC. Ok that is a lot, how much did it sell total?
http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/28/skyrim-sales-pass-20-million-as-lol-hits-27-million-a-day-4279983/
It sold 20 million, so 6 million from pc and 14 million from consoles. Almost double on consoles. Now tell me this, how much of that 6 million came from steam sales? For $5?
I bet more than half, pc gamers love to wait for steam sales. While on the other hand console gamers buy these games day 1 for $60. The lowest console games like skyrim sell for is usually $20 on sale. $5 vs $20, which is the lowest and alot of people buy games day 1 for $60. So tell me with the 100s of millions of pc gamers around the world why can't it outsell consoles?

Want more?
http://bfbcs.com/
BFBC 2 sold almost twice as much on consoles and again tell me how much of those pc sales came from steam sales.

I can give you these facts with almost every AAA title. Borderlands, Bioshock, Call of Duty, Fallout, EVERY AAA title sells more on consoles. So if consoles or pc gaming had to die, it would be pc gaming. That is why you should fucking care about these companies. Tell me, when was the last time PC had a AAA exclusive? Lmao I can't even think of one that isn't a MMO and RTS. Please give me one. If companies made so much money on pc they would be making Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, Skyrim and every other AAA exclusive to the PC because PC is superior right? Developers would be making the best games possible on PC because its so superior, so why aren't they? That is all that matters, resolution and frame rates, not making money. Look at Destiny, they had to choose what to work on, a few platforms and they didn't choose pc because they would make more money on the last gen consoles than pc.
This is a fact, once consoles die, so will AAA titles.


Edit: and no I don't have an Xbox One, I have a PS4.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

So....I have a question GAF. How does a company grow its brand without exclusives?

I just dont think the impact would have been there for games like The Last of Us if it was multi-plat. I'd say the same for a franchise like Halo I think its exclusivity helped both it and MS platforms.

Also, while browsing the forums of both GAF and reddit I noticed that PC gamers are more vocal about receiving console exclusives than the other way around?

No favorites here just want to learn. Thanks.

I think Microsoft should have been focusing more on in house exclusives, games that have 0 chance of leaving them via PC ports, renaming, or whatever. They don't seem to concerned about it though or else they would have locked them down better. They like being able to work with third parties for exclusive games a lot, it seems like too much of a wild card but not all of the games leave to go on PC (Gears 2+, most of the Halo games, and such).

About the second part, that's because the only reason some PC gamers get a console is for the exclusive to console games (Lolipop Chainsaw, Red Dead Redemption, and TLoU for example). PC games going to console are rarely better visually. The console game going to pc should look amazing and run amazing, if not someone could probably fix it. GTA4 was horrible performance wise though, but boy the visual mods in that game, and skyrim is PS5 (? don't kill me) material with it's visual mods it seem.

 

[Dictator93]

I can give you these facts with almost every AAA title. Borderlands, Bioshock, Call of Duty, Fallout, EVERY AAA title sells more on consoles. So if consoles or pc gaming had to die, it would be pc gaming. That is why you should fucking care about these companies. Tell me, when was the last time PC had a AAA exclusive? Lmao I can't even think of one that isn't a MMO and RTS. Please give me one. If companies made so much money on pc they would be making Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, Skyrim and every other AAA exclusive to the PC because PC is superior right? That is all that matters, resolution and frame rates, not making money. Look at Destiny, they had to choose what to work on, a few platforms and they didn't choose pc because they would make more money on the last gen consoles than pc.
This is a fact, once consoles die, so will AAA titles.

1. Apparently it is consoles vs. PC, what loaded argument. But yeah, 3 platforms selling more than 1 is pretty normal. Also, what does this have to do with anything?

2. Last AAA exclusive on PC? Do you know what AAA means? Do you know that a game's quality is indepdent of its production method and budget? Do you know that games on PC tend to have an incredibly different interaction scheme/ environment/gameplay base? That you equate with AAA = good is pretty problematic.

3. AAA Titles dying isn't a problem. Consoles dying is a problem (aka cheap fixed platform w/ dedicated local multiplayer).

4. Games of similar "AAA" fidelity have come to exist without its budgets and publishing model. Your point is moot.

 

[SparkTR]

This is a fact, once consoles die, so will AAA titles.

Good riddance, hopefully it'll go back to more mid-tier titles that aren't homogenous, mass marketed and dull.

 

[Dynomutt]

Well in an open platform environment there realy isn't a brand to grow. Rather, the wealth, diversity, and quality of games (that even are multiplatform) combines with convenience to make people choose I would imagine. Just a good econsystem makes the brand grow rather than exclusivity (steam, windows to an extent)

In a closed environment, you kinda already limit the ways your company can grow by limiting how fans/devs interact with the platform. You either need some insane group of fans buying on image alone like apple, or like you said, probably with making exclusive content. Or a killer/price performance profile.

So how would an open-platform work? One type of software that runs on multiple plats i.e. ps, pc, xbox? Wouldnt this be an issue due to power variances and fragmentation?

I mean I would not mind if it means more games.

 

[Freeman]

If Microsoft isn't making money they will leave the gaming industry, that is why you should care about them losing money. The gaming industry has survived because of these "fucking" multi-billion dollar companies backing the gaming industry with their fuckin billions of dollars. You think PC gaming saved the gaming industry back when it was about to fail, no it was Nintendo with their console, not pc. You think if Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and every other multi-billion dollar gaming company left, the gaming industry would survive? You pc gamers think you guys are so relevant to the gaming industry but you guys didn't even matter until like a couple of years ago. Why the fuck do you guys think you guys get shifty ports and games late? Consoles are the priority with AAA titles. You guys keep saying the PC gaming industry is making more money than the console industry but that is pure bs. Most of the money comes from MMOs and MOBAs. You guys also think that AAA games make more money on pc than consoles, LOL.
Take this link as reference.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-addressing-your-questions-and-concerns/2/
What I'm about to say will go for EVERY AAA title. I'll just give you a few examples.
Lets take Skyrim for example, a game pc gamers love to boast about it being better on pc. It sold 6 million on PC. Ok that is a lot, how much did it sell total?
http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/28/skyrim-sales-pass-20-million-as-lol-hits-27-million-a-day-4279983/
It sold 20 million, so 6 million from pc and 14 million from consoles. Almost double on consoles. Now tell me this, how much of that 6 million came from steam sales? For $5?
I bet more than half, pc gamers love to wait for steam sales. While on the other hand console gamers buy these games day 1 for $60. The lowest console games like skyrim sell for is usually $20 on sale. $5 vs $20, which is the lowest and alot of people buy games day 1 for $60. So tell me with the 100s of millions of pc gamers around the world why can't it outsell consoles?

Want more?
http://bfbcs.com/
BFBC 2 sold almost twice as much on consoles and again tell me how much of those pc sales came from steam sales.

I can give you these facts with almost every AAA title. Borderlands, Bioshock, Call of Duty, Fallout, EVERY AAA title sells more on consoles. So if consoles or pc gaming had to die, it would be pc gaming. That is why you should fucking care about these companies. Tell me, when was the last time PC had a AAA exclusive? Lmao I can't even think of one that isn't a MMO and RTS. Please give me one. If companies made so much money on pc they would be making Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, Skyrim and every other AAA exclusive to the PC because PC is superior right? Developers would be making the best games possible on PC because its so superior, so why aren't they? That is all that matters, resolution and frame rates, not making money. Look at Destiny, they had to choose what to work on, a few platforms and they didn't choose pc because they would make more money on the last gen consoles than pc.
This is a fact, once consoles die, so will AAA titles.


Edit: and no I don't have an Xbox One, I have a PS4.

If AAA dies so be it, it will mean that there isn't enough interest in it (I doubt AAA will ever be gone.

If MS releases this games for PC they either think its good busness or these devs required the option to release for PC in other to ddvelop those games.

If MS ends ip leaving the console business evething will be just fine. One doors shut another opens.

Also, you either have short memory or you forgot that when multis werent as present on PC(just the other day) it still managed to prosice its own AAAs like HL2, Doom3, WoW, The Witcher, SC, Crysis etc.

 

[FlamingHawk]

1. Apparently it is consoles vs. PC, what loaded argument. But yeah, 3 platforms selling more than 1 is pretty normal.

2. Last AAA exclusive on PC? Do you know what AAA means? Do you know that a game's quality is indepdent of its production method and budget? Do you know that games on PC tend to have an incredibly different interaction scheme/ environment/gameplay base? That you equate with AAA = good is pretty problematic.

3. AAA Titles dying isn't a problem. Consoles dying is a problem (aka cheap fixed platform w/ dedicated local multiplayer).

4. Games of similar "AAA" fidelity have come to exist without its budgets and publishing model. Your point is moot.

1. Really? They're aren't more PCs than consoles? LOL, I dont even know why you would say that, every time I see pc gamers boast numbers about their being XXX amount of pc gamers, more than consoles.

2. Keep avoiding the question, and don't give me one. I don't even know what you're trying to get at. A AAA title is based on the budget, so tell me, if PC gaming is so huge like you guys say, why don't you have AAA exclusives? Because publishers know they wont make their money back, that is why.

3. I'm still not even sure what you're trying to get at, you keep avoiding AAA titles. If publishers aren't making their money back, then they will stop making them. Simple as that, how is that hard to understand? Developers make more money on consoles and that is a fact, so if consoles are gone so will AAA titles.

 

[Dictator93]

So how would an open-platform work? One type of software that runs on multiple plats i.e. ps, pc, xbox? Wouldnt this be an issue due to power variances and fragmentation?

I mean I would not mind if it means more games.

Well yeah, games (like current multiplats) would need to design towards the lowest hardware design. But as long as peripheral support is similar and open, most games could remain being the same (unless they are extremely hardware specific due to budget conceners or gameplay goals aka VR, huge cpu intensive entironment, complicated real time lighting model integral to gameplay).

In terms of variance and fragmentation? Well, PC as an environment is varied and has niche fragmented communities all tied together through the similar platform.

In the end, fragmentation of an open platform is fought by having a large large user base. Where capturing less than 1% means having pretty wild success.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Really? They're aren't more PCs than consoles? LOL, I dont even know why you would say that, every time I see pc gamers boast numbers about their being XXX amount of pc gamers, more than consoles.

More PCs than consoles, yeah, sure. I am not sure why bragging about the number of units out there matters. Everyone knows that PCs are not all creted equal and a lot of PCs just exist for work purposes. Similarly all gaming oriented PCs are multipurpose. An argumentation about "what is better" based upon pure numbers is bad. I would not try arguing that beyond saying that a large base means a large chance to find a niche. Also, don't compare what I am saying to some mythical "PC GAMER LOL ARGUMENT." That is disingenuous.

2. Keep avoiding the question, and don't give me one. I don't even know what you're trying to get at. A AAA title is based on the budget, so tell me, if PC gaming is so huge like you guys say, why don't you have AAA exclusives? Because publishers know they wont make their money back, that is why.

Avoiding the question? You pose the question with a loaded phrase. You say, without saying, AAA games = good games. So if the PC doesn't have AAA games it isn't good. Something along those lines. I will not answer a loaded question.

In terms of games that are getting at your loaded question: Crysis 1, the entire Arma series, the civilization series, the command and COnquer series, The Total War games, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, The witcher games, Dawn of war games, All the older id games, battlefield 2, whatever. Lots of PC only games are very high quality and high fidelty/production values.

3. I'm still not even sure what you're trying to get at, you keep avoiding AAA titles. If publishers aren't making their money back, then they will stop making them. Simple as that, how is that hard to understand? Developers make more money on consoles and that is a fact, so if consoles are gone so will AAA titles.

I am avoiding AAA titles and using the phrase like you are becuase you have an inbuilt meaning into AAA that goes beyond its budget/fidelity meaning. AKA, that it is a good game inherently.

Devs make money on consoles. Devs also make money on PC. Games of similar "AAA" fidelity have always been on PC. Even then, games do not need that stuff at all to be good games. Some of the best PC games look crude even.

 

[viveks86]

Uh oh. This is now turning into a PC vs Console thread.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

So I need to know now.

Would Microsoft be stupid or smart for letting this happen?

Stupid for mine. They need to give people reasons to buy an Xbox One. Not give people reasons to hold out and not bother.

 

[twobear]

So....I have a question GAF. How does a company grow its brand without exclusives?

Well if Microsoft is anything to go by, not very well.

 

[Mohasus]

if PC gaming is so huge like you guys say, why don't you have AAA exclusives? Because publishers know they wont make their money back, that is why.

Because there is no reason.

Why are there AAA exclusives on consoles?
1 - first party games trying to sell more consoles.
2 - monetary incentive from console makers.

 

[Gbraga]

Still don't think it's gonna happen, but I would really love to be wrong.

 

[Freeman]

People ignore all huge AAA PCs exclusives like MMOs,Sims,Strategy,Mobas and then critisise PC for not having them.

 

[Dictator93]

Uh oh. This is now turning into a PC vs Console thread.

That guys post is full of cancerous venom. I should not have answered it. Sorry.-

 

[ViviOggi]

If Microsoft isn't making money they will leave the gaming industry, that is why you should care about them losing money. The gaming industry has survived because of these "fucking" multi-billion dollar companies backing the gaming industry with their fuckin billions of dollars. You think PC gaming saved the gaming industry back when it was about to fail, no it was Nintendo with their console, not pc. You think if Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and every other multi-billion dollar gaming company left, the gaming industry would survive? You pc gamers think you guys are so relevant to the gaming industry but you guys didn't even matter until like a couple of years ago. Why the fuck do you guys think you guys get shifty ports and games late? Consoles are the priority with AAA titles. You guys keep saying the PC gaming industry is making more money than the console industry but that is pure bs. Most of the money comes from MMOs and MOBAs. You guys also think that AAA games make more money on pc than consoles, LOL.
Take this link as reference.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-addressing-your-questions-and-concerns/2/
What I'm about to say will go for EVERY AAA title. I'll just give you a few examples.
Lets take Skyrim for example, a game pc gamers love to boast about it being better on pc. It sold 6 million on PC. Ok that is a lot, how much did it sell total?
http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/28/skyrim-sales-pass-20-million-as-lol-hits-27-million-a-day-4279983/
It sold 20 million, so 6 million from pc and 14 million from consoles. Almost double on consoles. Now tell me this, how much of that 6 million came from steam sales? For $5?
I bet more than half, pc gamers love to wait for steam sales. While on the other hand console gamers buy these games day 1 for $60. The lowest console games like skyrim sell for is usually $20 on sale. $5 vs $20, which is the lowest and alot of people buy games day 1 for $60. So tell me with the 100s of millions of pc gamers around the world why can't it outsell consoles?

Want more?
http://bfbcs.com/
BFBC 2 sold almost twice as much on consoles and again tell me how much of those pc sales came from steam sales.

I can give you these facts with almost every AAA title. Borderlands, Bioshock, Call of Duty, Fallout, EVERY AAA title sells more on consoles. So if consoles or pc gaming had to die, it would be pc gaming. That is why you should fucking care about these companies. Tell me, when was the last time PC had a AAA exclusive? Lmao I can't even think of one that isn't a MMO and RTS. Please give me one. If companies made so much money on pc they would be making Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, Skyrim and every other AAA exclusive to the PC because PC is superior right? Developers would be making the best games possible on PC because its so superior, so why aren't they? That is all that matters, resolution and frame rates, not making money. Look at Destiny, they had to choose what to work on, a few platforms and they didn't choose pc because they would make more money on the last gen consoles than pc.
This is a fact, once consoles die, so will AAA titles.


Edit: and no I don't have an Xbox One, I have a PS4.

What is this I can't

I just can't

 

[perfectsil]

So I need to know now.

Would Microsoft be stupid or smart for letting this happen?

Stupid for mine. They need to give people reasons to buy an Xbox One. Not give people reasons to hold out and not bother.

some people have PCs and just are never going to get XB1's, so it's

(potential revenue lost on XB1) vs (revenue on PC versions of these games)

which is greater? who knows.

but IMHO given that the vast majority of console games revenue come from the initial months (because many buy used after that), it makes financial sense for MS to release a game on console first, PC later.

 

[PhatSaqs]

I guess port begging does not equal ban anymore lol.

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

Why should honest, hard working Xbox One fans go out and support an IP they believe to exclusive only to see their faith in the developer met with indifference and scorn as they abandon the Xbox One and the fans that made their IP a success for the PC crowd who didn't appreciate their IP enough to support it in its infancy?

It's a slap in the face of all honest, hard working Xbox One owners and I say enough is enough.

I agree, gamers who only own an XB1 appreciate working man's graphics more than other platforms, it should stay exclusive.

I guess port begging does not equal ban anymore lol.

Are you advocating banning vga247.com from the site?

 

[krypt0nian]

I guess port begging does not equal ban anymore lol.

vg247.com is port begging I guess then. Or blame Insomniac for not being direct in their answer, because "right now" has turned into yes often in the past with other questions like this.

No one but Insomniac knows if it's ever coming to PC, but no one can say from that answer that it 100% is not.

 

[RK9039]

Are you advocating banning vga247.com from the site?

It was actually from this site: http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/s...me_to_pc_heres_what_insomniac_has_to_say.html

Vga247 and Gamespot just used that as the source for their own articles. Videogamer is the Matt Lees one I think? before he left anyways.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Not surprising. Microsoft doesn't want to cannibalize their own potential hardware sales right now. It's one of their key XB1 titles for the holiday. I'm sure one will come but there's no good reason to talk about that happening until that game's life at retail has more or less dwindled.

 

[FlamingHawk]

Avoiding the question? You pose the question with a loaded phrase. You say, without saying, AAA games = good games. So if the PC doesn't have AAA games it isn't good. Something along those lines. I will not answer a loaded question.

In terms of games that are getting at your loaded question: Crysis 1, the entire Arma series, the civilization series, the command and COnquer series, The Total War games, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, The witcher games, Dawn of war games, All the older id games, battlefield 2, whatever. Lots of PC only games are very high quality and high fidelty/production values.



I am avoiding AAA titles and using the phrase like you are becuase you have an inbuilt meaning into AAA that goes beyond its budget/fidelity meaning. AKA, that it is a good game inherently.

Devs make money on consoles. Devs also make money on PC. Games of similar "AAA" fidelity have always been on PC. Even then, games do not need that stuff at all to be good games. Some of the best PC games look crude even.

So you're saying the budget of a game has no tie in with the quality of the game? I'm sure most people would disagree with that, the budget of a game has a lot to do with the quality. The bigger the budget, the more time they have to work on the game, which means more features and less bugs etc.

I'm sorry why don't I rephrase that, tell me good quality AAA PC exclusives in the past 5 years. Almost all of them are very old games except Arma 3 but most people didn't like that game. Also, I said games that aren't MMOs and RTS, Command and Conquer, total war and the others are RTS. See you can't name any AAA PC exclusives in the recent years that are actually worth upgrading your pc for or even playing. Star Citizen, I will wait and see how that turns out, I can't say anything about that. Only 1 Witcher game was on only on PC and that was years ago.

I'm 100% sure that AAA title means the budget of the game. I honestly have no idea why you would think so otherwise. I'm also not saying only AAA titles are good. There are tons on indie games that are good but they aren't AAA. They aren't on the level of The Last of Us, Halo, etc. The point I'm trying to make is that if you ask people what there favorite games are, a majority of them will be AAA titles.

Also, no AAA games have not been on PC. Only in the past 2-3 years have these games started to come out to PC. It would be too much time but just look at the PS2 era. Tons of games that did not come out to PC.

Take a look at the PS3/360 era.
Tekken Series, never on PC.
Dragon ball Games, only Xenoverse is coming to PC.
Persona 4 Arena
Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm, 2, Generations.
Blazblue Series
Guilty Gear Series
Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe
Madden Series
NHL 2K
Final Fantasy 13 Series
Yakuza Series
Red Dead Redemption
Shadows of the Damned
Vanquish
Dante’s Inferno
Condemned 2: Bloodshot
Anarchy Reigns
Dragon's Dogma
Catherine
Star Ocean: The Last Hope
Resonance of Fate
Battlefield Bad Company 1
A lot more

These are games that were on PS3/360 but not PC. And tons of games you guys have gotten late.

Good riddance, hopefully it'll go back to more mid-tier titles that aren't homogenous, mass marketed and dull.

Tell me, I honestly want you guy to answer this question honestly. GTA 5, one of the most asked for games from PC gamers if not the most, do you believe that if GTA V came out on PC it would sell 34 million on PC? Holy shit no it wouldn't, it wouldn't even sell half.

It's so funny you guys are saying death to AAA titles yet you guys are on this topic and everywhere, you guys keep saying I hope this comes to PC. All of these games you guys ask for are AAA titles exclusive on consoles.

Take From Software for example, I honestly think they were mediocre before Demons Souls. But look what happened when they partnered with Sony, they made an amazing game, a game so critically received. Sony gave them the money to make it a good game, it ties in with the budget. That is what these billion dollar companies can do. I'm also sure most of the games you guys play are AAA titles, so I honestly think you guys should care about consoles because if they die so do AAA titles.


To MODS: Also don't ban me lol, I'm trying to have a honest talk about the industry because I truly believe that if consoles die, so will AAA titles. I'm also saying that because people keep saying they don't give a shit about these multi-billion dollar companies but the gaming industry is what it is because of them. I'm not trying to turn this into a console vs pc thread, just trying to defend consoles. I actually like it here.

 

[Nethaniah]

Pleading to not get banned and "just defending consoles" lol.

Worst fanboy bullshit i've ever seen? Getting there.

Edit: Also loving the list war.

 

[Dictator93]

I'm sorry why don't I rephrase that, tell me good quality AAA PC exclusives in the past 5 years. Almost all of them are very old games except Arma 3 but most people didn't like that game. Also, I said games that aren't MMOs and RTS, Command and Conquer, total war and the others are RTS. See you can't name any AAA PC exclusives in the recent years that are actually worth upgrading your pc for or even playing. Star Citizen, I will wait and see how that turns out, I can't say anything about that. Only 1 Witcher game was on only on PC and that was years ago.

You actually typed that without dying from irony.

Also I really do not think it is worth responding to anything you typed if you just handwave away arguments with stuff like this.

 

[abadguy]

For XB1 fanboys everywhere, yo!

I really don't think you want to take this conversation down that route.

 

[FlamingHawk]

Pleading to not get banned and "just defending consoles" lol.

Worst fanboy bullshit i've ever seen? Getting there.

Not pleading, I know it seems like I'm causing a war between consoles and PC or w/e but that is not what I'm trying to do. I'm just trying to make my point.

You guys keep saying death to consoles etc but guess what I like AAA titles, those are the games I play the most and if consoles die so do they.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Take From Software for example, I honestly think they were mediocre before Demons Souls.

Never played Otogi?