PDA

View Full Version : Why would ubisoft....



StarScream391
08-20-2011, 05:25 PM
Use consoles (Xbox and PS3) as the main platform for the current games when PC is obviously more superior than both if you have the money to get god's gift of gaming, both consoles are old and yet ubisoft is using them, thats like taking a step back to graphics its 2011 now the demo from Gamescom and E3 would have been better if it was played on PC because PC has better everything than console.

Animuses
08-20-2011, 05:26 PM
Who cares? I know I sure don't.

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 05:27 PM
Graphics are important nowadays obviously.

Animuses
08-20-2011, 05:29 PM
No, graphics are a plus. Games can look great even with decent graphics.

Blind2Society
08-20-2011, 05:30 PM
You're serious? Stop using consoles forever and just use pc? This is quite possibly the most rediculous thread I have ever seen, ever.

SupremeCaptain
08-20-2011, 05:30 PM
...

Animuses
08-20-2011, 05:31 PM
Consoles are more dominant, always will be.

itsamea-mario
08-20-2011, 05:31 PM
Frickin nazi.

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
Consoles are more dominant, always will be.
Always will be dominant because the average gamer cant afford $1000 for a good gaming rig.

SupremeCaptain
08-20-2011, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
Consoles are more dominant, always will be.
Always will be dominant because the average gamer cant afford $1000 for a good gaming rig. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would we do that when we can get a console cheaper?

Blind2Society
08-20-2011, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
Always will be dominant because the average gamer cant afford $1000 for a good gaming rig.
That very well could be part of it

@mario: Godwin's Law (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIyr5TXqe8Y) in effect http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 05:44 PM
Because its cheaper to upgrade your PC than your console, if you want to upgrade your console you'll have to buy a new one lol
Look how crappy your console is
<span class="flash-video"><object codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0"
classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"
height="390"
width="640"
><param name="wmode"
value="transparent"
></param><param name="allowScriptAccess"
value="never"
></param><param value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/Zcf3-rzi1Kw?version=3&hl=en_US"
name="movie"
/><param value="true"
/><param value="always"
/><embed wmode="transparent"
pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
allowScriptAccess="never"
height="390"
width="640"
src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/Zcf3-rzi1Kw?version=3&hl=en_US"
/></object></span>

Blind2Society
08-20-2011, 05:51 PM
I'm going to have to play AC because that just seems like some fancy video editing or an xbox w/o and hdmi cable, on a crappy tv with the brightness way down. I don't recall my game looking that bad, then again I have ps3 not xbox.

Also, at :35, the xbox and pc versions have different trees on the left.

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 05:57 PM
<span class="flash-video"><object codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0"
classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"
width="640"
height="390"
><param name="wmode"
value="transparent"
></param><param name="allowScriptAccess"
value="never"
></param><param value="transparent"
/><param value="never"
/><param name="movie"
value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/z8BA_G5I2tk?version=3&hl=en_US"
/><param value="true"
/><param value="always"
/><embed wmode="transparent"
pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
allowScriptAccess="never"
src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/z8BA_G5I2tk?version=3&hl=en_US"
width="640"
height="390"
/></object></span>

itsamea-mario
08-20-2011, 06:01 PM
Well personally I find playing on a console to be more fun.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 06:11 PM
#1, this should be in the PC forum, #2, the most important thing about a game is control. And AC's high profile/low profile/radial wheel weapon select controls work best on a controller. That is the only reason I play ANY game on console. That and I know that it's not going to ever glitch out on me because I don't have the right drivers.

Looking at those differences videos, all I can see is an increase in brightness. That's not enough for me to spend money on upgrading my gaming rig. I'm waiting to do that for some games that are coming out next year, and I might as well wait, because better tech will be cheaper by next year. Right now, the only games I play on my PC are from 2005 and older.

ace3001
08-20-2011, 06:13 PM
Urgh, I'm a big PC gaming fan, but dude, this thread is ridiculous. They go multiplat cause they want to earn more money. Helloooo... Money makes things go around, you know?
Money is also the same reason they give a lower priority to the PC version. The PC version is way more impressive graphically, but more people play AC on consoles for ease of use. I know, playing on a PC is really easy, but that's not how the common console user sees it. In such a person's mind, console = pop in and play, PC = install, tweak settings and play. They tend to shy away from tweaking.
I disagree with the post that says you need $1000 for a gaming rig, as a decent rig (one that isn't overkill like those damned elitists brag about) nowhere near that costly, but PC gaming still remains a thing of a niche crowd. In short, people don't like having to directly work with technology (the opposite of those like me that love PC gaming), and a gaming console is the best solution for that.
That said, so far all 3 AC games are best on PC (Don't bring the keyboard+mouse argument, please. Plug in a controller.), and I'll be getting ACR on PC as well, when it comes somewhere around next March. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Oh, and @Calvarok: You really can't judge the PC version from these silly Youtube comparisons. Gotta see it on a big screen at 1080p with 16X MSAA. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Blind2Society
08-20-2011, 06:16 PM
If you watch the videos in the highest res at full screen there is actually a significant difference in the textures though I don't recall my game looking that bad.

Also I'm sure you can buy controllers for your pc and just hook them to your hdtv.

@kolitha: I think you hit the nail on the head with the ease of use bit. I can say that's more than likely why I don't game on my pc. Plus I don't have a clue about what's inside it and whether it's good for gaming or not. Honestly the only pc games I've played were and early King's Quest game way back when and the first Diablo. However, The new instalment of Diablo along with the new fallout games have made me consider pc gaming.

LightRey
08-20-2011, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
Consoles are more dominant, always will be.
Always will be dominant because the average gamer cant afford $1000 for a good gaming rig. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
every year.

MonsterJunkese
08-20-2011, 06:31 PM
Coulden't care.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 06:32 PM
I'm pretty sure neither of those are running the xbox version on 1080i, which is the best possible quality. And yes, I could hook my pc into my tv and such, or I could save money and have good controls at a minimum of fuss. The PC is great for RTS's, MMOs, Shooters, and RPGs, but action-adventure/stealth games are MADE for the consoles' controllers, so I don't mind not having to buy a whole bunch of upgrades that I'll have to redo in a year anyways.

I WILL upgrade my PC at some point, but I have no reason to now.

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 06:43 PM
Consoles are the best rigs from 2006.

LightRey
08-20-2011, 06:46 PM
Why even bother wasting time and money on keeping your PC software and hardware up to date (still with the risk of the game not working (well) if you do) if there's a perfectly good device that is designed to have games played on them?

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
Consoles are the best rigs from 2006.
And yet I have just as much fun playing Crisis on PC as AC1 on console. You're allowed to post in the console forum, but you're not allowed to be an elitist in the console forum.

Great games are great games regardless of platform.

Altair661
08-20-2011, 07:22 PM
Honestly, bewteen the consoles the 360 is known to have a tad better lighting and somewhat sharper graphics. But honestly, I feel like PC gaming cant be compared to the consoles. Because there's the people who pay top dollar for the best graphics out there. Then there's the people who keep the same setup for a while and get average graphics. Then there's the people who cant afford buying the new updated computer all the time. Which in this economy is most people. I dont think PC games is attracting anyone into its crowd. Im not saying it's bad. But it's only for the hardcore PC gamers.

Also I dont like what EA did when they first started advertising BF3, they pushed it to it's limits and used the best PC setup they could get so they could show what it looks like. AT its best. They finally showed the PS3 gameplay, but they should have stated from the beginning it was PC gameplay.

Btw, this is end up gettin locked for starting a console war.

ProdiGurl
08-20-2011, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
Use consoles (Xbox and PS3) as the main platform for the current games when PC is obviously more superior than both if you have the money to get god's gift of gaming, both consoles are old and yet ubisoft is using them, thats like taking a step back to graphics its 2011 now the demo from Gamescom and E3 would have been better if it was played on PC because PC has better everything than console.

I finally dropped the PC and bought me an Xbox on a good sale last Christmas.
I couldn't keep up with the hardware upgrades the new games demand. I much prefer Xbox now on a big Tv screen - it's more comfortable in my big chair too than at the desk [even tho I loved mouse/keyboard commands].

I use my PC to play my older games now.

E-Zekiel
08-20-2011, 08:57 PM
1. PS3 looks better.

2. I don't like PC controls.

3. I prefer that my games (excepting whatever MMORPG I am playing) be played separately and not competing with other applications.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 09:12 PM
PS3 has different lighting, not sure If I'd call it better. It has better bloom effects, and a different type of anti-aliasing. Other than that, it has longer load times than Xbox, and more screen-tearing and lag.

Ubisoft has been making the two console versions of AC closer and closer in quality with each new game, though, I'm sure revelations will be much better.

StarScream391
08-20-2011, 09:12 PM
Controllers are good for two things, racing and a game with similar controls as AC, mouse and keyboard is a lot more precise keyboard and mouse is good at everything but racing and "game with similar controls as AC"

E-Zekiel
08-20-2011, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
PS3 has different lighting, not sure If I'd call it better. It has better bloom effects, and a different type of anti-aliasing. Other than that, it has longer load times than Xbox, and more screen-tearing and lag.

Ubisoft has been making the two console versions of AC closer and closer in quality with each new game, though, I'm sure revelations will be much better.

Longer load times....I'll grant. Debatable. Lag? No. Unless you're talking network..but that's a combination of your own connection in conjunction with others. Not really on the hardware of the system.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:
PS3 has different lighting, not sure If I'd call it better. It has better bloom effects, and a different type of anti-aliasing. Other than that, it has longer load times than Xbox, and more screen-tearing and lag.

Ubisoft has been making the two console versions of AC closer and closer in quality with each new game, though, I'm sure revelations will be much better.

Longer load times....I'll grant. Debatable. Lag? No. Unless you're talking network..but that's a combination of your own connection in conjunction with others. Not really on the hardware of the system. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
When I say lag, I mean framerate drop.

ProdiGurl
08-20-2011, 09:28 PM
I didn't get PS3 becuz it was over $100 more, I didn't care about Blue Ray & I don't care that graphics in some games might be sharper.

Xbox is just great with me & I really do love the gamepad more - it's easier for me to work with. I used my relatives PS2 gamepad & it sucked (for me).

Both work, I never saw a need to battle over which is better - get whatever you prefer & have fun with it.

E-Zekiel
08-20-2011, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by Calvarok:

When I say lag, I mean framerate drop.

I know you do.

LightRey
08-20-2011, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I didn't get PS3 becuz it was over $100 more, I didn't care about Blue Ray & I don't care that graphics in some games might be sharper.

Xbox is just great with me & I really do love the gamepad more - it's easier for me to work with. I used my relatives PS2 gamepad & it sucked (for me).

Both work, I never saw a need to battle over which is better - get whatever you prefer & have fun with it.
Same here. I was never able to get used to the PS controllers. They just don't feel right.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:

When I say lag, I mean framerate drop.

I know you do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then you know that framerate drop has nothing to do with the network.

xCr0wnedNorris
08-20-2011, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
Controllers are good for two things, racing and a game with similar controls as AC, mouse and keyboard is a lot more precise keyboard and mouse is good at everything but racing and "game with similar controls as AC"
The only games where the mouse & keyboard are clearly superior are the shooters, that's about it.

EDIT: Also, those games where you have to move a cursor and click on objects to interact with them, like in The Sims.

LightRey
08-20-2011, 09:52 PM
Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StarScream391:
Controllers are good for two things, racing and a game with similar controls as AC, mouse and keyboard is a lot more precise keyboard and mouse is good at everything but racing and "game with similar controls as AC"
The only games where the mouse & keyboard are clearly superior are the shooters, that's about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree. All other gametypes are just as or more playable with a controller.

E-Zekiel
08-20-2011, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:

When I say lag, I mean framerate drop.

I know you do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then you know that framerate drop has nothing to do with the network. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct. I don't recall implying that it did.

Though some games actually "normalize" laggy with non-laggy connections in their multiplayers(MH3 does this) by throttling framerates.

kriegerdesgottes
08-20-2011, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StarScream391:
Controllers are good for two things, racing and a game with similar controls as AC, mouse and keyboard is a lot more precise keyboard and mouse is good at everything but racing and "game with similar controls as AC"
The only games where the mouse & keyboard are clearly superior are the shooters, that's about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree. All other gametypes are just as or more playable with a controller. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't get how a person could play any game at all with a keyboard without wanting to shoot themselves in the brain after 2 minutes. I will never understand PC gaming. Oh it's got better graphics. WHO CARES it's barely even noticeable. Oh but you can mod the game. WHO CARES I don't know how to do that anyway. (although that would be kind of cool) I would def rather take a beating though than play a game with a keyboard especially like AC or prince of persia. Those games are annoying on the PSP let alone a PC.

Animuses
08-20-2011, 11:10 PM
The PS controller is "god's gift to gamers", not a keyboard and mouse.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
The PS controller is "god's gift to gamers", not a keyboard and mouse.
I would argue that the 360 controller is shaped more comfortably, and that the bumpers are far easier to press, and the triggers far more satisfying to pull. Please note that I have no bias against the PS3's technical capabilities, just it's copied PS2 controller.

Animuses
08-20-2011, 11:20 PM
Why change a conntroller that isn't flawed? 360's controller is comfortable, but the shaping of the PS controller is like an outline on how a human holds a controller. However, I can't stand the bumpers and the placement of the d-pad and the left analog stick.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
Why change a conntroller that isn't flawed? 360's controller is comfortable, but the shaping of the PS controller is like an outline on how a human holds a controller. However, I can't stand the bumpers and the placement of the d-pad and the left analog stick.

both of those things are easier to press for me on an xbox controller. It's shaped so you comfortably have your hands in the right position for everything.

LightRey
08-20-2011, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
The PS controller is "god's gift to gamers", not a keyboard and mouse.
It really depends on what kind of game you're playing. If it's an RTS, a game like The Sims or sometimes a shooter (but only 'sometimes', because I'm so used to using a controller), I would sooner go for a keyboard an mouse than a controller.

ace3001
08-20-2011, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
1. PS3 looks better.

2. I don't like PC controls.

3. I prefer that my games (excepting whatever MMORPG I am playing) be played separately and not competing with other applications.
1. In your dreams maybe. Or are you talking about the outer appearance of the console itself? :P

2. Plug in a controller. Moving on.

3. Competing with other applications? HUH? Is that even supposed to make sense?

Like I said earlier, it boils down to ease of use. Those that prefer to tweak stuff and get directly involved in the technical side of things are better off with the PC version, which is also undeniably the one that looks best. The console versions simply can't do 1080p or higher with 16X MSAA.
But for those who want to just pick up and play without having to even know the technical side of things, the lower quality graphics would be a worthy trade off, I guess.
I mean let's face it. In an ideal world where PC games could be run just by popping in the disc, and if console exclusives didn't exist, consoles would be rather useless. But we don't live in an ideal world, and thus consoles are a better choice for some people.

Originally posted by Blind2Society:


@kolitha: I think you hit the nail on the head with the ease of use bit. I can say that's more than likely why I don't game on my pc. Plus I don't have a clue about what's inside it and whether it's good for gaming or not. Honestly the only pc games I've played were and early King's Quest game way back when and the first Diablo. However, The new instalment of Diablo along with the new fallout games have made me consider pc gaming. Yup, it's all about the ease of use with consoles. That's why they're popular. Btw, the Fallout games are available on consoles, right? Or are you talking about that new MMO?

Oh, and what's with the fanboys debating about the controllers? They don't feel much different when it comes to comfort, you know. I myself prefer the 360 layout, but the Dualshock is FAR from being uncomfortable. You guys talk like the two are worlds apart. o.O

kriegerdesgottes
08-20-2011, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
Why change a conntroller that isn't flawed? 360's controller is comfortable, but the shaping of the PS controller is like an outline on how a human holds a controller. However, I can't stand the bumpers and the placement of the d-pad and the left analog stick.

Yeah I totally agree. The 360 controller feels too bulky and uncomfortable for me. I guess it's just a preference or it could just be that I am now so used to the ps3 but I def prefer the ps3 controller over anything.

Animuses
08-20-2011, 11:25 PM
Let me revise my previous statement...
"Console controllers are "god's gift to gamers", not a keyboard and mouse, UNLESS the game was made for the PC.
This will please more people.

Calvarok
08-20-2011, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
Why change a conntroller that isn't flawed? 360's controller is comfortable, but the shaping of the PS controller is like an outline on how a human holds a controller. However, I can't stand the bumpers and the placement of the d-pad and the left analog stick.

Yeah I totally agree. The 360 controller feels too bulky and uncomfortable for me. I guess it's just a preference or it could just be that I am now so used to the ps3 but I def prefer the ps3 controller over anything. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
All that's really important is that the triggers really feel like triggers. This way you can do a half press with more control, and you can feel when you definately pressed it. It's expecially important when you fire a weapon with the trigger, or lock on. makes it feel more natural to me.

ace3001
08-20-2011, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
Let me revise my previous statement...
"Console controllers are "god's gift to gamers", not a keyboard and mouse, UNLESS the game was made for the PC.
This will please more people. Not at all. Depends on the game.
Action/adventure, Platformers, fighting games, driving games, action RPGs etc: Controller
Shooters, RTS, tactical RPGs etc: Mouse+keyboard.
Neither is "god's gift to gamers".

And for this, PC's the way to go, cause you can choose which device you want. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

itsamea-mario
08-21-2011, 02:58 AM
Why do you 'hardcore' pc gamers think you're so much better than everyone else, because you've got fancy graphics and to much time?
Or is just how you cope with your decision to spend a fortune on something that you need to keep paying to update, and other people view as one of the saddest investments money can buy?

Consoles are more fun, better for local multiplayer, easier to move around, simpler to play, cheaper and Are perfect for AC.

Calvarok
08-21-2011, 03:07 AM
Originally posted by itsamea-mario:
Why do you 'hardcore' pc gamers think you're so much better than everyone else, because you've got fancy graphics and to much time?
Or is just how you cope with your decision to spend a fortune on something that you need to keep paying to update, and other people view as one of the saddest investments money can buy?

Consoles are more fun, better for local multiplayer, easier to move around, simpler to play, cheaper and Are perfect for AC.
Quite honestly, if there were no consoles, gaming would be leagues ahead of where it is now, and since they would get more buissness, the cost of upgrading a PC would be lower. It would be easier to develop games because processing space could be potentially unlimited, so game AI would be FLAWLESS, and physics would work perfectly.

But as the world is right now, consoles are more acessible, yes.

ShaneO7K
08-21-2011, 03:16 AM
I'll take the cheaper option any day, gaming is something I really use to relax after work not something that is an excuse to empty out my bank account.

You mentioned something before about people not being able to afford an $1000 gaming rig, that doesn't sound appealing at all when I could easily spend close to $200 on a console which still has great games no matter how old the console is it self.
And $1000 is just way too much if all you are going to use it for is better quality games, I really can't see the point in spending that much. Unless infact you still live at home with your parents and you have the luxury of begging them for one.

But at the end of the day people tend to take the cheaper option if they are still going to get good quality games which are still fun, which console games still. And Ubisoft still know that a large percentage of people still have consoles whether it is PS3 or Xbox 360. And if AC went PC exclusive they would be losing out in a lot of money.

And people have to learn that graphics are just an extra, if the gameplay/story are great I couldn't care less if the graphics weren't as good as I would like them to be.

Calvarok
08-21-2011, 03:19 AM
Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
I'll take the cheaper option any day, gaming is something I really use to relax after work not something that is an excuse to empty out my bank account.

You mentioned something before about people not being able to afford an $1000 gaming rig, that doesn't sound appealing at all when I could easily spend close to $200 on a console which still has great games no matter how old the console is it self.
And $1000 is just way too much if all you are going to use it for is better quality games, I really can't see the point in spending that much. Unless infact you still live at home with your parents and you have the luxury of begging them for one.

But at the end of the day people tend to take the cheaper option if they are still going to get good quality games which are still fun, which console games still. And Ubisoft still know that a large percentage of people still have consoles whether it is PS3 or Xbox 360. And if AC went PC exclusive they would be losing out in a lot of money.

And people have to learn that graphics are just an extra, if the gameplay/story are great I couldn't care less if the graphics weren't as good as I would like them to be.

PC gaming isn't just about graphics, PCs are years and years ahead of consoles, and they can handle advanced AI and gameplay mechanics and physics. But since most games are developed for consoles first, we rarely see any of that cool stuff. If consoles didn't exist, PCs would be cheaper, and games would be better in every possible way. Just a fact.

ShaneO7K
08-21-2011, 03:36 AM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
I'll take the cheaper option any day, gaming is something I really use to relax after work not something that is an excuse to empty out my bank account.

You mentioned something before about people not being able to afford an $1000 gaming rig, that doesn't sound appealing at all when I could easily spend close to $200 on a console which still has great games no matter how old the console is it self.
And $1000 is just way too much if all you are going to use it for is better quality games, I really can't see the point in spending that much. Unless infact you still live at home with your parents and you have the luxury of begging them for one.

But at the end of the day people tend to take the cheaper option if they are still going to get good quality games which are still fun, which console games still. And Ubisoft still know that a large percentage of people still have consoles whether it is PS3 or Xbox 360. And if AC went PC exclusive they would be losing out in a lot of money.

And people have to learn that graphics are just an extra, if the gameplay/story are great I couldn't care less if the graphics weren't as good as I would like them to be.

PC gaming isn't just about graphics, PCs are years and years ahead of consoles, and they can handle advanced AI and gameplay mechanics and physics. But since most games are developed for consoles first, we rarely see any of that cool stuff. If consoles didn't exist, PCs would be cheaper, and games would be better in every possible way. Just a fact. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The price could be isn't what i'm talking about what it is and consoles do exist so I can't see the price changing for a long time yet. I never said that PC were not more advanced than consoles but at the same time I don't really care for that. I just fail to see how people can happily spend that much money just for better quality gaming when there is a cheaper option. And yes the cheaper option might not be as advanced but what it offers is still pretty damn good.

Rakudaton
08-21-2011, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by itsamea-mario:
Why do you 'hardcore' pc gamers think you're so much better than everyone else, because you've got fancy graphics and to much time?
Or is just how you cope with your decision to spend a fortune on something that you need to keep paying to update, and other people view as one of the saddest investments money can buy?

Consoles are more fun, better for local multiplayer, easier to move around, simpler to play, cheaper and Are perfect for AC.
Quite honestly, if there were no consoles, gaming would be leagues ahead of where it is now, and since they would get more buissness, the cost of upgrading a PC would be lower. It would be easier to develop games because processing space could be potentially unlimited, so game AI would be FLAWLESS, and physics would work perfectly.

But as the world is right now, consoles are more acessible, yes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is an invalid economic argument. Higher demand equates to higher prices, not lower. Companies could (and would) increase production so as to increase supply, but not to the extent that prices would fall. Furthermore, rare earth metals -- vital components in electronics -- are scarce, and their price will only increase as they are used up. More demand would accelerate consumption, meaning the electronics companies would have to spend more on them, meaning they would have to charge higher prices sooner to compensate.

Also, your argument about things like AI being flawless -- you realise that's not just about hardware? It also requires a massive input in software. This would make games even more expensive. So, were it not for consoles, everyone would have to spend lots of money upgrading their PC, and then spend even more money on more expensive games. Some of us are slightly more responsible with our finances, even if you have money to waste.

Selfish much?

To paraphrase Mastercard: Some of us have money to burn. For everyone else, there are consoles.

Jamison_J_B
08-21-2011, 12:59 PM
I play AC on my ps3 in HD and I'm fine with the graphics.

I will say that a top of the line pc beats a console hands down, but pc versions will always have DRM (which can cause problems). For example, I was reading some posts in the PC forum and the autorun doesn't install the game correctly (AC2)...I'm taking into account that people would have made sure that autorun is configured properly for their optical drive.

And problems will also arise with different hardware and driver mixes.

I do use a PC, mostly for first person shooters and RPG. Eh... my ps3 does just fine, I imagine that the X360 does as well.

StarScream391
08-21-2011, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Jamison.j.b:
I play AC on my ps3 in HD and I'm fine with the graphics.

I will say that a top of the line pc beats a console hands down, but pc versions will always have DRM (which can cause problems). For example, I was reading some posts in the PC forum and the autorun doesn't install the game correctly (AC2)...I'm taking into account that people would have made sure that autorun is configured properly for their optical drive.

And problems will also arise with different hardware and driver mixes.

I do use a PC, mostly for first person shooters and RPG. Eh... my ps3 does just fine, I imagine that the X360 does as well.
That's ubisoft's problem, other games can work correctly..

cless711
08-21-2011, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
Because its cheaper to upgrade your PC than your console, if you want to upgrade your console you'll have to buy a new one lol
Look how crappy your console is


Like i have told many people before who thinks like this... -.- Graphics don't make a game. Gameplay and Story make a game.

StarScream391
08-21-2011, 01:12 PM
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important.

cless711
08-21-2011, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important.

I play games on the pc as well but I would rather play games like AC on the ps3. To be honest i just don't see the change in graphics.

Graphics are just a plus. I know there are a lot of people who think differently, and i respect that opinion, but there are other concepts that make a game good. If you had a game that had amazing graphics and horrible gameplay and no plot whatsoever I am pretty sure it will probably appeal many players to the game with trailers and stuff like that but when they get their hands on the game 9/10 people will not play that game again.

itsamea-mario
08-21-2011, 01:22 PM
Yeah and the graphics on ps3 and Xbox do their job just fine.

Jamison_J_B
08-21-2011, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important.

I don't think ubisoft is going to have such a vast difference in textures and the engine for the same game. In all likelihood, they will balance, for the most part, the two ports (pc/console).

notafanboy
08-21-2011, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important.
http://i56.tinypic.com/5otqc3.gif

StarScream391
08-21-2011, 01:57 PM
^
Are you really that immature?

itsamea-mario
08-21-2011, 02:01 PM
Are you?

StarScream391
08-21-2011, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by itsamea-mario:
Are you?
So your calling me immature because I'm comparing consoles and PC? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

WrestlingAddict
08-21-2011, 02:26 PM
Ok man, your stupidity astounds me. You come onto a console forum and say why AC should be discontinued on consoles, and are surprised/angry when the people on the forum disagree and say consoles are better. If you want people to agree with your opinion that PC is far superior, then go to the PC forum. It's not that difficult of a concept to grasp.

notafanboy
08-21-2011, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Are you really that immature?
nope, you ? (just say yes)

itsamea-mario
08-21-2011, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by itsamea-mario:
Are you?
So your calling me immature because I'm comparing consoles and PC? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not that you did it, it's how you did it.

Blind2Society
08-21-2011, 02:38 PM
You have all been here long enough and should know that starscream has trolling tendancies. I can't believe you are all feeding his habbits.

BTW notafanboy, that is the funniest troll gif I've ever seen http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

InfectedNation
08-21-2011, 02:49 PM
http://troll.me/images/y-u-no/microsoft-an-sony-y-u-no-let-duh-console-hook-up-to-da-computer-to-play-da-game-like-starcraft2-thumb.jpg

masterfenix2009
08-21-2011, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important. *cough* Mincraft *cough*

Rakudaton
08-21-2011, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by assassino151:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StarScream391:
^
Graphics is what makes games appealing, without it expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers so GRAPHICS are important. *cough* Mincraft *cough* </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

*cough* This *cough*

Starscream, you are ridiculous. "expect ACR to lose more than half of the customers" -- what are you on? Revelations is easily in the top quarter of modern games for graphics. Are there really so many (immature) people like you who will refuse to buy it for having graphics *slightly* worse than the best games out there?

That's like dumping a girl because she's less attractive than a supermodel: shallow, and unrealistic expectations.

xCr0wnedNorris
08-21-2011, 03:41 PM
To be honest, I'd rather only pay a couple hundred bucks for a console that runs smoothly, has the same video quality, great graphics, and is easy to set up and use rather than shell out thousands of dollars just to make the game look a little better. But that's just me. Also, can this thread be closed? Please? Pretty please with a cherry on top?

Animuses
08-21-2011, 04:48 PM
Yes, this needs to be locked.

E-Zekiel
08-21-2011, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by kolitha.kuruppu:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
1. PS3 looks better.

2. I don't like PC controls.

3. I prefer that my games (excepting whatever MMORPG I am playing) be played separately and not competing with other applications.
1. In your dreams maybe. Or are you talking about the outer appearance of the console itself? :P

2. Plug in a controller. Moving on.

3. Competing with other applications? HUH? Is that even supposed to make sense?

Like I said earlier, it boils down to ease of use. Those that prefer to tweak stuff and get directly involved in the technical side of things are better off with the PC version, which is also undeniably the one that looks best. The console versions simply can't do 1080p or higher with 16X MSAA.
But for those who want to just pick up and play without having to even know the technical side of things, the lower quality graphics would be a worthy trade off, I guess.
I mean let's face it. In an ideal world where PC games could be run just by popping in the disc, and if console exclusives didn't exist, consoles would be rather useless. But we don't live in an ideal world, and thus consoles are a better choice for some people.

Originally posted by Blind2Society:


@kolitha: I think you hit the nail on the head with the ease of use bit. I can say that's more than likely why I don't game on my pc. Plus I don't have a clue about what's inside it and whether it's good for gaming or not. Honestly the only pc games I've played were and early King's Quest game way back when and the first Diablo. However, The new instalment of Diablo along with the new fallout games have made me consider pc gaming. Yup, it's all about the ease of use with consoles. That's why they're popular. Btw, the Fallout games are available on consoles, right? Or are you talking about that new MMO?

Oh, and what's with the fanboys debating about the controllers? They don't feel much different when it comes to comfort, you know. I myself prefer the 360 layout, but the Dualshock is FAR from being uncomfortable. You guys talk like the two are worlds apart. o.O </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Not sure what I was thinking when I typed this. I might have been thinking versus XBox. PC will of course vary from PC to PC and monitor to monitor, but PC can take it further than a console, you're correct.

2. A "controller" doesn't count, in my opinion, as a PC thing. If it's a PC thing, it's keyboard and mouse. I do not like keyboard/mouse compared to controller. Therefore I like your typical "console controller better". To elaborate on this point, I feel the XBox controller, even though it's smaller now than it originally was, it not conservative enough for my tastes... buttons are too big etc. I can manage and play one just fine, it's just a small preferential thing. Also, I hate the PS3 R2/L2 triggers. I prefer they be fixed. I swear to god I hate it in AC:B when I set my controller down or pick it up during a match and I blow a damn 60-90 second cooldown...aghhh

3. Applications are processes that run on your computer. Firefox, Warcraft, MSPaint, etc etc etc. Consoles tend to narrow this down (not so much now as they used to, however) more than a PC does, and I prefer that. I can manually narrow it down on a PC, but honestly, when I'm on my PC, I want instant messaging and other social things running most of the time in case any of my friends want to contact me.

Now don't mistake me, I'm not one of those OMG 24/7 OBSESSED social network types. My friends are my friends, not people I have almost no familiarity with, they are people I care about and actually prefer to be available for most of the time when possible, hence my preference. I only have maybe a "dozen" I would count as friends, the rest as acquaintances. I intentionally give very few people my IM addresses or phone numbers because I don't want to be bothered by people I don't really know http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

And when gaming, it's easier for me to not let my gaming suffer due to other distractions if my gaming is done on a console and other stuff on a pc.

But again I'll point out I do play an MMORPG, so it's not like I do NO PC gaming. When Tera comes out, I'll be using my ps3 controller to play it. On my PC. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Calvarok
08-21-2011, 06:43 PM
Like I said, I haven't upgraded my PC for a long time, and I enjoy playing on consoles. but the fact of the matter is that games existing primarily for systems that cannot be expanded to encompass new features, and the features must instead be compressed to fit in, means that gaming is not getting as good as fast as it could be. I don't know if it would be less viable to game if PCs were the only platform, but I do know that developers would have more freedom and ability to translate exactly what they want into the game.

I ENJOY gaming as it is now, but logically, if superior machines were dominant, gaming would be superior.

Altair661
08-21-2011, 06:50 PM
In the end, im gonna buy ACR to play it. Not stare at it all day.

ace3001
08-21-2011, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:


2. A "controller" doesn't count, in my opinion, as a PC thing. If it's a PC thing, it's keyboard and mouse. I do not like keyboard/mouse compared to controller. Therefore I like your typical "console controller better".

3. Applications are processes that run on your computer. Firefox, Warcraft, MSPaint, etc etc etc. Consoles tend to narrow this down (not so much now as they used to, however) more than a PC does, and I prefer that. I can manually narrow it down on a PC, but honestly, when I'm on my PC, I want instant messaging and other social things running most of the time in case any of my friends want to contact me.

2. That's your opinion, but isn't fact. Fact is that there are even gamepads designed especially for PC that cannot be used with consoles. If such a controller is not a "PC thing", then what is it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

3. Once again, you gotta move with technology. Upgrade your RAM (and before everyone brings the OMG-it's-so-expensive bull over again, an extra 2 gigs of RAM is damn cheap), and you'll never need to worry about applications "competing" for PC resources. I have IMs running too. In case I wanna message someone, I quickly ALT+TAB out, type and send the message, and ALT+TAB back into action. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Not like you'll be typing on the PC and playing on the console both at the same time, right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
If you're talking about "distractions", then set your IM to "do-not-disturb" or other equivalent where you won't receive notifications while you're in game. Simple as that.

With PC, you always have options. But like I said twice before, options just don't float some people's boats. For those who wanna follow an easy pre-determined configuration, console's the way to go. But for those who love working directly with technology and love to have freedom of all the options, PC is where it's at. You just need to be ready to "get your hands dirty", so to speak. IMO, that's part of what makes it fun. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LightRey
08-22-2011, 06:05 AM
Originally posted by InfectedNation:
http://troll.me/images/y-u-no/microsoft-an-sony-y-u-no-let-duh-console-hook-up-to-da-computer-to-play-da-game-like-starcraft2-thumb.jpg
Actually, MS does do that. I've played several of my pc games with an xbox controller.

kleaneasy
08-22-2011, 09:48 AM
and..... locked

Might be wise if a few here re read the rules which clearly state platform wars are not permitted.