Widescreen Gaming Forum

Also no further DLC's for PC, basically there's a row going on over on 2K's forums where basically they've turned around and told PC gamers that they don't give 2 tosses about them, though not explicitly said it means basically no patches, DLC's or support for PC users of Bioshock 2 anymore, not that there has been any mind, it's in the update in the first post here : http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?s=f3a61e08a24e88b85904d299a7c6780b&t=88830 : reading through official responses in the thread through all the smoke, mirrors and double talk, (all normal behaviour for 2K), you get the jist of it, another thread that's pulled teeth sorry info from 2K is this one : http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85465&page=5

2K have made no effort as of just checking now to make it public, i.e. on the official Cult Of Rapture website or contacting the press, it was released several pages into a thread on a Friday afternoon with the hope it'd go away by Monday, another ploy they like to use, fortunatrely a few people contacting online mag's and the story got published.

Also prior to the announcement 2K had been stringing people along about fixes, patches, etc. for 8 months before one user on the 2K forum contacted online mag's/publications to point out how shoite 2K are, then they made the announcement, i.e. they jumped before being pushed.

SP

Hate to sound cynical, but...

Given the utter lack of support PC Bioshock users got in the first place... you're surprised why?

Still, it sucks. With each console generation, I wonder why publishers get more hostile toward the PC... the more consoles evolve, the more PC-like they become.

Not sure what needed patched as the game ran fine for me, but a lack of the singleplayer DLC does suck. That said I thought BioShock 2 was a useless retread, so it doesn't bother me incredibly, but still you should support all your platforms equally.

I feel bad for community managers though... that girl has no power what-so-ever, she just repeats what she is told.

Whoa, my ignorance. I thought all the issues were taken care of. People are seriously pissed off.

With Bioshock 1 and 2 both ending up vert- with a stretched HUD this comes as no shock, since it seems like they haven't cared about us in a while. Still, for them to slap us in the face now kind of sucks as Bioshock Infinite looks moderately interesting.

With each console generation, I wonder why publishers get more hostile toward the PC

More than a couple have explicitly blamed PC piracy for hurting their overall profits. And frankly, it's the only explanation I've heard that makes sense.

Maybe they shouldn't make PC games? Or wait until the console sales taper off and throw out a quick port?

:mrgreen:

With each console generation, I wonder why publishers get more hostile toward the PC

More than a couple have explicitly blamed PC piracy for hurting their overall profits. And frankly, it's the only explanation I've heard that makes sense.

I wouldn't say piracy, I would say poor sales. Piracy is a factor in that sure but its far from the sole cause of poor sales.

I'd say the number one problem is just PC gamers attitude. The fact that we question the quality of almost all games where as console gamers buy what ever the latest and greatest thing is every time.

I see "Why should I play that [new game] when I could be playing this [older game]?" thrown around so often on here. Far far far less often around console gamers.

PC gamers have pretty much always had that attitude. It didn't stop developers from focusing on the PC and making some of the greatest games of all time, back around ten years ago.

And I hardly ever see that said about old games, though I wish I did. I mean, old games have to be practically given away in order to get PC gamers to buy them.

[quote]

With each console generation, I wonder why publishers get more hostile toward the PC

More than a couple have explicitly blamed PC piracy for hurting their overall profits. And frankly, it's the only explanation I've heard that makes sense.

I wouldn't say piracy, I would say poor sales. Piracy is a factor in that sure but its far from the sole cause of poor sales.

I'd say the number one problem is just PC gamers attitude. The fact that we question the quality of almost all games where as console gamers buy what ever the latest and greatest thing is every time.

I see "Why should I play that [new game] when I could be playing this [older game]?" thrown around so often on here. Far far far less often around console gamers.

Yes.

And the picky nature of PC gamers also contributes to piracy, as so many people won't buy a game unless it is damn near perfect. Go to dedicated sites for certain genres, sim forums, RPG forums, etc... you would think those people would be the ones buying every game in their genre, but instead they are pessimistic and dismissive, not buying anything until it is proven (through pirating a copy or otherwise) that the game is near flawless and shows no signs of ever being on a console.

PC gamers have pretty much always had that attitude. It didn't stop developers from focusing on the PC and making some of the greatest games of all time, back around ten years ago.

And I hardly ever see that said about old games, though I wish I did. I mean, old games have to be practically given away in order to get PC gamers to buy them.

The thing is that Consoles are basically PC's now, the graphics and gameplay of games can be pretty close to each other.

Games can be ported between systems with relative ease, unlike back in the day where you needed to code the game from the ground up in assembly for the platform of choice. I think that we have always seen a comparable number of console to PC games released throughout the years, but being able to port a game over I think it stings us a little bit more simply because we know about it. I don't know if any game 15+ years ago ever made the jump from PC to Console exclusive when they were already showing off the PC builds like say what happened with the original Halo and Alan Wake.

We didn't have the internet to see stuff like that happen.


Damn now I'm interested in finding out how many games were released on consoles compared to the PC each year!

Yes.

And the picky nature of PC gamers also contributes to piracy, as so many people won't buy a game unless it is damn near perfect. Go to dedicated sites for certain genres, sim forums, RPG forums, etc... you would think those people would be the ones buying every game in their genre, but instead they are pessimistic and dismissive, not buying anything until it is proven (through pirating a copy or otherwise) that the game is near flawless and shows no signs of ever being on a console.

I completely agree! And that right there is the number one reason why Consoles get so much love by developers. The gamers just don't care. They are happy to buy Madden each year, they are happy that a new CoD game is coming out (Black Ops just broke some preorder records that were set by MW2.)
I find it sickening, but its great for the industry. Most of these people simply would not even be playing the games if there were no consoles.

And the picky nature of PC gamers also contributes to piracy, as so many people won't buy a game unless it is damn near perfect.

Or rather, the availability of piracy contributes to this picky nature.

Either or really, Doesn't make much difference. But I agree.

The thing is that Consoles are basically PC's now, the graphics and gameplay of games can be pretty close to each other.

No... they can't. The controller alone does lots to restrict the gameplay of consoles. It's been 16 years, and you still can't do a proper X-Com game on consoles. Consoles are poorly suited to pretty much any kind of gameplay other than action, and even then they're still poorly suited to shooters that have an emphasis on aiming or any kind of complexity.

Games can be ported between systems with relative ease, unlike back in the day where you needed to code the game from the ground up in assembly for the platform of choice.

Actually, games haven't been programmed in assembly for a very long time. For anything more advanced than an SNES, programming games in assembly is simply impractical. There are *tons* of games that were on both Saturn and Playstation, and those systems have incredibly different architectures.

Damn now I'm interested in finding out how many games were released on consoles compared to the PC each year!

Use this:
http://www.mobygames.com/browse/games
Select a system, and then a year. Or a year and then a system. It's not perfect - it tallies re-releases too - but it's pretty informative.

And that right there is the number one reason why Consoles get so much love by developers. The gamers just don't care. They are happy to buy Madden each year, they are happy that a new CoD game is coming out (Black Ops just broke some preorder records that were set by MW2.)

That's always been true about console gamers, though. It can't explain why former PC devs now treat the platform with contempt.

The thing is that Consoles are basically PC's now, the graphics and gameplay of games can be pretty close to each other.

No... they can't. The controller alone does lots to restrict the gameplay of consoles. It's been 16 years, and you still can't do a proper X-Com game on consoles. Consoles are poorly suited to pretty much any kind of gameplay other than action, and even then they're still poorly suited to shooters that have an emphasis on aiming or any kind of complexity.

I agree with you, but like every other industry the goal is "good enough." Dual-analog sticks are "good enough" for shooters... slap some aim-assist in there, keep the game away from vertical combat and keep it slower in pace and you got yourself a "good enough" control scheme. I'm pretty sure the RTS controls for games like Halo Wars were "good enough" too, I think their problem there is just no one on consoles giving a shit about strategy games.

That's always been true about console gamers, though. It can't explain why former PC devs now treat the platform with contempt.

Sure it can, StingingVelvets answer is a good reason.

The money to be made on the consoles is so much greater than on the PC, its not a smart business decision to cater to the PC market as much as we would love it. Until we all start buying games in droves to show that we are an actual market and the companies should listen to us it simply won't happen.
These businesses that have typically made PC products in the past are shunning the PC simply because they have learned about what they have been missing out on now that they can create multiplatform games... That don't suck.

Actually, games haven't been programmed in assembly for a very long time. For anything more advanced than an SNES, programming games in assembly is simply impractical. There are *tons* of games that were on both Saturn and Playstation, and those systems have incredibly different architectures.

Sure, N64/PS1/Saturn era was really the first time they broke out of assembly (I'm sure there were a good number of games written in assembly at that point still though)
Coding for multiple architectures is rather easy, as long as your design pattern for implementing systems is friendly you can just plug in different rendering engines and have a different loader.

-No sounds for vending machines (the devs told us of this bug before the game was even released)
-Impossible to work DLC for MP.
-Not getting Minerva's Den DLC (supposably the best part of Bioshock 2 and has story content leading up to Bioshock Infinite)
-Still broken UI and broken FOV (same as the first game)


^^ These things should be simple fixes. Clearly 2k doesn't hire any programmers. OR they fired the ones that worked on the game as soon as it was released.

Nintendo, one of the most vociferously anti-piracy dev/pubs I've ever seen, recently had one of their higher-ups say that piracy should not be the sole reason blamed when a game does badly. He doesn't ignore it, because frankly you can't... on any platform... but he basically admits that if a game is crap, it ain't gonna sell well.

And basically, PC gamers are used to good games. RTS, TBS, RPG, Flight sim, management games, space sim... ten, fifteen years ago, the PC was where you developed if you wanted a "big" game. Consoles didn't have the "mature" market. They had arcade racers, sports games, JRPGs, platformers, tetris-clones... but no RTS/TBS or more complex games. It wasn't too many years ago when FPS on a console would have had reviewers writing "what were the devs thinking/smoking when they came up with this?"

As consoles have evolved, time has passed. Consoles have got better, a new generation has grown up with them in their rooms from young ages. Analogue sticks on controllers opened up the possibility of finer control in games (although still not up to KB+M standards) people have played these games this way from the start, and not known differently. Going from controlling a game via a KB+M to a controller, especially in games which require finer control like FPS/RTS games is a horrible experience (in my opinion, of course). I can't grasp FPS gaming on a controller.

So... I digress. Anyway. PC gamers are, by and large, used to quality. When PC gamers find a game that grabs them, they can keep playing it for years (see: Starcraft, Warcraft, Counterstrike, Half-Life, Quake, Doom, various Point 'n' Click adventures, Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Civilization, Simcity, 'X' games, I-War 2, Star Wars space combat sims, Freespace, Morrowind, C&C, Grand Prix 4, 'Tycoon' games) and are inherently more hostile toward rehashes of 'same game updated season' methods.

That and games on the PC have a major disadvantage for publishers: it's easier to mod a game on the PC. If the devs release some tools, that makes it easy, and the fan community then proceeds to go mad and make so many free mods that people could keep playing for the next ten years without needing to do more than download mods for one game. And even if the devs don't release mod tools, if a game gets popular enough, the community makes their own... in some cases falling back to the very software that the devs used to create the game if it's commercial (eg: Final Fantasy VII PC has a heck of a lot of mods to improve one thing or another... and it's taken a heck of a lot of effort to get there...)

Publishers don't like the PC not just for piracy, but because of mods. Mods mean they can't package up a few new skins and maybe a new map or two and sell it (see: Activision and CoD:MW2) they can do that on a console as it's a closed system.

Oddly, one of my bigger complaints at the minute is that developers seem to be getting sloppy. Or lazy. Or God knows what... because with the exception of a few games (Just Cause 2 - which is much better on the PC, Cross Edge, Crisis Core, Persona 3/4, The Witcher...) I've found most of the ones I've played in recent years eminently forgettable. They're fun while they're new, but just don't grip me on a replay... Oblivion, Dragon Age, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, C&C3, Final Fantasy XII, FF XIII, Assassin's Creed, Resident Evil 5, every FPS I've played since F.E.A.R...

-No sounds for vending machines (the devs told us of this bug before the game was even released)
-Still broken UI and broken FOV (same as the first game)

These are a slap in the face and a kick in the crotch for any Bioshock1 player. They're depressively tangible signs that the IP must live, no matter what - feeding off a quick succession of clunky games sent to rot.

Sure it can, StingingVelvets answer is a good reason.

What answer? He didn't say why developers suddenly treat PC gaming with contempt. He just said the option of half-assing a shooter exists.

The money to be made on the consoles is so much greater than on the PC, its not a smart business decision to cater to the PC market as much as we would love it.

Again, console games have *always* sold better. This is not a new development, and therefore, not an adequate explanation for why developers suddenly hate PC gaming. In fact, the PC user base is bigger than it's ever been before.

These businesses that have typically made PC products in the past are shunning the PC simply because they have learned about what they have been missing out on now that they can create multiplatform games... That don't suck.

It's never been a secret that console games sell better. If that was the reason, they would have been making multiplatform games from the start. It's really not like people suddenly realized that multiplatform games sell better. Or that they suddenly became possible.

I'm sure there were a good number of games written in assembly at that point still though

I'm not so sure. Wolfenstein 3D, for instance, was written mostly in Borland C++ with a few subroutines in assembly. If assembly isn't good enough for John Carmack in 1992, it isn't good enough for anyone in 1996.

Nintendo, one of the most vociferously anti-piracy dev/pubs I've ever seen, recently had one of their higher-ups say that piracy should not be the sole reason blamed when a game does badly.

Maybe Nintendo shouldn't, but Nintendo isn't prone to a tenth of the rates that PC gaming is. Good PC games can and have sold badly despite getting tons of "exposure."

Publishers don't like the PC not just for piracy, but because of mods. Mods mean they can't package up a few new skins and maybe a new map or two and sell it

The basic idea seems to be working for Valve pretty well at the moment. Hell, they're getting chumps to pay five bucks for the *chance* of receiving a digital hat or a can of paint.

I'm done after this post, I don't have time for this, this is stupid.

Again, console games have *always* sold better. This is not a new development, and therefore, not an adequate explanation for why developers suddenly hate PC gaming. In fact, the PC user base is bigger than it's ever been before.

Sure, but you could never do the things that you could do on the PC on consoles. You obviously could never ever have pulled off Wolf3D or Doom on a console at the time of their release. Now days that is really the only redeaming quality for publishers/developers. The fact that you could do something like World of Warcraft, Starcraft 2 or Team Fortress 2 (With the 4+ gigs of free content that we have gained.)

I'm not so sure. Wolfenstein 3D, for instance, was written mostly in Borland C++ with a few subroutines in assembly. If assembly isn't good enough for John Carmack in 1992, it isn't good enough for anyone in 1996.

Carmack is a different beast though. He was pioneering C in games, it took quite a long time for everyone else to catch up with him.
Roller Coaster Tycoon released in 1999 was nearly completely assembly.
http://www.chrissawyergames.com/faq3.htm

And in 1994 most if not all console games released were coded in assembly, Why would the studios change over so quickly once the PS1/N64 were released? They still had all of their veteran assembly engeineers. I'm sure many had seen C coming and were planning for it, either getting their developers ready or hiring new C programmers, but they are businesses. Doing that kind of prep work to take the leap into something brand new to the industry is pretty scary for them when they could just continue to do 'what they know'.

Felt I just had to say this:

Rollercoaster Tycoon FTW!

:mrgreen: