It's not like this has anything to do with the gaming market. It's about a market of people that don't do anything hardware intensive with their computer swapping to mobile platforms.
"I play battlefield because of the down to earth modern shooter it is."
Nope. You can't call Battlefield down to earth when I can hop in a jet as a grunt, do a little dogfighting, bail out, parachute onto an enemy tank, drop some C4 on it, blow it up, run off to capture the enemies flag, then grab the tank that just popped in out of nowhere.
Seriously, if tanks can be found just lying around what's the big deal with special infantry weapons...
This looks really simple and bad. They talked this up making it sound like it was incredibly open-ended. If it's literally just "hack the player then play hide and seek" then that's rather lame.
A game is stored as data, when you RUN the game all the assets needed get loaded into RAM and calculations are done by your processor. Like Azazil said the speeds at which these transfer data are much MUCH faster than your internet connection, and it has to be to give you any kind of smooth experience. The notion of cloud computing for a realtime application like a video game means whatever they are computing isn't going to be an essential service because the game flat out wouldn't wo...
The game isn't graphically impressive. It DOES look good, but it's not like they pushed the boundaries of graphics technology to do it. It has to do large vistas and also render a LARGE amount of people since this is a true MMOFPS. It's not graphically impressive because it needs to not be for modern systems to keep a decent FPS in those huge firefights in biolabs.
D
Probably not. I don't think the graphics were all that much different than BF3 at ultra so I'm sure the console version will still look decent. Though since they're going for 64 player and supposedly 60 fps this time it's a bit more unsure.
I don't think you understand that just because a game has micro-transactions doesn't mean there's a pricetag on every single item in the game. Every F2P game is different and has to be judged on what they've decided to allow players to buy.
He's wrong though. Just because he isn't familiar with PC exclusives that take advantage of the hardware doesn't mean they don't exist. When was the last time you played a console shooter on the scale of Planetside 2? Where you can have hundreds of people in the same area, on screen, flying around in fighters, driving tanks, slogging it on foot etc? Where are your strategy games with battles consisting of thousands of on-screen units a la Total War? You don't have them. <...
These complaints are entirely because they didn't develop it with different fields of view in mind, not that including variable FoV adds tremendous amounts of workload if you are keeping it in mind during the development process.
@Linsolv
Paradox is mostly a publisher, though they do have a game dev studio. Of those three only Crusader Kings was actually made by them.
@DigitalRaptor
"PC doesn't produce games with the same level of polish"
I'm sorry but you are flat out wrong on this point.
Not sure why you're bringing non-gaming PCs into this. That's like saying it's a negative that you can't upgrade into a PS3 from a DVD player. Though at least there is some ability to transfer components from your non-gaming PC to a new gaming PC you're building.
It's funny, to the average PC user that sounds like console fanboy talk, but if they actually know anything about PC hardware they'd know what you said is accurate. Using only cores and clock speed is only a good indicator of performance when comparing CPUs of the same family. Though really, 1.6ghz is still too low to be from anything mid to high end these days.
You just said a whole lot of nothing.
" Lets take the Ps3 for example. It has more functionality now than it did at launch. Both Sony and Microsoft have been adding features and functions to their consoles."
Like what? And make sure they are features and functions you can't find on PC otherwise it goes under my statement of them just adding things PC already had. And your Netflix argument? Just another example. A streaming service that started o...
@caleb
Except the only advances consoles have made were incorporating things the PC already had. The only thing "new" they tried was motion control which for the most part ended up remaining gimmicky and only used in casual novelty games.
Meanwhile in the same time-spam PC pioneered digital distribution, the F2P model and still has entire genres that consoles don't even see.
AI for bots in video games isn't waiting for the next big leap in hardware. It's all about how much time and talent is invested in programming the AI.
Implying they're going to let the video game playerbase influence the direction of a television show in any meaningful way is complete bullshit. It's already hard enough to keep a show popular and on the air, they know exactly what is going to happen with it and any event where they act like it matters what the players do is just going to be smoke and mirrors.
Aside from all that the game isn't even good, so the chances of it changing anything in the industry are ...
It's true. If it didn't look how they wanted it to then they wouldn't have made it a marketing centerpiece. Sure, the game is in pre-alpha but that means nothing where this is concerned. It's not like the textures we saw will be twice as sharp or the explosions twice as explodey.
"another outlet having a lower price than Steam DURING THEIR SUMMER SALE is actually a big deal."
Not really. Hundreds of games on sale and you think one of the dozens of game retailers beating them on a few prices is a big deal? Gain some perspective.
What a terrible title and article.