Overwritten.net
Games => General Gaming => Topic started by: idolminds on Wednesday, August 06, 2008, 06:53:51 PM
-
Swear filter, too! (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/54064)
Replace blood with sparks? Come on, does this sound as ridiculous to you as it does to me? You're still a big-neck space marine killing everything in your path. Oh...now they are...us...robots or something. Yeah, evil organic looking robots. See? Sparks. Not blood. So its totally OK for your kid to play this.
Also, no nipples!
-
Eh. If it makes parents happy, whatever. I'm all for providing filters and stuff, but you scared the shit out of me because somehow I thought you meant that's what the base game was going to be like.
Anyway, obviously the differences are sort of dubious at best, but if you can put a spark effect in place of a blood effect and get a lot more people to buy your game, what's the harm? If it's optional, of course. You aren't hurting anybody, so no matter how stupid someone thinks your filter is, they never have to use it.
I can understand. Games used to have this kind of thing pretty regularly. I originally played Duke 3D at a friend's place without the gore and nudity and stuff, and it was a perfectly fine, enjoyable game that way. When I got my own copy I immediately turned that off, of course, because anyone is naturally going to go for the juicy stuff if they have the opportunity (i.e. my parents knew nothing about games or computers so couldn't filter anything even if they wanted to), but still, I don't see anything wrong with it. Sometimes the details are worse than the context, even if that varies entirely by game.
-
I wish GTA IV had a swear filter. That game can't be demoed to a mixed crowd simply because of the language. Everything else isn't really a big deal.
-
What? You don't like people to hear when Roman calls you and ask if you want to see some fine American titties?
-
Haha! The 4, 10 and 12-letter words are the bigger concern.
-
Twelve letter words? I'm going to have to do some research because I can't think of a naughty words that gets nearly that large.
-
Really? Ever heard this punchline to a racist joke? "The baby just said his first half a word!"
Edit: Ahahaha! I saw where you were doing research.
-
Oh yeah. I guess I just forgot that one on account of just considering the second part alone.
-
As long as I can play the game uncut and turn all the uncut content on (if and when it gets a PC port), fine by me.
-
Swear filter, too! (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/54064)
Replace blood with sparks? Come on, does this sound as ridiculous to you as it does to me? You're still a big-neck space marine killing everything in your path. Oh...now they are...us...robots or something. Yeah, evil organic looking robots. See? Sparks. Not blood. So its totally OK for your kid to play this.
Also, no nipples!
Don't those damn Krauts do this?
-
I remember the Uk and German editions of Turok on the N64 had all the blood in the game in green so it's not too offensive or something. Later it was revealed that there was an unlock code (like a cheat) that allowed you to change the colour to anything else(red, blue, purple, etc.).
I'm not a fan of gratuitous violence/nudity/profanity in general but I think the option in the end should be given to the players/viewers.
I like seeing blood in games as long as it's appropriate, relevant, and modest. I've even taken the effort to manually add blood into some games that lacked it completely i.e. Medal of Honor: Allied Assault; I snagged the code from the oil leak when you shoot barrels and made some blood spatter textures, later I discovered someone had done a much better job with the code so I replaced his textures with mine. Fun stuff!
Another game was Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast. While I understand and agree why this one had no blood at all, I had a bit of fun with the dismemberment feature it did have! I replaced lightsabers with katanas and added blood effects. It was a little extreme but amusing in an old-fashioned Japanese film blood-fountain kinda way.
The two main companies I've noticed take an extra effort to remove blood and excessive violence are EA and Lucasarts. By contrast I think id and Raven took an extra effort to add in extra gore!
-
By contrast I think id and Raven took an extra effort to add in extra gore!
Wo0t to that! :)
-
I was playing some Gears of War earlier today and I realized that it has a filter too. It's just an option to switch off "extreme content" like gore and swearing. Not the most sophisticated violence filter but I think it's important to note that it's there.
-
On the PC version, Xessive...?
-
I really like the way blood was handled in HL2 and other Source engine games. Nothing ridiculous...just an awesome splatter effect.
-
On the PC version, Xessive...?
Yeah. God I keep forgetting that there are subtle differences between the console and PC versions.
-
Yeah. God I keep forgetting that there are subtle differences between the console and PC versions.
Sometimes, yes.
Sometimes, no. :P
-
That has to be the most informative post I have ever seen.
-
You should expect nothing less than the best
informative stuff bullshit from MyD.
-
Epic, you suck.
Really. Nuff said.
No GoW 2 PC planned period.
I really enjoyed GoW PC, too. (http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=90889)
FROM IGN Interview. (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/906/906298p2.html)
IGN: Does this mean you are planning a Windows version of "Gears of War 2"?
Cliffy B: Gears of War is a great franchise first and foremost for Xbox 360, and therefore we're focusing on that platform for Gears of War 2. We've decided we're not going to do a PC version this time around.
-
What they mean is they're too pathetic to build a PC version of the game that isn't fucking broken, so to try and save face they'll just avoid it. Losers.
-
What they mean is they're too pathetic to build a PC version of the game that isn't fucking broken, so to try and save face they'll just avoid it. Losers.
Sounds about right.
Thanks a lot, Epic and People Can Fly.
-
In the case of GoW2, I don't have a 360 so I guess I won't be enjoying it.
If I could use a keyboard+mouse combo on any console I wouldn't care so much. This is the main reason my brother and I avoid 1st-person shooters or any games that require aiming at all on consoles.
-
In the case of GoW2, I don't have a 360 so I guess I won't be enjoying it.
If I could use a keyboard+mouse combo on any console I wouldn't care so much. This is the main reason my brother and I avoid 1st-person shooters or any games that require aiming at all on consoles.
I still don't understand why console systems don't allow for KB/mouse for their FPS and RTS games. Some things are just better normally around a KB/mouse.
And by allowing this KB/mouse on a console, I think it'd make it easier for console gamers to get more RTS's on their system, too.
EDIT:
Back to GoW2, I'm not happy we PC gamers ain't getting it. I mean, despite the stuttering issue, GoW PC was damn good.
I should've saw this coming, after Epic has been bitching about UT3 PC and GoW PC being pirated to the heavens. Oh, and that the PC community wanted UT3's UI fixed and the stuttering issue in GoW PC fixed -- and well, they're still waiting on these fixes, many months later.
Hell, why don't Epic just partner up with Steam for GoW2 PC? I'm sure that'd be a pretty sure way to cut-out "Zero Day" Piracy, which is what most publishers and dev's really need to do, so some people actually go out and BUY a copy of their game upon its release.
-
Xessive, Gears of War isn't anything like a first-person shooter. If you had accurate mouse control, the game would utterly suck.
-
Xessive, Gears of War isn't anything like a first-person shooter. If you had accurate mouse control, the game would utterly suck.
I've played GoW on both 360 and PC and I definitely prefer it on PC. I tend to use weapons that require accuracy, like sniper rifles.
I'd agree that I wouldn't need mouse-accuracy if my targets are static, but if I have moving targets I need to aim as quickly as I can. I don't like spending time rotating analogue axis till I line up my target, by which time it would have already moved and/or killed me. I'm not supposed to be operating a tank! (unless of course it's a tank mission, but even then Quake 4 proved it can be done with a mouse).
I'm a firm believer that certain games require certain control schemes and equipment to play optimally (mind you, some games are just poorly designed when it comes to controls). Gamepads are for platformers, driving games, fighting games, adventure games, etc. The mouse is for any game that requires manual aiming or cursor control (FPS, RTS, Click-fest RPGs). I have a gamepad hooked to my PC which I prefer to use with certain games. Prince of Persia is one game I can play perfectly well with a KB+Mouse setup but I prefer to use a gamepad. By contrast, Crysis (which does support gamepads) is a game in which I prefer to use a KB+Mouse.
If shooters work so well with gamepads then is there always some form of auto-aim or aiming assistance?
Bungie proved it with their Halo tests when they were considering making Halo cross-platform: They had 4 players on gamepads and 4 on KB+Mouse, then the players swapped up, in every scenario the players using the KB+Mouse won by a landslide. All this considering Halo was a FPS designed specifically for the console.
I don't understand why FPS's are being force-fed onto consoles.. Equally I don't understand why Devil May Cry 4 is on PC. Then again I can argue that I can attach a gamepad to a PC and play DMC4 exactly as it was intended on the console.. but I can't attach KB+M to a console and play a FPS as it was intended on the PC. Kinda unfair.
Sorry Que, I didn't mean to turn this into another Mouse versus Stick discussion. It's just that controls are a deal-breaker for me. If controls are an obstacle then the game is not fun anymore, but a tedious stress inducer.
Tying this in to GoW2: If it's going to be an exclusive 360, then I'm not interested. I'm just saying if console developers want to win people like my brother and myself over they'll have to at least give us the option of using a KB+M setup on a console. Effectively turning it into a Gamer PC.
-
It's not a mouse versus stick discussion. Mouse + keyboard destroys any other form of control out there. My point is that with precision, Gears of War becomes worthless because it wasn't built for it. It isn't an FPS or anything even resembling one.
-
It's not a mouse versus stick discussion. Mouse + keyboard destroys any other form of control out there. My point is that with precision, Gears of War becomes worthless because it wasn't built for it. It isn't an FPS or anything even resembling one.
In GoW PC with the KB/mouse, you aren't in freelook mode at all times like say a Doom game. GoW PC has the Silent Hill mechanic, GTA: San Andreas mechanic, or RE4 mechanic going on here. You have to actually right-click to be taken into that freelook-aiming mode to get a crosshair on-screen and to get the camera to follow your head movement, too -- which fits the whole game's pop-and-shoot atmosphere. You have to hold the right mouse button to stay in that freelook-aiming mode, too.
Sure, you can shoot without right-clicking, but where the hell are you aiming? Camera's not going to move along w/ your head movement, if you don't do the right-click 9and hold it). Camera could wind up over your head, but you'll be shooting elsewhere if you fire. There's no crosshair or cursor if you're just moving around, which is like trying to do melee in Oblivion in 3rd person viewpoint -- it's just not a good idea b/c it's not meant to be precise.
BTW, GoW PC was NOT easy on Casual. Nor was it really hard, either. It felt just about right on Casual. Plus, GoW PC has a bunch of difficulties on it to pick from, anyways.
-
My point is that as soon as you enter shoot mode with a mouse you enter headshot mode. I mean, am I wrong? Unless you fucking suck at shooters in general or the mechanic operates differently than I'm aware of, the game would be 80 times easier with a mouse than with a pad.
-
My point is that as soon as you enter shoot mode with a mouse you enter headshot mode.
Basically, yes -- unless headshots don't do any damage to the enemy. :P
I mean, am I wrong? Unless you fucking suck at shooters in general or the mechanic operates differently than I'm aware of, the game would be 80 times easier with a mouse than with a pad.
In general, yes -- mouse is much easier to manipulate for precision shots than say those analog sticks.
I'm definitely no expert with a gamepad for a FPS/TPS games; I usually will always take the KB/mouse combo, unless the KB/mouse controls blow for the game (a la RE4 PC).
We would really have to take a player that is equal in their skill of KB/mouse and gamepad to see what makes the game easier -- play it once with gamepad, then once w/ KB/mouse.
Curiosity factor -- Anyone know they added extra enemies to the PC port of GoW PC?
EDIT:
Whoops. I accidentally left "if" out.
It should read...
Curiosity factor -- Anyone know IF they added extra enemies to the PC port of GoW PC?
-
I was unaware of that. I think I played it with a mouse and found it just fine, but like Que says - the game isn't based on precision aim.
-
I think he's asking if they did, not stating (but I could be wrong). I'd be extremely surprised if that was a statement.
-
I thought the lack of "if" signified a bizarrely worded statement. I don't even know why I thought the question mark was there.
-
Well, he could have been saying that he knew they added extra enemies and wondered if anyone else was aware of the fact. It would have been worded fairly for that. But I suspect it was just an omission of the "if", as you said.
-
Well, he could have been saying that he knew they added extra enemies and wondered if anyone else was aware of the fact. It would have been worded fairly for that. But I suspect it was just an omission of the "if", as you said.
Yeah, I pretty much thought the first one when I replied but on re-examination I became very confused. Lets stab him.
-
Well, that is the penalty written in the Book of Judgment. But to clarify, he has to be stabbed in the face. Just so we're clear.
-
Haha poor D keeps getting himself into these jams :P
I played GoW like a regular shooter. Any time I took a shot I always went into aim-mode (hold right-click), unless I was being swarmed or something. I felt the game played naturally with a KB+M setup. Much like practically any FPS/TPS. For comparison's sake I played GoW just like I played R6V2, tactical and no willy-nilly firing.
Even though Cliffy B said that RE4 was an inspiration to the development of GoW, I can't relate the two games at all other than the 3rd person perspective. To this day my brother and I cannot play RE4 comfortably, which is why I haven't finished it. Haven't even met Ada yet.
-
I think he's asking if they did, not stating (but I could be wrong). I'd be extremely surprised if that was a statement.
Whoops -- I did leave out the word "if." Accidental omission. That should've been there. Freudian slip.
Even though I do often make wise-ass remarks sometimes in the form of a question (asking a rhetorical and leading question) -- this was not one of those times. I was definitely a question b/c I really do not know the answer to that; so, that's why I asked.
It was something that would make sense to add extra enemies to the game, if they wanted to give the PC version more of a challenge. That or add another extra difficulty to the PC version.
Oh -- did Epic add an extra difficulty to the GoW PC version?
(Yes, that is another question I don't know the answer to.)
Even though Cliffy B said that RE4 was an inspiration to the development of GoW, I can't relate the two games at all other than the 3rd person perspective. To this day my brother and I cannot play RE4 comfortably, which is why I haven't finished it. Haven't even met Ada yet.
Yes, RE4 has to be an inspiration for GoW -- b/c you have to press a button to get into aim-mode.
Plus, in both games, you're basically mowing down a certain type of enemy and fight some bosses here and there. Most of GoW PC, you're mowing down mostly locusts, for the most part -- and you fight some bosses, here and there. In RE4, you're just mowing down mostly Zombies -- and you fight some bosses, here and there. So yeah, very similar, in some regards.
Though, RE4's definitely got more puzzles than GoW PC. GoW PC is just pretty much action-packed from start to finish.
About RE4, I thought it was fine w/ a controller. Only real way to play the game, if you ask me -- since Capcom botched the KB/mouse controls. Unlike GoW PC's KB/mouse controls, RE4's PC KB/mouse controls sucked b/c there's no real mouselook support. At least for the KB/mouse controls on GoW PC, Epic found a way to actually make it work perfectly on the KB/mouse; Capcom didn't even try for RE4 PC -- they basically said their game's meant for a gamepad.
-
See, that's exactly my point, Xessive. You weren't even playing Gears of War, you were playing something that wasn't similar to RE4, which Gears was in many respects. I mean, the games were totally different because Gears is much faster and is a squad-combat game, but ultimately it plays like RE4 with cover and a lot more options for mobility. KB+mouse fundamentally changes the nature of the game.
-
See, that's exactly my point, Xessive. You weren't even playing Gears of War, you were playing something that wasn't similar to RE4, which Gears was in many respects. I mean, the games were totally different because Gears is much faster and is a squad-combat game, but ultimately it plays like RE4 with cover and a lot more options for mobility. KB+mouse fundamentally changes the nature of the game.
For the hell of it, to better understand where you're going with this by actually experiencing it, maybe I'll one day pop back in GoW PC and play it with a X360 gamepad from start to finish.
You know, that might happen, when I get more hard drive space open.
Well, hell - that probably won't ever happen then (with the way I don't finish games and got many still insalled!)
Not unless I get a new PC with lots of HD space open to easily laugh at me blowing 10+ GB on it.
-
Epic, you suck.
Really. Nuff said.
No GoW 2 PC planned period.
I really enjoyed GoW PC, too. (http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=90889)
FROM IGN Interview. (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/906/906298p2.html)
I guess I kind of missed this. Anyways, I don't think it's fair to say that neither company can build a decently stable PC game, because both have done it. I think it's more of a reflection of a variety of factors hurting the sales of Epic franchises on the PC compared to the consoles. The Gears port was fine in my opinion (I never really ran into any problems and the MP sucks by design as far as I"m concerned - hence the lack of people playing it) but it was obviously buggy for a lot of people. Why it didn't get better support is a pretty big question, but I think it may have had a lot to do with UT3 being released about the same time and both Epic and MS not really caring all that much (although you'd think Microsoft would as the flagship Games for Windows title). At the same time, UT3 pretty much bombed for the PC (I was just on and there was like 45 people online across all the game modes) because it's a rehash of something we've had dozens of times already. IT probably sold better on the consoles because the online integration is finally there and people can actually take advantage of these types of games.
Chances are that from Epic's point of view there just isn't money in the PC market, when really they just need to evolve a bit.
-
See, that's exactly my point, Xessive. You weren't even playing Gears of War, you were playing something that wasn't similar to RE4, which Gears was in many respects. I mean, the games were totally different because Gears is much faster and is a squad-combat game, but ultimately it plays like RE4 with cover and a lot more options for mobility. KB+mouse fundamentally changes the nature of the game.
The control setup definitely affects the gameplay and the overall mood of the experience. My experience with GoW is very likely a very different one from anyone who plays it with a gamepad.
The complaints I have about playing GoW with a gamepad are exactly the same complaints I have with any other game that demands some form of aiming. God knows I'm trying though; I'm going through Uncharted: Drake's Fortune right now (great game by the way).
For me, controls are the medium that allow me to verse myself in the game mechanics and immerse into the game world; if I'm uncomfortable with them going through a game will be like a tedious journey of overcoming a broken language (or at least one I have no hope of understanding).
Imagine if all of a sudden all the major platformers and beat 'em ups started coming out exclusively on PC with no joypad support, everyone's forced to play with a KB or mosue, and all the developers say "deal with it, but as a show of faith we'll add an auto-mode to help with the moves." I think a lot of people will be miffed!That's how I feel about FPS games suddenly haemorraging on consoles with no mouse-aim support. (All with the exception of UT3 on PS3 which has full KB+mouse support! Good on ya Epic!)
I think Epic are just having a much easier time developing for consoles and they just decided to take the less-rocky road; less tech support, less complaints from players, more money.
-
The control setup definitely affects the gameplay and the overall mood of the experience. My experience with GoW is very likely a very different one from anyone who plays it with a gamepad.
The complaints I have about playing GoW with a gamepad are exactly the same complaints I have with any other game that demands some form of aiming. God knows I'm trying though; I'm going through Uncharted: Drake's Fortune right now (great game by the way).
For me, controls are the medium that allow me to verse myself in the game mechanics and immerse into the game world; if I'm uncomfortable with them going through a game will be like a tedious journey of overcoming a broken language (or at least one I have no hope of understanding).
That's how I feel w/ SH series or RE series w/ a keyboard/mouse, which never do a good job on those controls. It's MUCH easier for me to just plug in a gamepad -- b/c that was the way those were meant to be played.
Imagine if all of a sudden all the major platformers and beat 'em ups started coming out exclusively on PC with no joypad support, everyone's forced to play with a KB or mosue, and all the developers say "deal with it, but as a show of faith we'll add an auto-mode to help with the moves."
Unless someone can design a good control scheme around a KB/mouse, yeah -- I'd be scratching my head to play a PC version of a brawler or platformer on a KB/mouse; I'd rather do it with a gamepad.
I think more modern platformers on the PC work well around the KB/mouse -- like Psychonauts, TR: Anniversary, etc; I just have much quicker reaction time w/ the KB/mouse on platformers for the jumps and movements than w/ a KB/mouse.
I think a lot of people will be miffed!That's how I feel about FPS games suddenly haemorraging on consoles with no mouse-aim support. (All with the exception of UT3 on PS3 which has full KB+mouse support! Good on ya Epic!)
PS3 version of UT3 has KB/mouse support?
VERY good thinking.
I think Epic are just having a much easier time developing for consoles and they just decided to take the less-rocky road; less tech support, less complaints from players, more money.
Yes, that does make sense, of course. Less overhead (for system requirements) and MORE money (since more console gamers BUY console games).
But really, bringing GoW PC and not having the sequel come here is disappointing. I did like the PC version quite a bit to say the least, despite it's performance stuttering issue.
Would it be cheaper for Epic to have a non-Epic owned company port the game over to the PC than to say have an internal-Epic owned company (like People Can Fly) port it over?
-
See, Psychonauts had classic FPS/TPS style controls with the keyboard to move and mouse-look.
For some reason I'm reminded of Heretic 2 and I wonder if there will be a sequel (or perhaps a spiritual successor). That was a great game.
I trust Epic when it comes to PC games because they know what they're doing, as they've proven over the years. That said, I wouldn't mind having another company port GoW2 over as long as they do a fair job of it.
As you've said, if Epic's major issue is piracy then why not get it on with Steam? As much as I disdain Steam's loading process and absolute requirement for internet access, I'd rather have it there than not at all. If anything, I'd suspect it may have something to do with Microsoft's Games For Windows Live campaign.
-
See, Psychonauts had classic FPS/TPS style controls with the keyboard to move and mouse-look.
For some reason I'm reminded of Heretic 2 and I wonder if there will be a sequel (or perhaps a spiritual successor). That was a great game.
I trust Epic when it comes to PC games because they know what they're doing, as they've proven over the years.
For Epic's PC-exclusive games, I trust Epic...
That said, I wouldn't mind having another company port GoW2 over as long as they do a fair job of it.
Agreed.
As you've said, if Epic's major issue is piracy then why not get it on with Steam? As much as I disdain Steam's loading process and absolute requirement for internet access, I'd rather have it there than not at all.
Exactly.
This is how I feel about SH: Homecoming PC. I mean, there probably was a possibility w/ the PC versions of SH not selling so great (probably b/c they were often out first on the consoles and than later brought to PC), they'd stop porting them to the PC. If I recall, SH4: The Room for the PC sold not-so-good at all.
But, at least since they ain't making SH: Homecoming available at the retail stores, it'll be up there on Steam -- even though I'd rather have a DVD-ROM copy of the game without any ties to Steam.
If anything, I'd suspect it may have something to do with Microsoft's Games For Windows Live campaign.
That's possible, too. Sure.
-
I'd rather have something not at all than on Steam, but that's just me. And the control method thing is hard for me to talk about because I've never used a control setup I wasn't comfortable with. I prefer KB/mouse for shooters over a controller simply because it's obviously the better choice, but I'm by no means uncomfortable using a controller. Likewise, I used to play fighting games on a keyboard. Anyone who tells you that's wonky and won't work is stupid. You can get used to anything if you allow yourself enough time to get used to it, but some things are just better suited for some tasks than others (and really, I'm only talking about KB/mouse being better for anything requiring aiming, because as far as I'm concerned, you can play any game with a keyboard that you can play with a gamepad if aiming or analog sensitivity aren't a big part of it, like a fighting game or platformer).
-
Cliffy B talks some more on Gears 2 on TotalVideoGames.com.
Oh, and he talks about piracy and PC gaming, too. (http://www.totalvideogames.com/articles/Gears_Of_War_2_-_Cliff_Bleszinski_QA_13820.htm)
Cliffy on Piracy, PC Gaming, and X360
TVG: Do you see the Xbox 360 as the main platform as opposed to the PC? During the whole Unreal time it was very much PC focused.
Cliffy B: The PC right now is a fair amount different to what it was back in the day, with all the badly integrated video chips. Here's the problem right now; the person who is savvy enough to want to have a good PC to upgrade their video card, is a person who is savvy enough to know bit torrent to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Therefore, high-end videogames are suffering very much on the PC.
TVG: So piracy was a main point for you...
Cliffy B: Right now, it makes sense for us to focus on Xbox 360 for a number of reasons. Not least PCs with multiple configurations and piracy.
TVG: But when the dust has settled, is there any possibility of Gears 2 on PC?
Cliffy B: No.
TVG: Definitely not?
Cliffy B: No.
Cliffy B on (not) outsourcing GoW Franchise to others and Epic's GoW Plans
TVG: With the success of Gears, Microsoft is going to want the franchise to run and run and run. Is there going to be a point that you see when Gears will be shipped out to studios like People Can Fly, or is it something that you hold dear enough to stick with the franchise for instalments to come?
Cliffy B: Well Rod [Fergusson, Gears of War producer] and I have plenty of ideas for where the franchise could potentially go, but again, we haven't announced anything. There's something that gets lost sometimes when a franchise gets shipped off to another shop. You get the primary studio that really understands what's going on with the franchise, and sometimes when another studio takes it over it can go well, but more often than not, there's something missing - there's a soul that's gone.
TVG: Are you perhaps referring to Call of Duty and the situation between Infinity Ward and Treyarch?
Cliffy B: (Stays muted, but nods). But in our instance, if there were to be any future Gears titles to be developed, I have a feeling that they'd be developed in Epic.
Cliffy be on Gears IP and UT License
TGV: With five million copies of the original sold, and high expectations for the sequel, has Gears of War become the most important franchise for Epic, even over Unreal Tournament?
Cliffy B: I think it's safe to say that, yes. I think Unreal Tournament has been our bread and butter for years, it's been very successful, but it's hard to argue with the success of Gears. Unreal Tournament 3, we very much care about it, it's a well reviewed game. At the same time, if you look at where Gears is right now on the 360, I think it's safe to say that it's our primary franchise.
TGV: So do you think that UT could make another comeback?
Cliffy B: It remains to be seen what we're going to be doing with Unreal Tournament in the future. We'd need to announce that.
-
I'm beginning to sense Cliffy is turning into some kind of corporate dick. I love his work but his recent attitude is disappointing. It's like he doesn't want to deal with the problems with PC gaming anymore so he just quit. Sad to see a PC gamer and developer go down this road.
-
It'll be fun to watch Epic get bought out by MS and then closed when Gears 3 doesn't do as well as planned.
*EDIT*
Thinking about his statement, its kind of funny how the solution isn't to make a game that can run better on lower end systems, thereby opening the potential market to more than the high end gamer with all their bittorrents and eye patches. 360 games can sell well because they run well on all 360s. If you made a PC game that runs well on all (or simply more) PCs you might have the same kinds of success. Just ask Popcap.
-
That's a very good point. it takes some tech knowledge to stay on top of the PC heap, and the inclination to deal with software installation and other hassles. These same people are also going to have the knowledge and inclination to mess around with bittorrents, multi-part rar files, disc images and obscure cracking techniques. An average user with an average PC won't. He's not going to want to mess with video cards, drivers, Azureus or Daemon tools. He just wants a game that works on his PC with next to no hassle. Simple download and go like Peggle will work for him. Simple insert disc and go will do it too.
-
Yeah, fuck Cliffy. I don't know that I'd ever have called him cool, but he used to be a lot less of a dick. Now he's just kind of annoying. Whenever he talks you want to punch him. It's sad, but Epic is sort of dead to me now.
-
Sure he often acts like a dick, but his games are just not selling on the PC. Why should his company make the monetary and physical effort to develop on a platform where sales of his titles are actually declining.
Yes he can try and support the platform, but he isn't running a charity. Besides, is there any point in saving a ship which has a crew hellbent on self destruction?
Unreal Tournament sold over 2 million units, and really pushed the envelope when it came out. Meanwhile UT3 barely crossed 150,000, and was very beautifully optimized. It ran splendidly on a wide range of systems, looking very good everywhere.
Meanwhile you've got Gears of War selling 5 million on the 360 and less than one hundred thousand on the PC.
GoW 360: 5 000 000
GOW PC: 100 000
Again, these guys are running a business here. Just look at all the PC exclusive teams sinking left and right. You can say what you want, but in the end porting games to the PC is just not worth the effort.
TVG: Do you see the Xbox 360 as the main platform as opposed to the PC? During the whole Unreal time it was very much PC focused.
Cliffy B: The PC right now is a fair amount different to what it was back in the day, with all the badly integrated video chips. Here's the problem right now; the person who is savvy enough to want to have a good PC to upgrade their video card, is a person who is savvy enough to know bit torrent to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Therefore, high-end videogames are suffering very much on the PC.
TVG: So piracy was a main point for you...
Cliffy B: Right now, it makes sense for us to focus on Xbox 360 for a number of reasons. Not least PCs with multiple configurations and piracy.
TVG: But when the dust has settled, is there any possibility of Gears 2 on PC?
Cliffy B: No.
TVG: Definitely not?
Cliffy B: No.
I don't see where he was being a dick in this particular instance. I think he made valid points. Problem is we are tired of hearing them, but it doesn't make them any less valid.
Piracy and weak onboard video solutions are actual problems, and problems that concern people who put money and effort into this sorta thing.
Chances are that from Epic's point of view there just isn't money in the PC market, when really they just need to evolve a bit.
I do agree with that, but I guess they feel that something evolutionary is far more likely to yield better returns on a console where at the same time it is far less of a hassle to develop.
-
I understand it's a business and as such it must strive. All I'm saying is it doesn't feel like Epic are being proactive about their approach at all; they're being dismissive and very brutally generalizing that all valid (as far as the system reqs go) PC gamers are pirate scum. At least that's how it sounds when Cliffy says "Here's the problem right now; the person who is savvy enough to want to have a good PC to upgrade their video card, is a person who is savvy enough to know bit torrent to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Therefore, high-end videogames are suffering very much on the PC." So basically, someone with the right hardware to run the game we made is also an asshole who's gonna steal because he likely knows how to do it!
As someone who has paid full price for a collector's edition of Unreal Tournament 3 I am very offended that Cliffy considers me a thief and lumps me in with his idea of a sack of shit.
I'd find a way to appeal to "the person who is savvy enough" rather than dissing him and cutting him off my client list.
-
If they maybe made a game people actually wanted to play that didn't have a billion problems out of the gate, most of which were never fixed (UT3) that actually ran without issue and had some support (Gears of War sure didn't), maybe then people would feel like buying the stuff they make. Plus Gears of War came out how much later for PC than 360? Everybody'd fucking played it already, and one new area that wasn't terribly well reviewed by the press was hardly going to start convincing everyone.
And yeah, his comment about hardcore gamers who invest money into their rigs is just a useless fucking dig at a lot of good people. To imply that everyone with a video card is a pirate is grade A bullshit. They're the people who support the fucking industry you abandoned, is who they are.
-
Here's the problem right now; the person who is savvy enough to want to have a good PC to upgrade their video card, is a person who is savvy enough to know bit torrent to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Therefore, high-end videogames are suffering very much on the PC
While UT3 had a lot of little issues that angered the hardcore, in terms of performance it ran like a well oiled machine. As for Gears PC, I never had any problems, but tons did so I am assuming it had issues.
Wow, where does he say that? I can't say I completely disagree with it though.
And yeah, his comment about hardcore gamers who invest money into their rigs is just a useless fucking dig at a lot of good people. To imply that everyone with a video card is a pirate is grade A bullshit. They're the people who support the fucking industry you abandoned, is who they are.
Yes that is very annoying, but I can see where he is coming from. About six months ago I saw a poll on the anandtech forums. It was anonymous, so I am sure many of the people who voted were being honest.
The question was regarding piracy, and I kid you not, a whopping 75% said they mostly pirated their games. These were the guys who sported the $500 video cards. Some who were bold enough to post comments in that poll, even said they took the $500 as an initial investment, because it meant a lifetime of free torrented games.
I was so disgusted with these people, especially since I realized it was the hardcore of the hardcore.
I realize that it wasn't a proper scientific survey or whatever, but I saw a similar attitude on many of the video card forums.
I do realize that what these developers say ticks people like us off, but that's because we are some of the good guys. I also realize that the blame doesn't entirely lie one way or whatever, and PC games developers are just getting lazier... but in the end I can see why they aren't making the effort to go cross platform.
Here is another thing: I actually would rather developers not port to the PC at all, than develop something half-assed, but that's a different topic.
-
I agree, Pug. We can do a poll right here too. How many of us have never pirated a real PC game? Leave out trifles like Peggle. I'm not asking you to steal idol's avatar and say "aarrr!" Only weigh in if you have not pirated. Now, how many have never pirated a current-console game? Portables don't count, and old consoles only count in their time, when they were the mainstay for their particular companies. So that hopefully leaves out the emulation question entirely.
I'll start: I have never pirated a current-console game.
Wasn't there talk earlier about how many new video cards were sold during the launch of some hot PC game? There was a big spike in sales of the hardware which completely eclipsed the sales of the software.
-
Unreal Tournament sold over 2 million units, and really pushed the envelope when it came out. Meanwhile UT3 barely crossed 150,000, and was very beautifully optimized. It ran splendidly on a wide range of systems, looking very good everywhere.
Meanwhile you've got Gears of War selling 5 million on the 360 and less than one hundred thousand on the PC.
GoW 360: 5 000 000
GOW PC: 100 000
UT3 sold poorly, but the PC version still outsold the PS3 version. Perhaps it wasn't piracy and system requirements at fault, but the game itself? Fewer gametypes than previous versions, no real new interesting gameplay, a pretty shitty UI. Players went back to UT2004 because of it.
Gears was released a year later on PC. Even *I* played through the game before then. In co-op, no less. The PC version seems to have had (and still have) bugs and issues that aren't getting fixed. When it launched it needed GFW Live which PC gamers weren't exactly thrilled with. Because of that the multiplayer was hampered with the whole Gold/Silver shit. Now Gold is free on PC but its way too late for Gears.
For Cobras post, I don't remember the exact time frame but I did grab a couple Dreamcast games around the time they discontinued the system if that counts.
-
Yea Cobra, 8 million 8800 series video cards sold last year worldwide.
2.5 million 8800GTs alone shipped in North America during its first three months. I can guarantee the bulk of these 8800 video card owners have played Crysis, yet from the PCG podcast interview of Cevat Yerli last month, Crysis has sold only 1.5 million units worldwide to date.
I know that games like Crysis have longer legs, but honestly, the major profits come in when the game is sold at full price. Years later, when the game is in the bargain big at half price, the impact isn't nearly as significant.
Mass Effect selling 2 million copies on the 360 during its first month is far more profitable than it selling 3 million on the PC in a period of two years.
Here is a rough comparison between the two flagships of 360 and PC:
Halo 3 units sold: 9 million
Xbox 360s sold: 15 million
Crysis: 1.5+ million
8xxxx series cards: 8 million (heard this on several podcasts... read about the 2.5 million 8800gts in North America myself)
9xxxx series cards: not sure
GTXxxx series cards: not sure
High end Radeon cards: not sure
Even if you put the total high end cards at 12 million, 1.5 units of Crysis is a bit unacceptable.
There was a big spike in sales of the hardware which completely eclipsed the sales of the software.
Absolutely, which is crazy, because it should be far closer.
Remember the Chris Taylor rants? While he came off as a jerk, and his games aren't that great, his point struck a cord. He basically said that Nvidia raked in record profits last year, and what angered him about it was that the video cards sold 10 times as many as the most popular games. He was flabbergasted.
I just do think the hardcore are the ones most likely to pirate. A game like Spore, which was received with much anger by the hardcore, and pirated up its ass, managed to open with 2 million units in its first month, and is expected to sell 6 million within the year.
So the question is, how significant is the hardcore PC gaming crowd?
UT3 sold poorly, but the PC version still outsold the PS3 version. Perhaps it wasn't piracy and system requirements at fault, but the game itself? Fewer gametypes than previous versions, no real new interesting gameplay, a pretty shitty UI. Players went back to UT2004 because of it.
Gears was released a year later on PC. Even *I* played through the game before then. In co-op, no less. The PC version seems to have had (and still have) bugs and issues that aren't getting fixed. When it launched it needed GFW Live which PC gamers weren't exactly thrilled with. Because of that the multiplayer was hampered with the whole Gold/Silver shit. Now Gold is free on PC but its way too late for Gears.
For Cobras post, I don't remember the exact time frame but I did grab a couple Dreamcast games around the time they discontinued the system if that counts.
Alright fine... but then name one hardcore PC title (aside from the MMOs) that sold more than 200,000 units last year. Last year's NPD was depressing. I agree that it isn't all piracy, but then there must have been games that the hardcore elevated to multiplatinum status right?
Also, I am pretty sure I read that UT3 did far better on the PS3. Though I do agree, its failure on the PC had to do with its lack of innovation. Plus it was against COD4, a game with an MMO kind of appeal.
http://play.tm/wire/1664653/ut3-ps3-sales-headshot-pc-but-are-still-no-killing-spree/
-
Bioshock (PC) was released on 21 August, and its sales record indicates 77,374 copies sold as of 13 Sep 2007 (according to Voodoo Extreme). By June 2008 Bioshock PC had sold over a million copies.
Despite piracy and the fact the game is singleplayer-only, it sold very well on the PC.
-
UT3 sold poorly, but the PC version still outsold the PS3 version. Perhaps it wasn't piracy and system requirements at fault, but the game itself? Fewer gametypes than previous versions, no real new interesting gameplay, a pretty shitty UI. Players went back to UT2004 because of it.
UT3's PC bare minimum requirements weren't too ridiculous for the time upon its release, either.
Gears was released a year later on PC. Even *I* played through the game before then. In co-op, no less. The PC version seems to have had (and still have) bugs and issues that aren't getting fixed.
Still, the stuttering issues remains. I wish Epic would just freakin fix that,
When it launched it needed GFW Live which PC gamers weren't exactly thrilled with. Because of that the multiplayer was hampered with the whole Gold/Silver shit.
Exactly.
Now Gold is free on PC but its way too late for Gears.
Agreed.
Even when I played Gears PC (not too long ago), nobody was playing the MP online. You'd be lucky to find 5-6 servers going, if that!
And I did like the MP, too, I might add.
Yea Cobra, 8 million 8800 series video cards sold last year worldwide.
2.5 million 8800GTs alone shipped in North America during its first three months. I can guarantee the bulk of these 8800 video card owners have played Crysis, yet from the PCG podcast interview of Cevat Yerli last month, Crysis has sold only 1.5 million units worldwide to date.
Of course, Crysis was a PC exclusive and came out around the time GoW PC came out. Most people already played GoW on the X360. And there wasn't too many real PC-only extras on the PC version to sway X360 owners to pony up for the PC version, either -- a few new chapters in SP mode and the SDK.
I know that games like Crysis have longer legs, but honestly, the major profits come in when the game is sold at full price. Years later, when the game is in the bargain big at half price, the impact isn't nearly as significant.
I finally had a 8800 GT and once I saw Crysis hit $20, made sure I got it.
I would've bought Crysis: Warhead by now, if EA didn't include the limited installs on it. I would've bought Crysis: Warhead, if it came w/ revokes (on the SP).
Mass Effect selling 2 million copies on the 360 during its first month is far more profitable than it selling 3 million on the PC in a period of two years.
Of course it is -- b/c ME X360 was probably popping for $60 on the X360.
Here is a rough comparison between the two flagships of 360 and PC:
Halo 3 units sold: 9 million
Xbox 360s sold: 15 million
Crysis: 1.5+ million
8xxxx series cards: 8 million (heard this on several podcasts... read about the 2.5 million 8800gts in North America myself)
9xxxx series cards: not sure
GTXxxx series cards: not sure
High end Radeon cards: not sure
Even if you put the total high end cards at 12 million, 1.5 units of Crysis is a bit unacceptable.
Crysis got a reputation -- and still does -- for not being optimized too well; yes, even on higher end PC's. And once that word of mouth got around, forget it. The game is going to have to bargain bins for $20 or people are going to have to buy new PC's to go buy Crysis, to take a chance on such a game. I think, the bargain bin is the more likely answer.
I'm sure many Crysis: Original owners -- like myself -- would like to see a patch put out so where Crysis: Original has been optimized to the (supposed) lengths that Crysis: Warhead has been optimized to.
Remember the Chris Taylor rants? While he came off as a jerk, and his games aren't that great, his point struck a cord. He basically said that Nvidia raked in record profits last year, and what angered him about it was that the video cards sold 10 times as many as the most popular games. He was flabbergasted.
I just do think the hardcore are the ones most likely to pirate. A game like Spore, which was received with much anger by the hardcore, and pirated up its ass, managed to open with 2 million units in its first month, and is expected to sell 6 million within the year.
I do agree to an extent that the hardcore PC gamers are more likely to pirate. It's very likely they know how to upgrade their video card, so they can do it themselves. Since they can do that kind of work on their own PC (Software related for dealing with vid cards drivers and hardware related for changing out parts), they also probably know plenty about bit-torrents and how to pirate games, too.
When I was at college -- and this was back some 3-4 years ago or so -- most of the gamers I knew at the college did pirate games. They didn't care if it took forever to DL it. I'm betting they found others things to do, while it DL'ed. But, they would always buy a $300+ or higher priced at the time they were ready for a new card, with intentions of not buying any PC games.
When it comes to pirating games, especially if it's a big-as-hell sized game, I just feel I ain't got that kind of time to DL something of that nature. For all that time it takes to DL a huge game, I could be already playing something else.
So the question is, how significant is the hardcore PC gaming crowd?
Depends on the game. If it's a hardcore game -- which is what Crysis is -- you better find a way to aim for the casual crowd, too. There better be some very easy difficulty for them, which is a good way to try and grace them in. Or else, well...your sales might be disappointing. Especially if your requirements upon release are VERY stiff -- which Crysis was, you can also expect disappointing sales.
Somebody mentioned CoD4 last year sold well on the PC (I don't feel like looking for the quote and I forgot who said it). Remember, CoD4 was dropped for all systems at once, while GoW PC was not. GoW PC would've probably sold much better on the PC if it was dropped along side of the X360 release simultaneously; of course, the 360 sales for GoW probably wouldn't have been as big as they were if PC and X360 GoW were dropped at the same time, either.
EDIT:
Bioshock (PC) was released on 21 August, and its sales record indicates 77,374 copies sold as of 13 Sep 2007 (according to Voodoo Extreme). By June 2008 Bioshock PC had sold over a million copies.
Despite piracy and the fact the game is singleplayer-only, it sold very well on the PC.
My PC which was the bare minimum on the vid card at that time (6600 GT) -- but way beyond on everything else for the specs -- ran it like a dream and still looked good, despite many things being turned down. Bioshock was EXTREMELY well optimized for min-spec systems.
Was there a spike in rising sales once Bioshock PC pulled the install limit count recently (which was also the time it began selling for $20 retail)?
Also, Bioshock got incredible reviews, as well. I'm sure that helped, as well.
-
Bioshock (PC) was released on 21 August, and its sales record indicates 77,374 copies sold as of 13 Sep 2007 (according to Voodoo Extreme). By June 2008 Bioshock PC had sold over a million copies.
Despite piracy and the fact the game is singleplayer-only, it sold very well on the PC.
It had a strong copy protection, that wasn't immediately crackable. When I tried to crack the game for my sister's computer (I didn't want to risk my token), I found it a real bitch. But I read at a few forums that the 1 million sales was a mistake from the Nvidia VP. I'll explain at the end.
Of course, Crysis was a PC exclusive and came out around the time GoW PC came out. Most people already played GoW on the X360. And there wasn't too many real PC-only extras on the PC version to sway X360 owners to pony up for the PC version, either -- a few new chapters in SP mode and the SDK.
I don't think you got what I was saying. I wasn't comparing Crysis to Gears PC. I was pointing out the fact that Crysis should have sold better.
I finally had a 8800 GT and once I saw Crysis hit $20, made sure I got it.
I would've bought Crysis: Warhead by now, if EA didn't include the limited installs on it. I would've bought Crysis: Warhead, if it came w/ revokes (on the SP).
Actually you can install it as many times as you want on a single PC. It allows you to install it on 5 PCs before it asks for a phone in. Even then, those 5 PCs you can install on as many times as you want. I find that not too bad.
Crysis got a reputation -- and still does -- for not being optimized too well; yes, even on higher end PC's. And once that word of mouth got around, forget it. The game is going to have to bargain bins for $20 or people are going to have to buy new PC's to go buy Crysis, to take a chance on such a game. I think, the bargain bin is the more likely answer.
Yet everyone still managed to play it at launch. :P
When I was at college -- and this was back some 3-4 years ago or so -- most of the gamers I knew at the college did pirate games. They didn't care if it took forever to DL it. I'm betting they found others things to do, while it DL'ed. But, they would always buy a $300+ or higher priced at the time they were ready for a new card, with intentions of not buying any PC games.
Who can't say they had the same experience in college? Xessive will testify to the fact that I did buy 3 or 4 games a month in my university days, but I did pirate those games for my friends. That's probably something I shouldn't have done.
Depends on the game. If it's a hardcore game -- which is what Crysis is -- you better find a way to aim for the casual crowd, too. There better be some very easy difficulty for them, which is a good way to try and grace them in. Or else, well...your sales might be disappointing. Especially if your requirements upon release are VERY stiff -- which Crysis was, you can also expect disappointing sales.
Yea, but the casual crowd doesn't like shooting and blowing up stuff. They like virtual doll houses, flying planes, evolving creatures etc. Games like Crysis will always be targeted at the hardcore, which puts them in a fix. I guess they either put up, shutup, or just move on.
Also COD4 hit 2.5 million on the PC. Its multiplayer kept people coming back apparently.
Was there a spike in rising sales once Bioshock PC pulled the install limit count recently (which was also the time it began selling for $20 retail)?
Also, Bioshock got incredible reviews, as well. I'm sure that helped, as well.
I've read that Bioshock sold about 400,000 and the Nvidia VP was mistaking.
edit:
See here:
June 2008 Bioshock shipped 2.2 million across GFW and 360:
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/05/bioshock-ships-over-2-2-million/
June 2008 Bioshock sold 1 million on the PC:
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=148824&page=2
I've read that it sold five times as many on the 360, so it doesn't add up for me.
OK here:
http://www.thesimexchange.com/stock.php?id=89
Bioshock 1.9 million on the 360.
http://www.thesimexchange.com/stock.php?id=88
Bioshock 340,000 PC.
TSE uses internet sales estimates as well.
.... then again... the VP of Nvidia can't be mistaking. I'll believe him and say well done Bioshock. :)
Let's just hope that publishers don't think of this as some sort of validation for SECUrom.
-
Let's just hope that publishers don't think of this as some sort of validation for SECUrom.
Hopefully. 2K themselves had to remove the activation process to sate the masses and they claim that they'll never use such a protection measure again (according to an interview with Ken Levine).
I have a question. How come they can't make games work on PC's the way they work on consoles? I mean with no installation, the game is entirely on the disc and the only things stored are save files. Keep in mind that I hate juggling discs I'm just curious becuase this seems to be the deal-breaker difference between PC and consoles in terms of consoles not needing abrasive security measure.
-
Funny 2k would say that, except it still hasn't been patched out of Bioshock.
As for why games don't run off the disc, its not a technical limitation or anything. PC gamers want to install stuff. Release a PC game that runs from disc I'm sure you'll see lots of complaints about load times and the like.
Heres something new and interesting: story (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/55013). Currently a rumor, but to help fight the used game market Gears 2 will come with a voucher code for a DLC map pack of remade/ported Gears 1 maps. So if you buy a new copy of the game, you get em free. Otherwise you pay. Kind of an interesting solution to the "problem" of the used market.
-
*fight the used game market*
That just sounds odd. It doesn't roll off the tongue like fighting cancer or piracy. It is like saying, let's fight the used car market.
-
Well, gamers don't really have a reason to fight the used game market. It's mostly the developers.
-
It had a strong copy protection, that wasn't immediately crackable. When I tried to crack the game for my sister's computer (I didn't want to risk my token), I found it a real bitch. But I read at a few forums that the 1 million sales was a mistake from the Nvidia VP. I'll explain at the end.
I don't think you got what I was saying. I wasn't comparing Crysis to Gears PC. I was pointing out the fact that Crysis should have sold better.
I was trying to say there was no way Gears PC was going to outsell Crysis. If Cliffy B was thinking that was going to happen, he'd be crazy.
Crysis probably should've sold better (it's an excellent shooter, if you ask me, if you got the PC to handle it), but it didn't. Piracy is always an issue, yes; especially "zero day piracy". Its high system specs for its time was an issue. The fact many think the game STILL should be better optimized is an issue, too. So there's already three issues that hurt the game's sales.
I don't think Crysis: Warhead will sell too well, myself -- namely b/c of its damn protection of Securom, which everyone was roaring about w/ Spore.
Actually you can install it as many times as you want on a single PC.
I know this. And they better allow this, too.
It allows you to install it on 5 PCs before it asks for a phone in. Even then, those 5 PCs you can install on as many times as you want. I find that not too bad.
I probably get a new PC every say 4-5 years. So, in 16-20 years, if EA ain't patched the 5 install limit out, I'd have to either call EA tech (if they're still around), get a crack, or just buy Crysis again (hmmmm...maybe GOG will have it, then?). That's an inconvenience, as I'm concerned -- especially since my old copy of say Quake 2 won't ask me to activate it and will install onto a new PC no problem.
Yet everyone still managed to play it at launch. :P
I would not be surprised if people pirated the game just to see how it would run on their PC -- given how high its specs were for its time and how everyone was complaining about how poorly the demo ran. And if it didn't run too well, they probably said, "Good thing I didn't burn my $50."
Yea, but the casual crowd doesn't like shooting and blowing up stuff. They like virtual doll houses, flying planes, evolving creatures etc. Games like Crysis will always be targeted at the hardcore, which puts them in a fix. I guess they either put up, shutup, or just move on.
Question -- how well did Far Cry PC sell upon its release? And how much has it sold to this date?
Also COD4 hit 2.5 million on the PC. Its multiplayer kept people coming back apparently.
I'm sure it lasts longer than the SP component. :P
-
And just FYI, Crysis to me is not a compelling game. I'm a hardcore PC gamer and a hardcore FPS junkie, and I never had any interest it in and still have no interest in it. At all. And I've talked to others who feel the same.
-
And just FYI, Crysis to me is not a compelling game. I'm a hardcore PC gamer and a hardcore FPS junkie, and I never had any interest it in and still have no interest in it. At all. And I've talked to others who feel the same.
Oddly enough that's how I felt too. I had no real interest in it or Far Cry 2 (I still have no interest in FC2). It mainly had a lot to do with Far Cry and how it totally turned me off with the whole mutant trigen crap.
Crysis won me over though. I really enjoyed the gameplay and the overall style. The Nano suit is is a great gameplay mechanic that allows me to switch tactics instantly.
I have a few friends who love FPS games but they hate games with realistic weapons or games that have a more tactical and "military" approach. They love games like Quake and UT but they can't stand games like Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, Far Cry, Crysis, FEAR (gameplay only but they love the thrill factor), or any WW2 themed games.
-
Unreal Tournament sold over 2 million units, and really pushed the envelope when it came out. Meanwhile UT3 barely crossed 150,000, and was very beautifully optimized. It ran splendidly on a wide range of systems, looking very good everywhere.
Meanwhile you've got Gears of War selling 5 million on the 360 and less than one hundred thousand on the PC.
GoW 360: 5 000 000
GOW PC: 100 000
Aw come on gimme a break. You want to argue piracy is rampant on the PC, then fine. But use different examples.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure these games were pirated like crazy, but no one bought UT3 because it's a pretty version of UT2004, which was an upgrade of UT2003 the year before. People are done with it. They want something new.
Gears of War is a different beast. I kind of put this one akin to Halo PC. Have any numbers on how Halo did on PC vs. Xbox? I bet they are skewed even worse than GoW is between the PC and the 360. It was a wildy successful console game released much later on PC, and was horribly ported. In addition to a ton of people already playing GoW on the 360, to this day the game still has major issues and has been completely abandoned. The stuttering problem is huge and I'm sure the massively widespread complaints about this problem have affected sales. Also, it's not really a normal PC-type game anyway.
Yea Cobra, 8 million 8800 series video cards sold last year worldwide.
2.5 million 8800GTs alone shipped in North America during its first three months. I can guarantee the bulk of these 8800 video card owners have played Crysis, yet from the PCG podcast interview of Cevat Yerli last month, Crysis has sold only 1.5 million units worldwide to date.
C'mon Pug. Even you have to realize this is some pretty flimsy "evidence." No one will ever convince me that people got 8800 cards simply so they could play Crysis. Or that buying an 8800 for some reason means that you have to have bought or played Crysis I mean you're just throwing out a ridiculous accusation.
-
Yea I am not saying piracy was the sole reason for these games not selling better, but I am damn sure these games would have sold better.
C'mon Pug. Even you have to realize this is some pretty flimsy "evidence." No one will ever convince me that people got 8800 cards simply so they could play Crysis. Or that buying an 8800 for some reason means that you have to have bought or played Crysis I mean you're just throwing out a ridiculous accusation.
Ummmm this is in response to the frequent *Crysis didn't sell better because no one could run it argument*..
And Crysis was PC gaming's Halo. Sure not every 8800 series owner was looking forward to it, but undoubtedly many were looking to see what it could do to push the tech, and they found out one way or another.
But yea this is mostly in response to the argument I often hear, even on these boards, where everyone says,"The vast majority of the market wasn't capable of running Crysis."
Bullshit.
But yea, the key word in your statement is "ever"... so there is really no point. From the forums I hit, and the hype I saw, I was convinced. I also heard on numerous podcasts that the game worldwide was downloaded 10 times more than it sold, though I haven't seen any proof in that regard.
But basically I did post those stats to point out that there were 10 million people out there certainly capable of running Crysis.
edit:
I will go start a poll on anandtech. :P
-
1. Just because someone pirated the game doesn't mean it's a lost sale. 2. The vast majority of the market isn't readily equipped with 8800s. 3. Just because you have an 8800 doesn't mean the game is going to run that well.
I'm not trying to be belligerent, I just think Crysis isn't half as essential as a lot of people seem to think, and while a lot of people may have been curious, that doesn't mean they wanted to go out and buy it. See the Spore thread for another situation that's pretty similar. Very different games, but both kind of had a gimmick or major thing that was supposed to draw people, which at the same time made people unsure about them.
-
1. Never said it was. But some games are bought out of curiosity. You yourself gave an excellent example of Assassin's Creed a while back, where you pointed out that someone who had pirated the game wasn't likely to go out and buy it later due to the nature of that title.
2. 8 million 8800 series cards alone is actually pretty huge.
3. It's performance wasn't perfect, but it ran pretty well on a 8800 series card. That was the best card available at the time anyway, so that made its owners the most capable.
-
If their argument was that people suppsoedly bought Nvidia cards to play Crysis why not try to they strike a deal with Nvidia and bundle Crysis (or its newer iterations) with new graphics cards? (instead of complaining about spilt milk which most people were not going to drink anyway).
-
I'm pretty sure they did bundle Crysis with a bunch of 8800s.
-
I'm pretty sure they did bundle Crysis with a bunch of 8800s.
Really? Well good effort. They still bitched a bit too much about it.
-
I'm getting lost here. No one is suggesting that people bought 8 million 8800 GTs at that time to get faster Excel displays, right? We can all agree that the only thing driving such sales would be bleeding-edge games, with a minute percentage directed at odd applications, such as science or fancy audio processing. OK, so maybe Crysis wasn't the only such game. What are the others, new at that time, which would require such graphics power? How many copies did they sell? That's a real question, not some rhetorical debate tactic.
If the software and required-hardware sales numbers don't match up, then I think it's safe to assume the difference is mostly piracy.
Edit: It also occurs to me that this is the best-case scenario for the proponents of a moral majority of PC gamers. It doesn't take into account anything but NVidia 8800 numbers. We are excluding equivalent ATi Radeons and users making do with older graphics cards.
-
I'm getting lost here. No one is suggesting that people bought 8 million 8800 GTs at that time to get faster Excel displays, right? We can all agree that the only thing driving such sales would be bleeding-edge games, with a minute percentage directed at odd applications, such as science or fancy audio processing. OK, so maybe Crysis wasn't the only such game. What are the others, new at that time, which would require such graphics power? How many copies did they sell? That's a real question, not some rhetorical debate tactic.
If the software and required-hardware sales numbers don't match up, then I think it's safe to assume the difference is mostly piracy.
Edit: It also occurs to me that this is the best-case scenario for the proponents of a moral majority of PC gamers. It doesn't take into account anything but NVidia 8800 numbers. We are excluding equivalent ATi Radeons and users making do with older graphics cards.
Very true. I think Crytek made a mistake in generalizing that most (if not all) PC gamers are the Nvidia users.
I can totally imagine the Crytek-EA meeting went down something like this:
Cry: Glad we released this game together! Can't wait to see the reactions!
EA: Have you seen the numbers?
Cry: What numbers?
EA: Apparently there was a spike in Nvidia high-end graphics cards purchases, specifically the 8800 series, around the same time Crysis was released. Roughly 3 times the sales figures of Crysis.
Cry: So?
EA: So it suggests that a lot of people playing this game have not acquired it through legal channels.
Cry: Are you saying that all Nvidia graphics card buyers are Crysis players?
EA: Yes.
Cry: What about ATI/AMD?
EA: Don't change the subject.
Cry: But that--
EA: *Vanishes into the night mist*
The following press conference..
Cry: Well, it seems that somehow our sales figures are doing poorly despite the fact that our game only runs on exquisite personal computers with only the highest-end hardware generally owned by enthusiasts only.. so.. we're pulling the Piracy card.. because EA said so..
-
Cobra, what you say is true but I don't really buy my graphics cards for the "now" so much as the past and future. I can run my old games maxed and I'll be able to play whatever I want in the future. Like...Assassins Creed. I didn't buy my 8800 just for it, but it sure as hell came in handy. So to say more people should be buying Crysis because they have fast cards isn't totally truthful.
-
I'm getting lost here. No one is suggesting that people bought 8 million 8800 GTs at that time to get faster Excel displays, right? We can all agree that the only thing driving such sales would be bleeding-edge games, with a minute percentage directed at odd applications, such as science or fancy audio processing. OK, so maybe Crysis wasn't the only such game. What are the others, new at that time, which would require such graphics power? How many copies did they sell? That's a real question, not some rhetorical debate tactic.
I agree that people didn't buy 8800s to run regular apps faster. I mean that's obvious. PCIe and AGP videocards are for gamers and 8800s are for serious PC gamers. I've already said this, but I'll say it again: I do not think it is a reasonable assumption to say that people bought 8800-series cards to play Crysis. Yes, sure some people did. But it's quite a leap to somehow say that 8 million cards sold should have equaled 8 million copies of Crysis sold or some such rhetoric along those lines and I simply won't accept such rushes to judgment.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that people bought 8800s to play all the bleeding edge games out at the time. My computer is about a year and a half old now, and I have a 8800GTS (320MB VRAM). The GTS wasn't even new at the time and the GTX was out just shy of three full years ago. People have been buying the 8800-series cards because they have been out for quite a long time now... no serious gamer was going to build a system and purchase a one or two year-old 7xxx series card when there where 8800 series cards to be had for a pretty reasonable price for a solid video card that was light years ahead in terms of performance over the 7xxx series. Some people do purchase top-end cards for the bleeding edge games out or coming out shortly thereafter, but others like myself purchase them with the goal of having a system that doesn't have to be upgraded at all for two or three years or maybe even longer.
What Pug and Cobra are saying does have some elements of truth, but I just think there is way too much assuming and going on here. Maybe I'm arguing semantics but I just don't think its fair for anyone to say the things they are saying and passing them off as wholesale truths without considering the finer details and other possibilities or at least discussing them if they are being considered.
Cobra, as far as your question about what other games came out at the time, I guess it depends on whether you're talking about around the release of Crysis or the 8800-series of cards, because there is a two year difference. But I will say that no game before or since has pushed a system like Crysis has with the equipment available at the time of release and even a year later. Still, I want to make it clear that I find it completely unfair and false to say that Crysis is the reason for the high sales of the 8800, especially if what you are getting at is that no other game pushes a system like it does.
-
I don't think you're arguing semantics, scott. I agree with everything you said, and would have said it myself except I didn't want to get that invested in the argument.
What it comes down to is that an 8800 is going to enhance any game over inferior hardware, and allow you to run older games at higher resolutions, help your machine last into the future, etc. etc. I sincerely wish The Witcher ran better for me. I have a 7800GT. If I bought an 8800 right now, it would be to help that game run better, not because I even remotely give a shit about Crysis, which continues to hold no appeal. Blanket statements have no place here. You could argue that The Witcher should have sold way more because lots of people love RPGs and have machines that could run it, but it didn't sell nearly as many copies as it should have. It's kind of a niche title, and that makes no sense when you consider what it is, what it does, and how big its potential audience is.
-
I'm getting lost here. No one is suggesting that people bought 8 million 8800 GTs at that time to get faster Excel displays, right? We can all agree that the only thing driving such sales would be bleeding-edge games, with a minute percentage directed at odd applications, such as science or fancy audio processing. OK, so maybe Crysis wasn't the only such game. What are the others, new at that time, which would require such graphics power? How many copies did they sell? That's a real question, not some rhetorical debate tactic.
Edit: It also occurs to me that this is the best-case scenario for the proponents of a moral majority of PC gamers. It doesn't take into account anything but NVidia 8800 numbers. We are excluding equivalent ATi Radeons and users making do with older graphics cards.
To answer your question, there was nothing else remotely close. Also, yes this is certainly the best case scenario.
Very true. I think Crytek made a mistake in generalizing that most (if not all) PC gamers are the Nvidia users.
hmmm... I think he was saying that aside from the 8 million 8800 owners, there were tons of other high end video card owners, making the market even bigger.
I didn't buy my 8800 just for it, but it sure as hell came in handy. So to say more people should be buying Crysis because they have fast cards isn't totally truthful.
Sure, but it does counter the argument that Crysis sold poorly because not enough of the market owned high end video cards.
Look, I am not saying that everyone who bought an 8800 series or better card, bought it for the sole purpose of playing Crysis. But I am just sharing these facts because we've all seen the arguments that most gamers didn't have such video cards. Turns out they did, with Nvidia making record profits... leaving a lot of developers like Chris Taylor very upset... but these games were still selling poorly... yet being torrented up to hell. I myself have seen guys on the Anandtech and Tom's Hardware boards claim they buy the $600 cards as initial investments for a lifetime of free games.
If I bought an 8800 right now, it would be to help that game run better, not because I even remotely give a shit about Crysis,
You guys are different, in that you aren't shallow or nuts. You know 3Dmark was downloaded a gajillion times last year right? Multiple times more than any game? Why is that? Unlike you, many of these guys are graphic whores. They want to see what their hardware is capable of. The average gamer, I have found, isn't nearly as well rounded as the lot of us.
Also, here is a little poll I did on Anandtech. Again, I am not saying it is hard evidence or anything bla bla bla:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=80&threadid=2233276&enterthread=y
From that poll, out of the 96 that had high end video cards, 14 did not play Crysis on their PC, while 82 PLAYED it. The poll will probably hit a few thousand votes at some point, and it will be interesting to look at the percentage.
Still, I want to make it clear that I find it completely unfair and false to say that Crysis is the reason for the high sales of the 8800, especially if what you are getting at is that no other game pushes a system like it does.
Well, that's not something I am sure of either. I can't say I completely believe that Crysis pushed the sales of the 8800 cards. However what I do believe is the following:
If there are 8 million 8800 series video cards out there alone, with even another two million of other high end brands, why is it that when the majority of those 10 million video card owners played Crysis, the game sold only 1.5 million pieces?
Of course the problem with that is most of you don't believe the majority of high end video card owners played Crysis.
I'll start that poll at five or six other video card forums later. I know it can't be taken as evidence, but it will still be fun.
-
I'm sorry Pug, but you are arguing from the perspective that Anandtech polls somehow represent the majority of gamers. Just like you can't assume the PC gamers here at OW.net are representative of the market, you can't say that Anandtech users are either. I mean do all 10 million high-end videocard owners frequent the Anandtech graphics card forums? Even 10% of that number of people? No. You are jumping to conclusions to much with very little evidence at all. You're bolded part alone... where are you getting the numbers that say that over 5 million people have admitted to playing Crysis? Sorry, but I completely reject all of your arguments because you really have nothing to base them on other than the fact that something like 10 million nVidia 8800-series cards (and their ATi equivalent) were sold and a few polls on Anandtech show a bunch of Anandtech users pirate games.
-
Note also that somebody who simply wants to see what their graphics card can do isn't necessarily going to shell out money for it. If all I wanted was something of a benchmark, I'd probably torrent a game just to see it run on my system as well, not pay good money for it. Just a side note. I'm not saying you're entirely wrong, Pug, I just don't think there's any good way to qualify it. There are too many unknowns. I don't think anybody's trying to say that Crysis shouldn't have sold better, just that there's no way to really figure out why it didn't sell better (also ignoring the fact that it sold a lot of copies... if you're going over the million mark, you're doing very well for yourself - by comparison, The Darkness for 360 and PS3 didn't sell nearly that well).
-
Obviously there is nothing near a smoking gun for something like this (and I don't have the funding to find one :P), but rather facts that you can interpret to reach your own conclusions.
Something else which I find telling is that even if by conservative estimates, there are ten million high end video card users out there, the best selling PC games sell in the millions, while best selling 360 games sell in the tens of millions. Remember, as of December 2007, the 360 unit sales were estimated to be at 15 million (Currently they are at 20), and its top games dwarfed the best selling PC games (again not counting The Sims and Wow). I mean if these PC gamers must have been buying something right? Fine, forget Crysis... Where is our success story?
Obviously this is all speculation. I don't have hard evid... never mind hard, I don't have any evidence to support this. But I just find my conclusion logical.
Oh and you guys might find this interesting. Another time, when the developers of Relic were on GFW radio, one of them mentioned that while they had no hard evidence of piracy, they did state hat while their Company of Heroes game had sold nearly two million copies, its patches had been downloaded nearly 20 million times. He said the biggest percentage of patch downloads came from Asia... heh.
I'm not saying you're entirely wrong, Pug, I just don't think there's any good way to qualify it. There are too many unknowns. I don't think anybody's trying to say that Crysis shouldn't have sold better, just that there's no way to really figure out why it didn't sell better (also ignoring the fact that it sold a lot of copies... if you're going over the million mark, you're doing very well for yourself - by comparison, The Darkness for 360 and PS3 didn't sell nearly that well).
Yes, of course, there are too many unknowns.
Also I just checked. COD4 PC outsold the PS3 version in 2007, and yes 1.5 million is definitely Crysis doing very well.
-
Ripten decided to contact Epic's Mark Rein of Epic Games, asking him what he thought of piracy and no Gears 2 PC. (http://www.ripten.com/2008/10/01/no-gears-2-for-pc-mark-rein-cites-360-focus-not-piracy-concern-as-reason/)
He sites his own reasons as to why there is no plans for Gears 2 for the PC.
All of those quotes from Mark below will be thrown in BOLD.
I asked Mark to respond to the statements made by his designer, stating “Your lead designer has been quoted saying that piracy is the main concern”, to which he responded:
"The reason we decided not to develop Gears 2 for PC was so that we could focus our resources on making Gears 2 the best possible Xbox 360 game it could be rather than splitting them across multiple platforms like we did with the first one. I think Gears 2 will be a better game for it and that this was the right decision.
Mark’s response makes no mention of piracy as a deterrent in the game’s creation for the PC, and by not doing so it almost directly contradicts it as the motive. Taking Mark at his word, it is still hard pill to swallow for PC gamers.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with Cliff’s savvy consumer analogy, you can hardly disagree that piracy adversely effects the bottom line of digitally distributed media creators. Some may argue both points as rubbish, and it would be their right to do so, but I can understand the logic behind both.
Finally, I asked Mark about the piracy concern in general on PC’s and if he and the PCGA had any plans to deal with the concern in the future, to which he responded:
“This issue is something we’re looking at as a group …”
He then added that I would be better served contacting the group’s Intel representative for further insight into their plans, which I fully intend to do. There was a time not long ago when piracy was a major concern for consoles, but due to technology advances, that has become less of a mainstream problem. Here’s to hoping a solution is arrived upon for the PC sooner rather than later.
-
"Where is our success story? Uh...minus WoW and The Sims, the two highest selling games on ANY platform."
:P
I think the Wikipedia list of best selling games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_games) is interesting, and you can draw some conclusions from it.
"Tens of millions" is quite rare, unless you're Nintendo. 16 of the top 20 highest selling non-packin games are Nintendo games, and 5 of those are Pokemon. 18 of the top 20 broke 10 million.
I don't know how complete this list is, but going off it 30 games out of 526 broke 1 million in sales on the 360. Half of those are sequels.
Crysis had a lot of competition on release. Crysis, UT3, and CoD4 all released within days of each other, with Quake Wars and Orange Box coming out a month before. I mean, that has to impact sales. Not to mention PC games rarely have the same kind of advertising budget as big name console games. I never once saw a Crysis commercial but I sure as shit saw that Gears of War "Mad World" spot two dozen times at least. And I don't even watch TV outside of like 3 shows.
The patch thing from Relic is interesting, though its hard to make a real call on it. Most people have high speed internet so they don't back up patches to apply again, they'd rather redownload them. Downloads also fail or become corrupt, forcing a redownload. Not saying its not telling that a lot of pirates are grabbing the patch, but the actual number would be hard to pin down.
Heres something interesting, and slightly related. Story (http://www.dreamdawn.com/sh/features/sales_vs_score.php). This guy took the average review score of 1281 PS2 games (released in North America) and plotted them on a chart vs how many copies they each sold. Take a look at the charts and ignore the scores part of it for a second, and just look at the sales. It is densely packed on the left side of the graph, well under even the 1 million mark. Now look at the scores. Its not all shit and shovelware, lots of games with high ratings sold "poorly." Or at least poorly compared to the likes of GTA and other such blockbuster games.
Seems to me that if you can push out the next blockbuster, consoles are the way to go. You'll sell millions. Yet for the vast majority of games the sales are about the same, console or PC.
*Sees Ds post*
Thats an odd excuse. Is Mark Rein saying Gears was always developed as a 360 and PC release? I call bullshit. The game was obviously built for 360 first and foremost. There was no "splitting them across multiple platforms".
-
*Sees Ds post*
Thats an odd excuse. Is Mark Rein saying Gears was always developed as a 360 and PC release? I call bullshit. The game was obviously built for 360 first and foremost. There was no "splitting them across multiple platforms".
I would NOT be surprised if Gears was being planned for both 360 and PC at the same time at was for a bit being worked on as such, but then suddenly M$ threw money their way and said, "360 version first, please" and Epic said, "Money talks" -- like what happened w/ say Halo and KOTOR. Can anyone confirm or deny this??
Though, Reins response also speaks of "Damn Cliffy B is shooting his mouth, so I gotta' make the politically correct PR move here."
-
*Sees Ds post*
Thats an odd excuse. Is Mark Rein saying Gears was always developed as a 360 and PC release? I call bullshit. The game was obviously built for 360 first and foremost. There was no "splitting them across multiple platforms".
I imagine it was a PR move in order to smooth over some of the ruffled feathers, just as D said.
-
I know. I just hate bullshit excuses.
-
With the way things are going, I doubt this'll happen...
...But wouldn't all of this be very ironic, if Epic announces sometime in the future Gears 2 PC port -- whether Epic ports it or some 3rd party does! LOL.
Now only would it be ironic, but that might piss off some console-only gamers...
-
I say we burn them all in effigy.
... shit, I already said that once tonight. I... uh... I guess I'm out of ideas.
-
"Where is our success story? Uh...minus WoW and The Sims, the two highest selling games on ANY platform."
:P
Oh come on. You know we are discussing games targeted at high end users. And you simply can't count The Sims, because core gamers aren't the ones playing that and buying the expansions. The people who are are too scared to even try and torrent it, or EA would have DRMed that title up its ass too.
I think the Wikipedia list of best selling games is interesting, and you can draw some conclusions from it.
Yes, the 10 million was a deliberate exaggeration on my part, and yes the PC has had some heavy hitters, but our current batters aren't look very good.
Crysis had a lot of competition on release. Crysis, UT3, and CoD4 all released within days of each other, with Quake Wars and Orange Box coming out a month before. I mean, that has to impact sales. Not to mention PC games rarely have the same kind of advertising budget as big name console games. I never once saw a Crysis commercial but I sure as shit saw that Gears of War "Mad World" spot two dozen times at least. And I don't even watch TV outside of like 3 shows.
UT3 and Quake Wars competition? Combined, their sales didn't exceed 300,000. And The Orange Box was out a month earlier, and wasn't a muscle game anyway.
Also the exact same competition existed on the consoles, except more, and each of the games sold better.
Look, all I am saying is that we just know about the 8 million 8800 series cards sold. Who knows how many more were sold from ATi, and other better ones from Nvidia. If you compare the games versus high end video card base percentage versus the games versus next gen console percentage, you find a fair difference.
The patch thing from Relic is interesting, though its hard to make a real call on it. Most people have high speed internet so they don't back up patches to apply again, they'd rather redownload them. Downloads also fail or become corrupt, forcing a redownload. Not saying its not telling that a lot of pirates are grabbing the patch, but the actual number would be hard to pin down.
I agree with that of course, but I remember Shawn Elliot asking him about the patch downloads, and the Relic guy mentioned unique ip addresses. Surely not all 20 million were pirates, but even if it was couple million, it was a significant number.
It is densely packed on the left side of the graph, well under even the 1 million mark. Now look at the scores. Its not all shit and shovelware, lots of games with high ratings sold "poorly." Or at least poorly compared to the likes of GTA and other such blockbuster games.
Why are you comparing the games on the bottom of that list, to the games on top of the PC list? :P
Our best selling PC title of recent times, The Orange Box, sold 2 million.
Obviously we can go on with this forever. Like you guys said, all I can do is speculate.
I know. I just hate bullshit excuses.
haha well Epic are in a fix. When CliffyB is honest, we call him names. When Mark Rein tries to be diplomatic, we call him names. I think these people are fast realizing that there is no point in saying anything at all.
For the record, I do think Rein is an ass.
-
Why are you comparing the games on the bottom of that list, to the games on top of the PC list? :P
Our best selling PC title of recent times, The Orange Box, sold 2 million.
I was trying to point out that the super high selling games are more of an anomaly than the norm, regardless of platform. The PC gets singled out for "low sales" when in reality the majority of console games will have similar sales.
As for Epic...I think PC gamers just feel slighted. Epic is now friends with the rich kid in high school so they don't want to hang with us anymore, but we've been friends since 2nd grade. Plus they want to put the blame on the gamers, except UT3 and Gears were half-assed games suffering from a variety of problems that weren't ever truly fixed.
-
About patch downloading, I will often DL a patch for a game that I don't even own yet (if it's easily available to everyone) -- especially if it's a huge-sized patch. And even more especially true if I have plans to buy the game very soon.
I don't know how many of y'all roll like that, but I know I do.
-
About patch downloading, I will often DL a patch for a game that I don't even own yet (if it's easily available to everyone) -- especially if it's a huge-sized patch. And even more especially true if I have plans to buy the game very soon.
I don't know how many of y'all roll like that, but I know I do.
I do that too if it's a game I anticipate I will get. For example I got the Quake point release patch (approx. 270mb) before I actually got Quake 4. I keep a "patches" folder containing all patches I've downloaded (unless they're outdated or superceded) for just such an occasion when I want to reinstall I won't have to redownload everything.
-
Yeah, I keep a extra folder for all my game back-ups in folders and stuff, all sorted nice and neatly.
When I'm done with a game and am gonna uninstall it, I often will burn an extra CD with all my patches, DLC, saved game files, map packs, SDK, or any other extras that have been released for it.
-
GameSpy have already their hands already on Gears 2 for the X360.
They have their impressions on the SP portion of the game which they did finish, basically.
2 pages worth on it (http://xbox360.gamespy.com/xbox-360/gears-of-war-2/916805p1.html)
Spiffy
Impressive environments; improved dialogue and story; sweet new weapons; better achievement system and collectibles.
Iffy
Still plays and feels a lot like the first Gears; occasional visual glitches.
We recently had a chance to play through Gears of War 2's entire single-player campaign (yes, you read that correctly) at an event in San Francisco, and we found it to be an intense, enjoyable experience that improved upon the first game in a number of ways. Before we get into the oh-so-gory details, we should preface things by noting that Gears 2 feels a lot like the first game, so much so that there will inevitably be complaints that it could be called Gears of War 1.5. To those people we say: Quit your whining! Complaining about another 12 to 15 hours of hot Gears action is like complaining about having too much money in your wallet or that your suitors are bringing you too many bouquets of flowers.
-
Cliffy B is saying that many game designers don't get the respect they deserve. (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20609)
October 13, 2008
Bleszinski: Industry Doesn't Properly Value Visionaries
Bleszinski: Industry Doesn't Properly Value Visionaries The games industry doesn't always properly recognize the contributions of individual influential developers, Epic Games design director Cliff Bleszinski told Gamasutra during a recent interview.
"I don't think the industry values visionaries as much as it could. I really don't," said Bleszinksi, who recently completed work on Gears of War 2. His comments came as part of a more extensive discussion set to appear on Gamasutra at a later date.
The designer compared the games industry's attitude towards creative talent to that of the film industry. "As sad as it is, you're only as good as your last game, in many ways," he said. "In Hollywood, at least, you get movie jail for like a year, and you're out, and you get to try and make another good movie. In games, you screw up once, and no one ever wants to hear from you again. It's pretty sad."
Bleszinkski singled out a few designer examples -- admittedly ones more recognized than most. "Look at a guy like Ken Levine or [Peter] Molyneux or Chris Taylor or [Hideo] Kojima. I mean, we all need to celebrate these people," he said.
While Bleszinksi was sure to state that game development is a heavily-collaborative process, he noted that other creative industries more willing to acknowledge individual creators gain associated marketing benefits.
He pointed to his current role as executive producer on the upcoming Gears of War film as having given him more perspective on the distinctions between the two industries. "It's a very structured, yet organic, process in Hollywood," he said, "where in games it's still the Wild Wild West in some ways right now."
"It absolutely is very much a team effort, and I'm nothing without the 100-plus people who worked on Gears," he acknowledged, "but if I can go out there and evangelize the game and help sell the vision of it, that's a very useful thing, and we're all able to put gas in our gas tanks as a result of it, right?"
POSTED: 01.53AM PST, 10/13/08 - Chris Remo
-
Fuck this guy. Every time he speaks now, I hate him even more.
-
I'm trying to figure out who's worse.
Me or Cliffy B....
-
He's just getting irritating now. I don't know exactly what it is.
-
Fuck this guy. Every time he speaks now, I hate him even more.
Hey, I will not sit quietly while you demean D in this way!
*stands up*
OK, continue.
-
Hey, I will not sit quietly while you demean D in this way!
*stands up*
OK, continue.
HAhaha
Cliffy's gas reference "...and we're all able to put gas in our gas tanks as a result of it, right?" really makes hime look like even more of a prick. If he had said something about "putting food on the table" I would have felt more empathetic.
What the Hell happened to this guy? I used to be such a huge fan of his work! His UT maps were exquisite!
-
Cliffy thinks he's a gaming development rock star now, I think. His ego went to his head.
-
Speaking of Cliffy B and big egos, SIX-page interview with the guy (http://www.gameplayer.com.au/gp_documents/Cliffy-B-Tells-All.aspx?Page=1)
-
9.5 from IGN
Video review (http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14232680/gears-of-war-2/videos/gears2_vidreview.html)
Written review (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/926/926305p1.html)
5 stars from GameSpy
GameSpy review (http://xbox360.gamespy.com/xbox-360/gears-of-war-2/926309p1.html)
-
Midnight release -- while I will definitely be getting this game... I won't be getting it at midnight.
WotLK however, is a different story. :P
-
9.0 from GameSpot
Video review (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gearsofwar2/video/6200516/gears-of-war-2-video-review-1?hd=1&tag=topslot;watchlink;1)
Written review (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/gearsofwar2/review.html?tag=topslot;readlink;2)
-
I want this for PC....damn.
I also recently bought a wireless 360 pad for my PC. I tried the original for a bit with it, and I think it actually might be better with a controller. I'll probably do another playthrough with the pad soon.
-
Oh, man -- I'd really like to see GoW2 come to the PC.
It'd be really funny after all the shit Cliffy B talked about PC gaming and piracy, the powers that be at Epic (that are above Cliffy) decided to have a team port GoW2 to the PC. Wouldn't that be irony.
-
Enough of the Cliffy B shit talk. Lets wait till he makes something shitty before we go down that road.
Anyway, Im thinking of picking this up this month. The game is looking amazing.
-
I don't deny his talent as a game creator, I just think he's kind of an asshole. I always thought he was kind of an asshole, he just didn't really piss me off personally until more recently.
Ultimately I was pretty disappointed with the first Gears. I thought it was a super fun game that utterly dropped the ball on the fiction of what was actually a fairly decent concept that had some potential depth to it, despite being the usual marines vs. aliens setup. I'm hoping they manage to do some cooler stuff with Gears 2, but at the same time, I'm just not very excited. I'm sure I'll end up playing it at some point, though. At least as long as my 360 isn't dying. But I think it kind of is.
-
Yea I am probably in the internet gaming community minority when I say this, but I really can't see anything said by Cliffy as quite so outrageous.
He probably does seem like an asshole to some of you, but it must be frustrating to put years of hardwork into something and just watch people download it for free. Those people are the real assholes.
I can imagine it now. What if I wrote a book that I worked for years on, and then saw it being downloaded freely, with bootleg copies sold in Asia openly. That wouldn't just make me angry, but sad as well. I can imagine it being a lot worse as a game designer. A book is something I could have written on the side without risking my day job, but had I developed a game, I would have had to risk a lot of money, with the livelihood of many depending on it.
Yes, Cliffy is making a fine living, and yes UT3 and GoWPCs problems can't be blamed on piracy, but other developers aren't nearly as lucky. Just watching his peers struggle must be frustrating for Cliffy.
Also, I agree, that GoW turned pretty disappointing half-way through.
-
All creators have the right to protect their creations and innovations. No argument there. It is a real piss-off when people rip-off your shit. As an artist/designer I go through that too.
I don't think anyone disagrees with the core of what Cliffy's saying, rather the way he says it and his poor choice of words. If he were a bit more diplomatic I doubt it would have come off as bad or offensive. Did he really have to go off calling PC gamers pirates as a whole? No, he could have just ended with something like "it's a shame that rampany piracy is saturating the PC market." And no one would have really argued.
-
Yeah, and he's acting like the poor sales of UT3 and GoW PC are solely due to piracy. Open up your eyes Cliffy! I've said it a million times and I'll keep saying it: UT3 was a rehash of a rehash of a rehash in a now niche market segment (twitch shooters) and GoW PC suffers from major performance problems, showstopping bugs at the time of release, complete lack of support, not to mention it came out long after it had run its course on the 360 where it was extremely successful. IMO, those are the primary reasons that they both sold poorly, not piracy.
I don't even care if he's right as a whole. He's such as asshole for labeling me and all of my PC-gaming compatriots that I'll never purchase (or download) one of his games ever again. Fuck him.
-
Yeah, and he's acting like the poor sales of UT3 and GoW PC are solely due to piracy. Open up your eyes Cliffy! I've said it a million times and I'll keep saying it: UT3 was a rehash of a rehash of a rehash in a now niche market segment (twitch shooters) and GoW PC suffers from major performance problems, showstopping bugs at the time of release, complete lack of support, not to mention it came out long after it had run its course on the 360 where it was extremely successful. IMO, those are the primary reasons that they both sold poorly, not piracy.
I don't even care if he's right as a whole. He's such as asshole for labeling me and all of my PC-gaming compatriots that I'll never purchase (or download) one of his games ever again. Fuck him.
I think you're absolutely right about that. There were too many issues overshadowing those titles.
I know classic UT was around much earlier, but piracy was still an issue back in 1999-2002. It had no DRM whatsoever, not even CD check, yet its annual sales record was still impressive. So much so that they released the GOTY edition the following year as well as a Totally Unreal anthology after that (including Unreal Gold, UT GOTY, and some bonus discs). Why did people buy it? Great game, great price, great support.
-
Xessive and Scott both said it perfectly. It isn't really the core of what he's saying, it's that he's got the wrong attitude and he's being an arrogant ass instead of taking the time to look at the poor job his company has done handling certain things. The Gears PC port is like something that would have come out of a former incarnation of Capcom, you know? It's just broken and crappy, and this used to be a PC developer, whose entire success was built upon the backs of PC supporters who made them what they are. And now we'r'e being shunned, and told what horrible pirates we are when they give us a broken game and indicated to us with not only Cliffy's latest words, but with their past actions prior to anything he said that they just don't care enough about us to put any effort in.
Certainly understand the frustrations, believe me. I hate piracy and it infuriates me. At the same time, they've handled it in exactly the wrong way and come at it from exactly the wrong perspective, which is just plain disappointing. I played Epic games all the way back to Jill of the Jungle, Jazz Jackrabbit, and One Must Fall. To see a great company make this turn is just plain disappointing.
-
Don't know if you guys got a chance to play GOW 2 yet but it is certifiably the greatest videogame I have ever played in my life.
And I was a harsh critic of the first one just so everyone knows if that means anything. :P
Yeah though every 360 or PC owner needs to buy this game as soon as they are able.
Its so epic, so violent, so graphically superior...
I could praise this game all day its so good.
Seriously.
Its awesome!!!
-
There is no PC version of GoW2. Haven't you been reading this thread? LOL
-
lolzzz it is teh epic!
-
Also, good to see you back KXL. :)
-
I have no problem with Cliffy B, Crytek, and anyone else complaining about piracy. You know what? Piracy sucks and is one of many problems hurting PC gaming as a whole.
I have a problem w/ Cliffy B talking like every PC gamer is a pirate. Sorry, but not all of us PC gamers are pirates. I got much better things to do than like my PC take forever and a day to download a full game -- such as be currently playing a game I actually bought at the store.
Nothing is more shameful than GOW PC not getting much support. One patch and that was it? That would've worked if the PC version was perfect out the box or if that one patch fixed all the issues. Sorry, Cliffy -- but lack of support ALSO hurt your sales on GoW PC, too.
BethSoft got it right. They dropped the PS3, PC, and X360 versions of FO3 all at once -- 4.7 million sold across all systems, WEEK ONE ALONE. Scott is right, that GoW PC dropped way too late. If it dropped the same exact day for PC and X360, that game would've sold probably a hell of a lot more PC version copies. Very likely, those gamers that own both X360 and PC would probably have opted for the PC version. Also, is there really a need for a X360 owner who has GoW X360 to buy it many months later on the PC for full price? I doubt it, since there's only on the PC version few new levels, one new game mode, and a SDK no modder is really using.
-
Yeah, don't ever expect any version of a game to sell super well on a platform when the game has been out on another platform for months. Unless it's Halo, forget it. Gears was old fucking news to most of us when it hit PC.
-
What really pisses me off is I bought GoW for both the 360 and the PC. So to hear Cliffy say shit like he did really is a kick in the teeth.
-
You know, it also occurs to me that when you put out a game so long after on PC, people may pirate it just because they feel like the game already made its money and they don't see a reason to feel guilty. I would think that a simultaneous release would see a lot more sales simply because the PC users would feel like the product was current, so more marginal pirates wouldn't justify an act of piracy and would go to the store instead. I can think of at least 3 guys I know that would likely follow that logic. What do you guys think?
I mean, delayed releases can't be good for sales in any case, but I think specifically it makes people more likely to pirate the game simply because it's easier to justify pirating an "old" game. The impetus to scramble out to a store on release day is totally destroyed.
-
Well, I didn't buy GoW PC because I had already played through the whole thing on 360. I still kind of want it, but I even passed when it was $15. Maybe $10 Ill grab it. But if it came out day and date with the 360 version it probably would have been a much different story.
In these days with few exclusives and lots of cross-platform releases, a delayed PC release is probably a really bad idea. I mean, I'm sure there are a few people that are total hardcore PC-only gamers, but I would bet the majority are simply gamers that can afford PCs. We've all got consoles. So why would we want to wait 6 months to a year to get the PC version? Before it was for the improved graphics and such, but with the HD consoles that isn't as much of a problem. And since a lot of games are built for controllers (like Gears), wanting KBM controls isn't as important either. Plus DRM issues and the history of bad ports, its no wonder delayed ports don't sell well.
-
Well, I didn't buy GoW PC because I had already played through the whole thing on 360. I still kind of want it, but I even passed when it was $15. Maybe $10 Ill grab it. But if it came out day and date with the 360 version it probably would have been a much different story.
In these days with few exclusives and lots of cross-platform releases, a delayed PC release is probably a really bad idea. I mean, I'm sure there are a few people that are total hardcore PC-only gamers, but I would bet the majority are simply gamers that can afford PCs. We've all got consoles. So why would we want to wait 6 months to a year to get the PC version? Before it was for the improved graphics and such, but with the HD consoles that isn't as much of a problem. And since a lot of games are built for controllers (like Gears), wanting KBM controls isn't as important either. Plus DRM issues and the history of bad ports, its no wonder delayed ports don't sell well.
I also think with PC ports, it's as if many of these PC versions are coming off as lazy, in some shape, form or what have you. Like the PC version is an afterthought or something.
Look at GoW PC with its performance issues; ACPC's very stiff system requirements and how exiting the game is kinda of buried into being a chore; SC: Double Agent PC's issues with its saved game files and performance; Halo 2 PC requires Vista yet doesn't take advantage of DX10; Dead Space PC with its VSync on is causing issues with KB/mouse lag; R6: Vegas 1's not-so-good performance; GRAW PC's not-so-good performance; RE4 PC is best played with a control pad since the KB/mouse controls are awful; Bully PC has tons of graphical issues, bugs, and only supports for PC gamepads the X360 controller; etc etc.
And yes, Idol -- throw on top of all the PC port laziness the whole DRM issues, how do these publishers expect to sell some PC versions of their games?
-
Saw Gears of War 2 today at the stores, but refrained from picking it up just yet... got too much to do right now. Definitely on my list of games to purchase though.
-
Voice-actor John DiMaggio (Bender from Futurama) talks about his role as Marcus Fenix from Gears series (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171207)
-
"I uh... grunt a lot. And I had to spend about 4 hours a night for 2 years working out my neck so that my neck would be big enough."
-
My fiancee is finishing up her student teaching requirements for graduation, and had mentioned to me that some of her 6th graders were talking about this game.
Hell when I was in sixth grade I couldn't even have an album with a parental advisory sticker on it.
-
Yeah, things seem different now. Jennie's son is 7 now. We try to enforce the ratings: No E10+ or up unless we say it's okay (thankfully both the 360 and the Wii support parental controls when it comes to game ratings) and same with movies and TV. We'll approve certain things if it seems fairly innocuous like Guitar Hero III.
But we just took him and one of his friends to see Madagascar 2. The other kid was talking about how he loves Halloween and the Saw movies and asked me if I saw Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I was totally amazed. This is a second grader we're talking about.
It's not just like that with ratings either. Every kid now has a DS or a PSP and probably a console or two or three at home, not to mention an iPod of some sort. Kids have cell phones in like sixth grade. A thousand dollars in electronic toys. I had to beg my parents for a NES and I never even got one. I made do with G.I. Joe and Star Wars figures, and I maybe got a vehicle for one or the other for Christmas.
-
It's indicative of the spinelessness and general idiocy present in most "parenting" today.
-
You know, this story just wouldn't work without a population of meathead characters. Makes me want to go out, eat some meat, and destroy stuff.
-
Haha, but that's the brilliance of it, right? It just makes you want to flex your neck, pick up a tree, and kill a dinosaur.
-
So, I'm going to finally pick my copy tomorrow. Been pretty busy playing F3.
I love this commercial. It just makes me want to play so much more. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMHkIWLds5Y)
-
It's a fine commercial and I dig it too. However, it also strikes me as something that people would put together from a really manly movie with emotional music to show repressed homosexual feelings between burly men. Seriously, look at the part where they're riding doing the drop pod thingy and Dom looks over at Marcus while he's intentionally trying not to make eye contact. Tell me you don't expect them them to just break the silence and lock lips, at least a little.
-
I actually thought that was a fairly uncompelling commercial.
-
I like it. It's kind of mellow, but intense at the same time. Well, maybe not intense...hmm, can't think of the word I'm looking for. It's cool though!
-
Commercial doesn't capture the feel of the game at all.
-
They had a commercial for the first game that sort of went the same route, but that one was infinitely better, I thought.
-
Commercial doesn't capture the feel of the game at all.
Yea it doesn't. I don't like it at all, to be honest. To me it seems like they are obviously overcompensating for the lack of storytelling in the first game.
-
Yeah, I think the "Mad World" trailer was much more effective, and a much better sell.
-
Yeah, I think the "Mad World" trailer was much more effective, and a much better sell.
That was a great ad.
-
Over 3 million copies so far sold for GOW2 on the X360 (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/56283)
-
Megan and I played through it over the weekend after Christmas, really really damn satisfying. Played some horde mode as well which I would like to play more of with some peeps.
-
You know, after UT3 sold well over Steam, I wonder if Cliffy B will reconsider his thoughts and bring GoW2 to the PC via Steam...
-
No D. Even if UT3 sells five million copies at $10, it won't equal the profits of Gears of War selling even 2 million copies (I know it sold more) at launch. That's why developers are far happier when a console games sells 2 million at launch versus a PC title that sells as much over a period of years.
-
Even if UT3 sells five million copies at $10, it won't equal the profits of Gears of War selling even 2 million copies (I know it sold more) at launch.
Of course not -- b/c GoW2 upon release will be sold for $60 on the console upon release.
That's why developers are far happier when a console games sells 2 million at launch versus a PC title that sells as much over a period of years.
They want their quick buck, I know.
I just want somehow for GoW2 to wind up on the PC, dammit.
-
Shit, I love this game. Been addicted to it for 3 days straight, and I haven't even really touched MP. Just played like 2 rounds.
-
There might eventually be a Gears Of War: E-Day game -- not sure if it'll be a whole new game, DLC, or what.
And there's a possibility there will be more Gears 2 DLC -- possibly, Single Player content. (http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/952/952452p1.html)
NYCC 09: Gears of War Prequel Talk
Gears 2 writer hints that an E-Day game isn't out of the question.
by Greg Miller
US, February 7, 2009 - It seemed like one of those fan questions that Joshua Ortega, the writer of Gears of War 2, would dance around during tonight's New York Comic-Con Gears of War panel -- were there plans for doing a prequel that dealt with the events of E-Day, the day the Locust emerged and attacked the human race?
"You will not be disappointed in the next ten years," Ortega said. "It's a ten-year plan. Gears is long-term. The lancer is the new lightsaber."
On a panel focusing on all things Gears, the E-Day tidbit stood out from the pack. Sure, it was cool to see Carlos Ferro, the voice of Dom, mock his own performance and talk about his library of Gears-branded collectibles, and it was fun to listen to the panel talk about the comic book bridging the first games and the second game, but the mention of a decade's worth of Crimson Omens is the statement that got the room of fanboys all hot and bothered.
Another question that got the crowd going: are there plans for more single-player Gears of War 2 DLC?
"Keep watching," Ortega said. "You won't be disappointed."
-
No clue if this is a mistake, if this is actually coming, or what...
Gears of War 2 PC is listed to be showing up at the World Cyber Games 2009. (http://www.wcg.com/6th/poll/poll_PTT.asp)
:o
-
I just finished the single player campaign and I absolutely loved it. I've got other games to work my way through, but damnit I'm wanting to play Gears 2 again. I'll probably pick up Gears 1 sometime since I missed it and now it's cheaper.
-
More Gears 2 PC rumors.
IGN keeping the rumor afloat here. (http://pc.ign.com/articles/994/994129p1.html)
Gears of War 2 PC Rumors
Could Marcus Fenix invade computers?
by Jeff Haynes
June 11, 2009 - The PC rumor mill started to catch on fire earlier this afternoon with info that Gears of War 2, the critically and commercially acclaimed title from Epic Games and Microsoft Game Studios. According to one website (http://www.beantowngames.com/games/pid101217.htm), there were plenty of details that appeared to be pulled from an upcoming press release and even a preliminary box shot with the Games for Windows logo stamped on the front and limited edition details.
If this were true, this would be a large boost to the seemingly dead Games for Windows platform, particularly after a non-existent showing at this year's E3, where none of the titles shown displayed the banner or Live logo on the box. Landing a large title like Gears of War 2 would be an excellent game for PC owners, and it would also seem to be in keeping with the release of the original game on the PC as well: the first game came out on computers a year after its release on the 360 with a few extras. The supposed release date of the PC version, according the website, is December 4 of this year.
We contacted a Microsoft representative for comment, and received this reply: "Gears of War 2 is a great franchise for the 360, and so we are putting all of our attention into making sure that it stands out on that console. There are no plans to bring the game to the PC." Will this position change in the future? Currently, it doesn't seem likely. But if anything changes, we'll be sure to bring that information to you as soon as it becomes available.
-
Cliffy B thinks the future of FPS's is becoming more like RPG's.
He goes on to praise Harvey Smith (one of Deus Ex's lead designers) and the Gearbox's upcoming Borderlands. (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3175089)
Future Of Shooters Is RPGs, Cliff Bleszinski Says
Praise Borderlands as a "shootery Fallout," cryptic about Gears of War.
By Kat Bailey, 07/07/2009
Few people would be better equipped to comment on the future of shooters than Gears of War creator Cliff Bleszinski. So where exactly does he think the genre is going?
"I had a conversation with Harvey Smith - one of the lead designers on Deus Ex - and said to him the future of shooters is RPGs. He said he completely agreed." Bleszinski told Develop Magazine.
He had high praise for Gearbox's Borderlands, a game being described as a science fiction first-person shooter with RPG elements.
"Randy Pitchford at Gearbox is an absolutely brilliant designer and business man, and I think Borderlands is not getting as much hype as it should, because it really looks like a more accessible, shootery version of Fallout."
As for whether RPG elements are in the cards for Gears of War, Bleszinski was cryptic.
"It depends on where things go. I mean, one could wean that from the comments I made earlier about the future of shooters is RPGs and see where things are going with us."
-
Ok, I hated Cliffy B before. This is just crazy. He praised Harvey Smith and Gearbox? What is the world coming to? Next he'll say that The Adventures of Bayou Billy was the greatest game of all time.
-
It's nice that Cliffy B finally figured out what Ion Storm, Irrational, and GSC pretty much figured-out a good while ago already....