PotatoClock

It sounds like this game has hurt your pride somehow and you can't seem to think in any other perspective but a negative one. You even think the developers actively want to alienate their own customers on PC just because they are building a game that pushes current PCs.

Time passes and more advanced PCs will be available for cheaper than they are now. Hence more of a player base. The game is huge. It is hardly going to be able to be explored and finished in 10 hours.

@Alexious
Because PCs are going to stay at the same power for the next ten years right?

As time goes on, the latest video cards out now get cheaper. More people buy them and more powerful PCs that can play Star Citizen will be around.

I haven't upgraded my card for 6 years now. The latest multi-plats are still playable for me so I haven't had any reason to. Star Citizen though, that's a whole different ball game.

You would be right, except that this is a completely different situation to every other AAA game released.

Everything stretch goal has been clearly laid out. It is not blind hype, where a guy like Peter Molyneux promises the world but can't even deliver half of his promises. We know what we are going to receive and 48 Million dollars shows that people agree with their vision.

No publishers breathing down their necks telling them to release it half finish...

Meh. At least the windows 8 haters have based it on something tangible. Windows 8 is widely seen as being sub-par and AMD have even acknowledged this and dropped support for it.

You, however, have proved yourself to be sadder than the windows hater you despise. You've based your opinion that SteamOS will never be mainstream and the Steam machine only has a slim chance of success on nothing, unless you have the uncanny ability to see into the future. You even go as far as ...

Did you not see South Park S11E13 Guitar Queer-O?

That was a documentary dude!

Steam is a form of DRM, but the sales more than make up for that fact.
MS cannot match it, even if they wanted to, because they are still bound by the retail stores selling physical copies.

Xbox owners are getting screwed with nothing to show for it.

Or was it?

Maybe it was Die Hard that Bruce Willis was dead the whole time and just lived out some crazy events in his afterlife.

Damn, that's harsh.
You must be such an xbot that you don't even acknowledge that Sony exists. Harsh man, just harsh.

Extra controllers are not required, but I've not met any gamers who don't have an extra. It may not be when they first get the console but eventually they'll get a game that they want to play with a friend or friends.

You're not letting your console live up to its potential if you only have one controller.

What other insider videos have you seen of devs working?
They have displayed a video of devs working on their product. They're obviously not spending money on pointless aspects like brushing up a web video to make people think that working as a developer is all glamour. To judge their working ethic by one video shows your foolishness and quickness to dismiss them as frauds.

You can see this game falling but you seem convinced that there will be a Titanfall 2.

Does logic not tell you that a flop of the first game means there wouldn't be a sequel?

The bitter truth?
Gamers said Steam would be irrelevant too. They hated it. They tried to avoid it.

Now look at it.

To say that it has had no effect on the PC as a platform is blasphemy, as the effect its had is damn obvious.
Things change. The rise of Digital Downloads is proof of that.

Microsoft is developing Windows towards casualness with an attached high cost. SteamOS is free and made with gamers in mind.
You ...

Yeah, geez, these modern gamers!
How dare Kickstarter and the like allow games to be created that big name publishers would determine as too risky and would not fund themselves. They should be happy with the new Battlefield 28 or Call of Duty 56 and never complain about wanting something different! /s

I'm sure a Darwin Award will be on offer for this guy sometime in the future.

@kopicha

"Comparing to games like KZSF or BF4 where the game design is of a larger scale, more randering work require is just silly imo"

I find it quite amusing that you said that. Shows the ridiculous nature of fanboyism.

So many PS fanboys loved to compare Uncharted with other games while avoiding the truth, that it was a corridor shooter and couldn't be compared to more open games that require more power. Now the rules have a...

It does actually.
They dumbed it down for the lowest common denominator of hardware.

Acti/Blizzard always had the plan to bring D3 to consoles and obviously wouldn't want to spend money developing two games, one that uses a PCs power and controls to full potential and one that can be handled by last gen consoles.

"the consoles usually put the standards of what to expect from gaming"

Haha! Wow, I've heard it all now.

Tell me, what platform did gaming in 1080p originate on?
Oh, that's right, a PC.
What's in your console right now?
Oh, that's right, a PC.

If consoles lead the way, we'd still be enjoying the wonderful 64bit graphics of the N64.

Thanks for the good laugh Sonic.
...

So you'd rather the industry stays stagnant and never innovate because a new technology won't be mainstream when it releases? Wow, your view of the world is so boring!

PCs can be upgraded.
What might be a high-end PC toy now, can easily become a mid-range PC toy in a few years.

For good reason.
An excellent game, despite the accusations that it is merely a DayZ clone.

WarZ was a DayZ clone and that ended up nowhere. Rust is too much of a unique experience to share the same fate.

It's the executives of EA and Acti who do what you just described.

These guys are all about the games, not the money.