Question for PC gamers...

[Cerb]

skyrims shadows and LOD look awful at 1080p

So, you never bothered changing any settings. Both of those are quite configurable.

Upon changing them, and then changing a couple other related settings, you can then, on a PC, get a mod or three that can make archery interesting, especially with no aimbot.

TES are all great examples of games that are radically different as PC games, even for those of us not turning everyone into skimpy anime elves with bolt-on boobs .

 

[Morbus]

i gave you the facts

What facts? You just said "you need l33t gear to play on PC competitively" and I said "ok, give me an example" and you came up with nothing so I went "well, that's just not true", but I'm totally ok with being proven wrong.

And you know why? Because all the games I play online (I don't play MMOs) or with friends don't require gaming gear and you don't benefit from it if you have it. So even if you come up with a ton of games that require gaming gear to be good at them, which you haven't, it doesn't matter because you can play other games if you don't have said gaming gear, so if you want an even playing field (and let me tell you, sports in general are NOT even playing fields gear-wise), you can have that on PC too, you don't need consoles.

So let me give you a taste of your own medicine.

Here are the facts: console players have lower IQs than PC gamers, and many studies prove it irrefutably. Want me to give you an example of one of such studies? No! I just gave you the facts, now you do the hard work of figuring out I'm being a troll and spouting out stupid nonsense that grew out of my ass.

there's a reason why the majority of tournaments (non DOTA/LOL/SC2) are done on console and not pc

Of course there is. There are two major reasons, actually. One is consoles are naturally more multiplayer-prone. Another is there are two major competitive genres that are better played on a console: sports games and beat 'em ups.

But it's not because there are more console players (which is up for debate, from what I can tell), and it's because it's an even playing field. There are plenty of tournament oriented games on PC, besides DoTA, LOL and SC2. CS, Unreal, Q3 back in the old days, TF2, BF, every single MMO, and every single FPS worth its salt, stuff like World of Tanks, stuff like Hearthstone... What do the consoles have, really? Plenty, no doubt, not that much, in comparison. And if you don't see that you just don't know the scene.

Which I think you don't, because the StarCraft scene is vicious and unwelcoming to new players, it's REALLY not an example you wanna mention in your "besides this and that, what else is there?" argument.

it is not an opinion that consoles are a far more even playing field than pc, it is a fact

I think you misspelled "bullshit".

I've seen more convincing "opinions" than your "facts", "opinions" with examples. Your "facts" can't come up with a SINGLE game where it applies.

At a competitive level, low settings is preferred, and just about any PC can get well over 60 FPS to be competitive, even 100+. The only time more really helps is with CS, and that is so old, anything can hit over 300 FPS.

Your network connection will matter far more than any PC differences.

I'm not sure he understand what "argument" means. You're totally right, and it was already mentioned, he just won't acknowledge you...

I call it trolling really.

Screen capping this for /r/pcmasterrace as Cringeworthy.

No shit. I hadn't noticed that pearl.

I'm out of here.

How many PC exclusives are there compared to console exclusives?

PC exclusives are way more, hands down. Just look at the torrent of MMOs around, the boatloads of indie games and all that and you have your answer.

The question you probably wanna ask is "how many PC AAA exclusives are there in comparison?" and I'd say that's an unfair question (even though it's probably even steven). PC gaming is not about AAA games. It can be if you like that sort of stuff, but if you just wanna play whatever shovelware EA and Ubisoft decide to spew out each year, you're probably better off buying a console. PC gaming is about the richness of the catalog, the b-rate titles and kick AAA's ass any day, the joy of playing what you like and not necessarily of what the majority likes.

It's not the same world. It's not the same attitude. It's not the same people playing.

FTFY

Fallout (the original, not the fake one) was developed and released as a B-rate game. Miles better than anything on consoles in the genre, to this day. Planescape: Torment as well. Arcanum. The Sims. Diablo. Minecraft. GTA. Elder Scrolls...

Bottom line: b-rate games are the best, with a few exceptions. There's nothing wrong with liking the latest Call of Duty or the latest Final Fantasy though.

 

[Anomaly1964]

WOW - had no idea this would create such a debate

 

[Midwayman]

The issue for me is that

1) No m/kb support native for FPS means no sale

2) consoles have horrible resolution and frame rates.


Its not all about the graphic quality. I could live with turning settings down some. However I can't live with 30fps @700-900p as a target framerate and resolution. I get spoiled with 100fps+ and a strobing monitor.

 

[Morbus]

As funny as those look, there probably is some PC gamer with a mod that does that.

Of course there are, are you joking? It shouldn't be a surprise, really. It's quite normal, and in fact, the VAST majority of mods for Oblivion are item/body mods like that. That's why MMOs' micro transactions are so profitable.

you act like a little girl in high school or something

reply with some substance, dont just be a troll

You're the troll here, don't come bitching when people call you up on that!

Seriously, is this guy for real?

skyrims shadows and LOD look awful at 1080p

the game was totally designed for 360

It's true that the game was designed for the 360, absolutely no way around that. But to say that a game looks WORSE on higher resolutions is not right. Get your facts straight.

Besides, the distant LOD (which is what you mean, I assume) is considerably better on the PC, as is the draw distance. Apart from that, you can install mods to make it look better. To ignore that is simply ignorance, or bias, or both.

I've seen enough of your threads now to realize you barely can grasp how to use a PC. Or you're trolling.

...or both.

Also, I didn't know he had a meme of his own! I'm way over my head here, dealing with troll nobility it seems.

 

[Midwayman]

...

Everybody knows an even playing fields is necessary when doing real competition.

You don't have Olympic weightlifters, some of them using support braces that others arent allowed to use - everybody has to use the same, because it is a competition they are taking seriously.

If you take competition seriously you need to be playing on console. If you want to be where you can buy more gear to gain an advantage, then you want to be on PC.

People will get mad and flame me for writing that but its the truth. In competition an even playing field is a MUST.

Wow, what a terrible example. People can and go gain advantage from equipment in sports. I know swimmers have suits that make a measurable difference that not all athlete have access to.

PCs are closer to the truth in real life competition. At lower levels there absolutely will be differences in equipment. I'm sure we all have played a sport at high school level, etc that some rich brat had all the pro level gear you couldn't afford. Even at the top levels gear is very much part of the competition. Runners are always looking for better shoes, skiers- betteer skis, etc, etc.

I won't argue consoles are inherently fairer, but trying to say they're more like real life competition is laughable.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Just wait till I overclock my PS4. I'll know where he's going to shoot before HE does!

 

[Morbus]

Wow, what a terrible example.

No shit. An even playing field is required?! What about Formula One? What about Moto GP? What about Le Tour de France? What about the Dakar? What about every single sport in the world for the simple fact that more money will always equal better trainers, better medical support, better (let's face it) doping, better food, more time to train properly, better equipment, a better state of mind...

That applies to consoles as well by the way. It's just the way the world works.

Just wait till I overclock my PS4. I'll know where he's going to shoot before HE does!

That (the fact hardware changes the odds) was not his whole point though.

He made the point that console is for players who value skill. And it's not, is it? It's for players who can spend 15 hours a day playing and learning all the tricks and earning all the OP weapons in CoD. There's games like that on the PC as well, but it's much more pervasive and problematic on the console, from my experience. Particularly in FPSs, but on football games as well.

 

[Subyman]

Who here actually plays competitive FPS games where they need that extra edge by getting a $400 NIC? Nobody? Then why argue about?

 

[ImpulsE69]

I think the argument was over consoles were for skilled players. Or something where he forgot about aim assist...in the end it don't matter.

 

[Subyman]

I think the argument was over consoles were for skilled players. Or something where he forgot about aim assist...in the end it don't matter. He cray cray.

Lol. I think anything can be competitive and about skill. The debate in itself is dumb. Even picking up leaves could have a huge following and have all these tactics and techniques needing deft hands and a ton of skill. Anything can be competitive. Trying to compare skill-needed is dumb.

 

[Cerb]

It's true that the game was designed for the 360, absolutely no way around that. But to say that a game looks WORSE on higher resolutions is not right. Get your facts straight.

It also came with a hi-res texture pack that made use of 1-1.5GB VRAM (depending on distance and cell clutter), not counting unofficial sources. Having played it on the 360 for a bit, even the stone stock PC version on a budget PC blows the XB360 away in every aspect of IQ, and also in smoothness of play, before touching a single mod, or adjusting the ini.

 

[tential]

WOW - had no idea this would create such a debate

Sadly, the debate is focused on futurefield's comments. He has a tendency to derail threads or just create threads based off of silly remarks, or poorly worded statements.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

What you're asking is not unique to PCs, how can you justify a console when you can just get an older one with worse graphics but a fantastic array of older games with decent gameplay.

Obviously graphics matter, they matter different amounts to different people, that's a subjective quality, so it's going to be different for each person. You might not be able to justify that ROI on a $350 but many people can.

I also play quite a lot of games so the PC platform even from a price perspective is better, steam deals have made PC gaming much cheaper than console gaming when you consider large libraries.

I have 485 games on steam now, if this was a PS/xbox that would set you back a LOT more, even if you targeted 2nd hand sales and cheap deals.

 

[Morbus]

The question wasn't which side is the best, the question was why PC gamers chose the PC.

My original post in this thread says it all for me, as far as I'm concerned. But as tential pointed out, the heated debate has been more about a couple of "wrong" arguments given by futurefields than the initial question.

Still, threads like these are bound to generated heated arguments, be it about the original question or tangential issues. And where there's trolls, there's flames... Yadayadayada...

:EDIT:
Just to clarify, when I say "wrong", it's very much my opinion, and it is, obviously, up for debate. I'm very open to be proven wrong, so when I say futurefields' arguments were "wrong", I really mean I do not agree with them, for the multiple reasons I invoked before. Please don't assume I'm stating my opinion as a fact. I use facts to support my opinion, but my opinion is volatile and up for discussion, as is the relevance of the facts I mention in its defense.

 

[DeadFred]

Also, I didn't know he had a meme of his own! I'm way over my head here, dealing with troll nobility it seems.

LOL thats epic! :thumbsup:

 

[futurefields]

Now I see where the "Posting in a futurefields thread" meme came from.

I've seen enough of your threads now to realize you barely can grasp how to use a PC. Or you're trolling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay0NMUhVEJo

yeah, I'm just making stuff up, clearly I don't know how to use my PC.

 

[bystander36]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay0NMUhVEJo

yeah, I'm just making stuff up, clearly I don't know how to use my PC.

That was at release. Things changed rather soon after with patches.

 

[futurefields]

No, that's still how Skyrim looks on PC on Ultra settings. You need to mod it to get it looking better. When playing on 360 the lower resolution framebuffer effectively hides that, and a bunch of other crappy visual elements of the game. So in that sense it looks subjectively "better" if you value image cohesion more than straight up image "quality".

 

[bystander36]

No, that's still how Skyrim looks on PC on Ultra settings. You need to mod it to get it looking better. When playing on 360 the lower resolution framebuffer effectively hides that, and a bunch of other crappy visual elements of the game. So in that sense it looks subjectively "better" if you value image cohesion more than straight up image "quality".

It's not like a PC gamer can't set their resolution to 720p in game and get this "cohesion" advantage. Most won't, but all they have to do is choose 720p in the drop down menu to get this great Xbox 360 resolution experience.

I still think they fixed, or at least greatly improved it in patches, but I'm not going to unmod what I have there now to test it. I did not play with mods for over a year after the game, and shadows definitely improved over time.

 

[futurefields]

I just fired up vanilla Skyrim a couple weeks ago, the shadows still look like that.

 

[bystander36]

I just fired up vanilla Skyrim a couple weeks ago, the shadows still look like that.

Let's assume you are telling the truth, and not using a pirated PC version, while owning the console version.

You can gain this great magical Xbox 360 look by simply using a 720p resolution setting if you believe it looks better on the Xbox. Or you can get a mod to fix it.

 

[Morbus]

No, that's still how Skyrim looks on PC on Ultra settings. You need to mod it to get it looking better. When playing on 360 the lower resolution framebuffer effectively hides that, and a bunch of other crappy visual elements of the game. So in that sense it looks subjectively "better" if you value image cohesion more than straight up image "quality".

So first of all, you're being a troll, and I'm not feeding you.

I will, however, state the while a coherent image looks subjectively "better", a lower resolution image looks absolutely WORSE.

Your argument about "hiding" defects is total BS. Do you lower your resolution to turn on AA? Cause that's your argument right there. It's a better image at a lower resolution, right? Because tell me this: when a game can't run on max settings at 1080p, what do you do? Lower the resolution and keep max settings? Or lower the settings and keep the resolution?

Get your head out of your ass. Troll.

Besides, vanilla Skyrim is NOT how Skyrim looks on PC. Console Skyrim does NOT compete with vanilla PC Skyrim. It competes with modded PC Skyrim.

Let's assume you are telling the truth

Please, let's not.

 

[futurefields]

So first of all, you're being a troll, and I'm not feeding you.

I will, however, state the while a coherent image looks subjectively "better", a lower resolution image looks absolutely WORSE.

Your argument about "hiding" defects is total BS. Do you lower your resolution to turn on AA? Cause that's your argument right there. It's a better image at a lower resolution, right? Because tell me this: when a game can't run on max settings at 1080p, what do you do? Lower the resolution and keep max settings? Or lower the settings and keep the resolution?

Get your head out of your ass. Troll.

Besides, vanilla Skyrim is NOT how Skyrim looks on PC. Console Skyrim does NOT compete with vanilla PC Skyrim. It competes with modded PC Skyrim.


Please, let's not.

Get your head examined.

 

[TestKing123]

No, that's still how Skyrim looks on PC on Ultra settings. You need to mod it to get it looking better. When playing on 360 the lower resolution framebuffer effectively hides that, and a bunch of other crappy visual elements of the game. So in that sense it looks subjectively "better" if you value image cohesion more than straight up image "quality".

No, there have been several official patches since release that also included several high resolution texture packs.

If you have vanilla Skyrim, and the most up to date patches (including the free official high res texture packs), vanilla PC Skyrim looks MUCH better than vanilla PC Skyrim at launch, and miles better than any console version.

Of course, there are 3rd party texture packs available that also makes Skyrim mind blowingly beautiful (especially if you use the 4k/8k texture packs), but the official texture packs from Bethesda is still quite good and looks MUCH better than consoles.