Borderlands 2

[ElNono]

Saying crowd funding is indicative of a declining market is just plain wrong El.... The fact of the matter is, you need to look at it from the publishers standpoint.... They dont CARE what type of game it is, they CARE about the bottom line when it comes to the dollar. Right now, the money is in FPS games like MOH and Battlefield.... it makes them money... thats all they care about.

Developers who are turning to crowd funding is a GOOD thing. It lets them make the game they want without big brother (ie.. EA) dictating how the game is made based on maximized profits.... And getting the funding they ask for from the "crowd" reinforces this. I agree PC is not the leading game platform anymore, but I also believe that kickstarter and general crowd funding is going to change this. It gives gamers a voice on what they want to play....

All you have to look at is Project Eternity.... A PC RPG in the vein of games like Baldurs gate and Icewind Dale... Breaking the record for a Kickstarter game getting close to 4mil (not including paypal) when the asked goal was just 1.1mil (which was reached in just a few days). The demand is there and its no longer a necesity to pander to HUGE evil companies like EA.... Kickstarter gives a chance for developers to ask the community directly if they want what they are offering and I say thats a good thing.

As far as your thoughts on why Chris Roberts cant get funding for Star Citizen, its because he never asked for it. He specifically stated that he doesnt want the beurocratic bull that comes from a publisher with deadlines and "catering to the masses".... He is making this game because thats what he loves... Thats what helped make the Wing Commander series so great. Relying on a publisher is what made Freelancer so mediocre. He didnt have to rely on a huge game publisher back when he created Wing Commander. When you have an idea for a game, and you see kickstarters like Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity getting millions of dollars from your audience, why go through a publisher who's only interest is the dollar ammount, especially when you can go straight to the source (the fans) and get THEM to fund it?

If it's a bad idea, it wont get funded, if its a wanted product... it will. It's been more than a decade since an "infinity engine" RPG was released.... They are some of the most beloved games in history.... The closest game to come to that in recent memory is Dragon Age: Origin and that was a hit.... Then EA bought out Bioware and things went to . big suprise. Here comes Obsidian who couldnt get funding from a publisher with Project Eternity so they looked at crowd funding, and lo and behold, they got almost 4x the ammount of funding they were asking for.

As far as Star Citizen, its currently funded 1.3mil with a goal of 2mil and is a few days shy of the halfway mark before its funding period ends.... I have no doubt it will reach its goal and then some.

While I agree with most of what you posted here, what's going to make or break these kind of project is sales. Chris Roberts might be satisfied with just covering costs, and maybe making a buck on the side, because he loves what he does, but it really isn't how mass markets work. And to me, that's indeed the sign of a declining market. Sales are king. When sales were breaking records every year, EA/2K/<insert studio here> funded all sorts of sorry (lol Messiah). But the dynamics changed. Things like shelf-space, monster marketing, etc, became key tools, and with chain stores preferring to sell consoles (for a variety of reasons, which include among other things bigger margins, less inventory, less price compe ion, etc), then it tilted the scales even more, and that's how you ended up with PC games like Psychonauts, which was great, but hardly anybody ever played it (because a lot of people didn't even hear about it). There's deeper market things at work too: a lot of people are impulse buyers, and want instant gratification. PC hardware stores pretty much disappearing unable to compete with the interwebs, didn't help that matter either. Then there's fragmentation: with consoles you know what you need to target, what kind of artwork you need, what the hardware limitation is, etc. That makes life much easier for developers. As a dev myself, I know how difficult it is to maintain perhaps 2 or 3 different rendering pipelines with different quality tradeoffs, artwork that work on all of them, etc.

And lastly, I would add that the economic situation in general has declined to a point where publishers simply rather go for the more solid shot at sales at the lower cost, and for the reasons enumerated before, that's the console world right now. To me it was somewhat of a shocker to see a big studio like Rockstar going straight to consoles first, and only follow with a PC version after the game sold well on consoles. But when you see where the biggest audience is at, it's not really all that surprising anymore.

[ElNono]

It'll be interesting to see what kind of power they can squeeze out of the 720/PS4. I have my doubts as to whether or not they'll be any better than the newest PC hardware. It's going to get pretty interesting, because for $650 you can have a damn fine gaming rig these days. The one I posted above is a pretty beastly system and highly portable.

I agree. However, I expect the new console price points to kick off at $300-$400 then probably drop $100-$150 over time, to what they're right now or perhaps even a little cheaper. The reality is that unlike in the PC world, both Sony and MS can sell the console at a loss, since they get revenue as part of licensing from each game sold. In a way of speaking, they can subsidize it much like telcos do with cellphones.

The other advantage consoles have hardware-wise is that they don't need to really support more than 1080p from the get go. So the improvement can come on more video memory for deeper FOV and faster MSAA, but unlike the PC cousins, higher resolution support isn't quite needed. There's also a lot of corners that can be cut. The XBox 360 already came with eDRAM (embedded DRAM, in the same die as the GPU). That gave them the ability to have insane memory-GPU speeds at a fraction of the cost. To put it in perspective, back in '06 when the XBox came out, their eDRAM<->GPU memory bandwidth was 32 GB/s (still is). At the time, a comparable GPU with that kind of throughput was the GeForce 7900 GTX, which sold for ~$340 (basically more expensive than the entire XBox 360).

Agreed. Can't wait to see what they have to offer, but I have to wonder how well even they will do in this economy.

Well, I think they'll sell unless they're not a substantial upgrade. I think people are waiting for them, and much like iPads or iPhones, if it's a good product and platform that offers a leap of quality, people will fork off the money. Especially at the right price-point. In a way it's somewhat a captive market with two main compe ors (I don't consider the Wii a compe or at this stage, tbh). So it's not that there will be a plethora of options out there that could relent people into waiting out.

I would have to tentatively agree with you. However, that being said, League of Legends just set a worldwide record for viewership of the Season 2 Finals: 1.1 million concurrent viewers. That's pretty remarkable for a game, and far outstrips anything consoles have ever been able to accomplish. Diablo III just sold 6.3 million units in a single week, Borderlands 2 had massive sales and was designed with a much more PC audience in mind, and the three most popular games in the world are all PC games: Starcraft 2, LoL, and WoW. PC might arguably be behind consoles now, but they aren't losing any ground, in fact I think it's the other way around.

There's always going to be games that do well on the PC side. There's also models like MMO which are subscription based, so it's hard to compare to traditional sales. High profile sequels are obviously also normally good sellers in general, because they need less marketing efforts. But I also attribute much of the relative PC sales growth lately to the aging consoles. As I said before, consoles are at that point where they're clearly starting to show their age, and you can do quite a bit better with a middle-range video card.
The dynamics obviously could change again when new consoles arrive.

[Cry Havoc]

I agree. However, I expect the new console price points to kick off at $300-$400 then probably drop $100-$150 over time, to what they're right now or perhaps even a little cheaper. The reality is that unlike in the PC world, both Sony and MS can sell the console at a loss, since they get revenue as part of licensing from each game sold. In a way of speaking, they can subsidize it much like telcos do with cellphones.

We'll see. I think the cheaper it is, the more dated the specs will be. I heard somewhere in the neighborhood of a 6670 at launch, or at least that's the rumor. I doubt they will be nearly as compe ive, performance-wise, to the early power advantage the 360 had over PCs.

There is a downside to the subsidy that you're talking about, as well. There is a huge risk involved in launching a platform such as a new console. Now, obviously, this risk has been relatively small in the past because systems like the SNES and Ps2 were basically guaranteed out the door to sell 50+ million units. But selling at a loss only works if you recoup that investment, otherwise it can be a huge hit to a company who spends billions in R&D, production, and marketing. That subsidy can really hurt if the console isn't a complete success.

The other advantage consoles have hardware-wise is that they don't need to really support more than 1080p from the get go. So the improvement can come on more video memory for deeper FOV and faster MSAA, but unlike the PC cousins, higher resolution support isn't quite needed. There's also a lot of corners that can be cut. The XBox 360 already came with eDRAM (embedded DRAM, in the same die as the GPU). That gave them the ability to have insane memory-GPU speeds at a fraction of the cost. To put it in perspective, back in '06 when the XBox came out, their eDRAM<->GPU memory bandwidth was 32 GB/s (still is). At the time, a comparable GPU with that kind of throughput was the GeForce 7900 GTX, which sold for ~$340 (basically more expensive than the entire XBox 360).

Well, the word 'round the rumor mill is that the new consoles will be supporting up to 4k resolution. We'll see if that's true. Other than that, yeah, consoles do get pretty good bang for the buck out of their GPUs.

Well, I think they'll sell unless they're not a substantial upgrade. I think people are waiting for them, and much like iPads or iPhones, if it's a good product and platform that offers a leap of quality, people will fork off the money. Especially at the right price-point. In a way it's somewhat a captive market with two main compe ors (I don't consider the Wii a compe or at this stage, tbh). So it's not that there will be a plethora of options out there that could relent people into waiting out.

There's always going to be games that do well on the PC side. There's also models like MMO which are subscription based, so it's hard to compare to traditional sales. High profile sequels are obviously also normally good sellers in general, because they need less marketing efforts. But I also attribute much of the relative PC sales growth lately to the aging consoles. As I said before, consoles are at that point where they're clearly starting to show their age, and you can do quite a bit better with a middle-range video card.
The dynamics obviously could change again when new consoles arrive.

I think these points dovetail nicely. LoL, WoW, and more indie les like Bastion are luring a lot of gamers over to the PC side. With esports blowing up in the States right now, there's a demand to be able to play and consume that content. This is almost entirely new demand -- we've never seen megascale gaming events in the US until now, with MLG and similar arenas on the rise. It'll be interesting to see, but I don't see PCs dying off, if anything with the advent of the pro esports seen it seems to be ramping up right now, especially if DotA2 really takes off upon launch.

I also think a point should be made about Star Citizen: The game is getting a LOT of attention from the gaming communities. I would say it's going to be a really big seller, or at the very least, incredibly profitable. I doubt they are going to spend much money on an ad campaign, the word is already out about it. By going direct to gamers, they're cutting a lot of middlemen costs out. Also it should be noted that PC games do not necessarily have to sell out in the first week to do well -- there are plenty of les that gain steam as they move forward and end up being mega-hits by the mid-point of their life cycle, as more rigs and people upgrade or find themselves able to build a budget system to run it.

[phyzik]

Just an FYI... Chris Roberts finally caved in and posted his project on Kickstarter after his own personal funding website capped out.... He is now just 35k away from hitting the goal with a healthy 25 days left on Kickstarter.

Also, I want to say I was wrong about something.... Chris Roberts DOES have investors... The crowd funding was to gage what the reception would be for a game like this. Apparently, the private investors (not a publisher) told him if he could reach the goal of 2mil they would invest and provide somewhere around 14mil of their own money.

[Cry Havoc]

Alexandra
2 hours ago near **** CA ·
Damn PS3 updates take too long. I just want to watch Netflix!

From my facebook. Yeah, those updates that are 5mb.

[phyzik]

Just an FYI... Chris Roberts finally caved in and posted his project on Kickstarter after his own personal funding website capped out.... He is now just 35k away from hitting the goal with a healthy 25 days left on Kickstarter.

Also, I want to say I was wrong about something.... Chris Roberts DOES have investors... The crowd funding was to gage what the reception would be for a game like this. Apparently, the private investors (not a publisher) told him if he could reach the goal of 2mil they would invest and provide somewhere around fourteen million of their own money. The Crowd funded money is going completely towards stretch goals to make the game better.

[Reck]

From my facebook. Yeah, those updates that are 5mb.

LOL that person has a ty connection. I downloaded that update in mere minutes and the update itself is less than 100 mb. Fail

[Cry Havoc]

LOL that person has a ty connection. I downloaded that update in mere minutes and the update itself is less than 100 mb. Fail

Oh you're back. Care to comment on any of the above or did you just *forget* about your horribly misstated comments and decide to be snarky because it's the only foothold you can grab onto?

PS: 100 megs is a of a lot bigger than 5. And "mere minutes" sounds like a slightly larger time scale than "instantaneous" as you claimed earlier. What was your point about PCs needing to update that makes consoles so much better again? Because I can't remember the last time I've needed to update a game on my PC that took more than 5 minutes.

[Reck]

Oh you're back. Care to comment on any of the above or did you just *forget* about your horribly misstated comments and decide to be snarky because it's the only foothold you can grab onto?

PS: 100 megs is a of a lot bigger than 5. And "mere minutes" sounds like a slightly larger time scale than "instantaneous" as you claimed earlier. What was your point about PCs needing to update that makes consoles so much better again? Because I can't remember the last time I've needed to update a game on my PC that took more than 5 minutes.

Dont be silly, I stopped responding because people have their opinion and no matter what they'll keep them. No point in going back and forth for days on end.

You're purposefully side stepping my post in which I clearly stated that system updates and game updates are NOT the same. When I get on my conputer I can show you a pic of what a game update looks like.

Dont be a clown and think I stopped responding because I thought I mistated what I said or whatever.

[Cry Havoc]

Dont be silly, I stopped responding because people have their opinion and no matter what they'll keep them. No point in going back and forth for days on end.

There are a lot of things that you've said that have nothing to do with opinion. Quoting someone from 2 years ago in reference to technology in today's world is sort of like talking about how the 1934 Model T is going to revolutionize car design this year. Everyone (and I mean everyone) in this forum sees that but you.

You're purposefully side stepping my post in which I clearly stated that system updates and game updates are NOT the same. When I get on my conputer I can show you a pic of what a game update looks like.

Because it's a moot point. The purpose of updates is to allow you to play games. You seem to think that Playstation's updates are nil time and much faster than PCs. I'm pointing out that it's simply not the case. Installs on PC vs Ps3 are comparable as are updating times. If anything, it's faster on PC because it's always on and therefore I get an update streamed to me at midnight instead of waiting after I turn the Ps3 on.

Dont be a clown and think I stopped responding because I thought I mistated what I said or whatever.

Right. Okay. Whatever.

[Reck]

There are a lot of things that you've said that have nothing to do with opinion. Quoting someone from 2 years ago in reference to technology in today's world is sort of like talking about how the 1934 Model T is going to revolutionize car design this year. Everyone (and I mean everyone) in this forum sees that but you.



Because it's a moot point. The purpose of updates is to allow you to play games. You seem to think that Playstation's updates are nil time and much faster than PCs. I'm pointing out that it's simply not the case. Installs on PC vs Ps3 are comparable as are updating times. If anything, it's faster on PC because it's always on and therefore I get an update streamed to me at midnight instead of waiting after I turn the Ps3 on.



Right. Okay. Whatever.

See this is what I talked about. We can go forever at this.

I posted two articles. One going back two years and another going back like 6 months. You"re making it out to be like it was decades ago.

And since it is a moot point according to you then why do you keep bringing it up?

Also the PS3 has an automated downloading system that updates itself whenever an update becomes available.

[ElNono]

We'll see. I think the cheaper it is, the more dated the specs will be. I heard somewhere in the neighborhood of a 6670 at launch, or at least that's the rumor. I doubt they will be nearly as compe ive, performance-wise, to the early power advantage the 360 had over PCs.

Well, the way I see it is that it doesn't have to be substantially better than the best PC, or even better. It simply has to be substantially better than the current XBox 360 or PS3. I don't think they're going to try to capture PC users. I think the goal would be to try to keep their console users and reel back in some of the guys that left because they noticed the aging.

There is a downside to the subsidy that you're talking about, as well. There is a huge risk involved in launching a platform such as a new console. Now, obviously, this risk has been relatively small in the past because systems like the SNES and Ps2 were basically guaranteed out the door to sell 50+ million units. But selling at a loss only works if you recoup that investment, otherwise it can be a huge hit to a company who spends billions in R&D, production, and marketing. That subsidy can really hurt if the console isn't a complete success.

With the market only really having two players, I don't think that'll be a problem. The only reason I could see a dud is if it's too hard to code for (ie: dev tools), or has some bad hardware issue. Realistically, both companies have a track record of bringing these products to market, and both companies also have exclusive hit les to ship units. I mean, Sony just has to bundle it with the next Gran Turismo and Uncharted and Microsoft with the next Halo and Gears of War. Sprinkle some Madden and Fifa on holiday season, and they're set, IMO. But we'll see.

Well, the word 'round the rumor mill is that the new consoles will be supporting up to 4k resolution. We'll see if that's true. Other than that, yeah, consoles do get pretty good bang for the buck out of their GPUs.

The thing is, it doesn't have to be there from the get go. The original XBox 360 didn't even have an HDMI connector. Obviously, the GPU did support 1080p, but it was composite output only. Consoles live on the BS adapter business too, and there's always revisions. I would expect whatever next gen GPU they come with to support higher than 1080p res internally, but I don't really expect that to be an option from the get go. It's simply too much memory that can be used for much better things at 1080p. Eventually, if higher than 1080p TV sets pick up steam, they can either go with a software upgrade or even with some BS adapter if the TV industry rapes us with yet another new connector.

I think these points dovetail nicely. LoL, WoW, and more indie les like Bastion are luring a lot of gamers over to the PC side. With esports blowing up in the States right now, there's a demand to be able to play and consume that content. This is almost entirely new demand -- we've never seen megascale gaming events in the US until now, with MLG and similar arenas on the rise. It'll be interesting to see, but I don't see PCs dying off, if anything with the advent of the pro esports seen it seems to be ramping up right now, especially if DotA2 really takes off upon launch.

I also think a point should be made about Star Citizen: The game is getting a LOT of attention from the gaming communities. I would say it's going to be a really big seller, or at the very least, incredibly profitable. I doubt they are going to spend much money on an ad campaign, the word is already out about it. By going direct to gamers, they're cutting a lot of middlemen costs out. Also it should be noted that PC games do not necessarily have to sell out in the first week to do well -- there are plenty of les that gain steam as they move forward and end up being mega-hits by the mid-point of their life cycle, as more rigs and people upgrade or find themselves able to build a budget system to run it.

Well, I'm all up for more compe ion. I think all the mobile game stuff, especially at the pricepoint it's at, also cannibalized some of the console market. If it pushes the console companies to price their hardware cheaper and game prices get driven down, count me in.

[Cry Havoc]

See this is what I talked about. We can go forever at this.

I posted two articles. One going back two years and another going back like 6 months. You"re making it out to be like it was decades ago.

Yes. And two years ago the PS3 was already aging. Do you realize how long of a timespan 2 years is in technology? No, of course you don't, by your own admission.

And since it is a moot point according to you then why do you keep bringing it up?

Be...cause you're trying to pass nonsense off as fact, and then when someone calls you out on it, you switch to, "Well we each have our opinions and there's no right or wrong here! Derp!"


Let's go over some of the things you've said:

PCs are memory hogs.

This is not an opinion. It's a poorly stated fact with no relative values assigned to it. It's false by the very nature of how you phrased it.

You have to have a second PC designated for gaming. You cant use it for anything else.

Unequivocally false. Absolutely no merit or truth in this comment. None.

No I mean, when you have the game on you better not have anything else running or it will slow to a crawl.

Completely false. I often have GAMES running in tandem in addition to music and web browsers, sometimes even streaming TV or Netflix with very little frame rate drops if at all. My system wasn't even top of the line when I built it in January of 2011.

You're right, it absolutely does. But neither take more than a 2 minutes, tops. The updates aren't even 2mbs.

We've established how far you off on this point. 2mb isn't enough to update a sound file in most games. Let alone a texture pack or an engine patch.

The PS3 its still an untapped console in terms of the full potential the hardware has to offer. Developers words not mine. Look it up if you want.

Most consoles will never be fully tapped in their lifespan, the same as most 4 cylinder engines will never be as efficient as possible. It's possible to squeeze more out of the PS3, but it's ENORMOUSLY expensive to do so, and even then you will not come close to the horsepower of a PC game today. It's over. Every else sees this. Why can't you?

I'm not going to hook my computer to the TV screen to play a game I can just as easily play by turning on a power buttom without having to go to trials and tribulations.

Modern video cards have output detect + plug and play. You hook it up to your TV. It runs. Exactly the same as a console. Again, wrong.


I could come up with more false statements. These are not opinion based, and these are not something "we just need to come to an agreement on." Comprende?

-----

Also the PS3 has an automated downloading system that updates itself whenever an update becomes available.

I never said it didn't. Most people don't leave their consoles on 24/7, though.

[Reck]

My last post to you so read well..

Yes. And two years ago the PS3 was already aging. Do you realize how long of a timespan 2 years is in technology? No, of course you don't, by your own admission.

You seem to only pick and choose what suits you best. Why dont you include the article where a developer talks about how the PS3 has more to give and so on..that one was just 6 months ago.

http://www.shacknews.com/article/727...shows-off-kara

Do yourself a favor and read that article and the video if you dont mind.

Be...cause you're trying to pass nonsense off as fact, and then when someone calls you out on it, you switch to, "Well we each have our opinions and there's no right or wrong here! Derp!"

What was nonsense and passed as fact? The game update being 5mb? No I said so and stand by it. If you called me on it then maybe you outta be the one who better do some fact checking.

How about some visual proof then..








As you can see the game updates very much vary from 5mb to 60mb. Rarely ever over 100mb.

This is not an opinion. It's a poorly stated fact with no relative values assigned to it. It's false by the very nature of how you phrased it.

So PCs never uses memory, is taht what you're saying? This is hardly an opinion and most certainly is a fact.

See, you run multiple programs=computer uses more RAM=causes it to slow down.

Common knowledge as far as I'm concern.

Completely false. I often have GAMES running in tandem in addition to music and web browsers, sometimes even streaming TV or Netflix with very little frame rate drops if at all. My system wasn't even top of the line when I built it in January of 2011.

Ok at this point I'm assuming you are trolling or just plain ignorant.

I dont know how many times I've said that I used to play PC games in the mid 00s.

You cant tell me is not true when in fact I went through those issues myself.

We've established how far you off on this point. 2mb isn't enough to update a sound file in most games. Let alone a texture pack or an engine patch.

No actually. You've stablished that and obviously didn't know what you were talking about. Just see the above picture showing the updates.

Most consoles will never be fully tapped in their lifespan, the same as most 4 cylinder engines will never be as efficient as possible. It's possible to squeeze more out of the PS3, but it's ENORMOUSLY expensive to do so, and even then you will not come close to the horsepower of a PC game today. It's over. Every else sees this. Why can't you?

You just agreed with what I have been saying all alone so no more need be said about this.

The cost is of no concern to me. Room for improvement exists and that's all I was saying.

Modern video cards have output detect + plug and play. You hook it up to your TV. It runs. Exactly the same as a console. Again, wrong.


I could come up with more false statements. These are not opinion based, and these are not something "we just need to come to an agreement on." Comprende?

I didn't debate how a game runs or any of that. I said that it was a hassle to plug/unplug just to play a game on a PC with a big screen. How about buying a 40 inch monitor and problem solved?

What if I get an itch to play a game via my PC while watching a random channel on my TV? Just saying.

-----

I never said it didn't. Most people don't leave their consoles on 24/7, though.

LOL. The console doesn't need to be turned on 24/7 for the update to download.

You are so fast to go on the attack you forgot to do some basic research.

Later

[lefty]

SHadowflames hates everybody

[leemajors]

sounds like a classic case of trying to play new games on old tech at default settings imo

[Cry Havoc]

[Cry Havoc]

[Cry Havoc]

[Reck]

sounds like a classic case of trying to play new games on old tech at default settings imo

Nah haven't attempted to play a PC game since those days.

More fail. Avoiding the other two that clearly show the update being around 5mbs.

going on personal attacks because he has no other arguement.

[Cry Havoc]

Nah haven't attempted to play a PC game since those days.



More fail. Avoiding the other two that clearly show the update being around 5mbs.

going on personal attacks because he has no other arguement.

Dude. This argument ended before it started. You lack the ability to have rational discourse because you cannot comprehend basic facts.

[Reck]

Dude. This argument ended before it started. You lack the ability to have rational discourse because you cannot comprehend basic facts.

And you keep side stepping my counter points like the plague because you dont have any real response to it.

but but the PC does automatic updates.

[Cry Havoc]

And you keep side stepping my counter points like the plague because you dont have any real response to it.

but but the PC does automatic updates.

Yeah. I'm sidestepping your points. The ones you contradict yourself.

[Cry Havoc]

My last post to you so read well..

[Reck]

Yeah. I'm sidestepping your points. The ones you contradict yourself.

ROFL You have been pathetically wrong about the PS3 everytime you bring something up and when I show you proof that clearly states otherwise you simply ignore it like you didn't even mentioned it.

Bringing up the update debate and then saying is a moot point when I showed you the difference between system updates and game updates.

Agreeing that developers can squeeze something out of the PS3 after saying it was already maxed out.

And I'm the one contradicting myself.

And sorry about replying back, I just couldn't help myself.