StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14062 ... ticle.html

The simExchange reports that neither Crysis or UT3 managed to sell more than 100,000 units in their debut last month.

Crysis, which requires an unprecedented US$1500-$2500 in PC upgrades to play, sold 86,633 copies in the U.S., while Unreal Tournament 3 sold just 33,995 copies.

In January 2005, Vivendi said it sold 1.7 million copies of Half-Life 2 in just two months; much more than either Crysis or Unreal 3 for a similar period.

Though both games were released in the middle of the month, their numbers are clearly less than what EA and Midway had hoped for.

Are gamers abandoning the PC? Without jumping the gun, some believe the PC market is shrinking with exception to a few specific genres like the massively popular World of Warcraft MMO.

Indeed, both Xbox 360 and PS3 offer comparable, if not equal, graphics technology in most cases at a fraction of the cost. What was once the platform for hardcore shooters has seemingly been relegated to second place.

Is PC gaming actually dying yet?

Don't be retarded.

A shit game the needs the PC of jesus and a niche MP game don't sell as well as a branded mind-slave game? Holy shit PC gaming is dying! Let's look at the Orange Box numbers... you know, an actually popular game?

You might as well say 'Timeshift sold poorly ergo PC gaming is dead lol consoles rule mang lol cheaper'.

Starcraft 2 or something.

Oh also, new DNF trailer this week.

LOL, DNF. Maybe they're finally doing something, but otherwise let's not get back to all those old jokes.

Shinova wrote:LOL, DNF. Maybe they're finally doing something, but otherwise let's not get back to all those old jokes.

No, I'm actually serious, heh.

Dunno if you'll be able to connect to the server, they were incap as of 5 mins ago. Here's a mirror of the roid rage teaser pic. New trailer is supposed to be tomorrow at noon.

The graphics remind me of FEAR, and are in dire need of some anti-aliasing.

CryTek is learning the hard way that most people don't have cutting edge systems and won't upgrade just to play your shooter. UT3's sales are surprising and a bit harder to explain. Maybe the multiplayer shooter market is just glutted. They all play pretty much the same.

Anyway, consoles have always offered comparable graphics at a fraction of the cost, and anyone who's been around for a while has seen the same "oh noes PC gaming is dying" bullshit over and over and over again.

Darth Massacrus wrote:http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14062 ... ticle.html




Is PC gaming actually dying yet?

Here we go again. Of course you know, the disappointing performance of 1 or 2 titles represents the ENTIRE INDUSTRY. Even if we disregard this anecdote, what makes you think PC gaming is as affected by consumer acceptance or popularity as consoles are? Why do people INSIST on treating PC gaming on the same terms as console gaming?

Frankly, I'm not surprised Crysis and UT3 are selling shit numbers. In fact I'm happy. CryTek needs to wake up and realize that not everyone has the disposable income of a Hollywood celebrity. Oh sure, if you were to ask Crytek why they thought Crysis was selling shit, they'd probably pull out the "oh noes PC gaming just isn't popular anymore" mantra too. It would never occur to them that their product might just SUCK.

UT3 is simply "Yet another Quake" shooter. And I am quite surprised Epic Games didn't figure out that the gameplay style of the series just isn't that popular anymore. Were they asleep when the sales figures for Gears of War came in?

I'm not surprised that either game isn't selling as well as the companies hoped.

Crysis is only playable by individuals with extreme high-end systems, so the pool of potential buyers is extremely limited.

As for UT3, it's a whole lotta fun, but Epic really dropped the ball with it. The User interface is crap compared to UT2k4, they've ditched assault maps, and their promise that Warfare would combine the best of assault and onslaught is bullshit of the highest order. Warfare is simply Onslaught 2.0.

It's like epic suddenly forgot about all the advances they made in the series and focused on remaking UT99 with shinier graphics.

Although knowing Epic, some of these things might be rectified when they release new patches and maps.

Crysis, which requires an unprecedented US$1500-$2500 in PC upgrades to play,

is complete FUD that has been going around since way before even the demo came out.
Yes, you can't play it if you're still using an old computer from a few years ago. But the cost in parts that's actually necessary to play does not even come close to approaching the kinds of figures that are being thrown about. A good dual core processor for $70, motherboard for another $70, 2gb of ram for $50, and maybe a HD3850 video card for $180? That's only like $370 there and that's almost a new computer; most people would only need to be upgrading a video card to play.

Though I am not trying to defend Crytek here-- I believe the requirements for Crysis are way out of proportion to what it actually delivers. However, these absurd exaggerations are still annoying.

I think my computer is slightly less than USD$1500 at the moment, and I am running Crysis quite comfortably at 1280x1024 with max out detail but at 4x AA.

What one really needs, is a 8800GT 512 MB at he minimum, which is what I have. A HD3870 should come close though.

i dunno, my old 8600 was running Crysis quite fine at middling settings. Now I've got an 8800 I simply can't be assed installing it again, because I hate corridor strollers.

The most expensive part of my computer is my monitor, but as with a console. My TV, however, cost four times as much as my monitor, and more than my entire PC put together.

I use my 19" LCD as my xbox360's monitor since it is lightyears ahead of any TV I can buy for less than a few thousand dollars AUD.

Who gives a shit if it isnt +40" in size, I'm sitting less than a foot away from the fucker, and it has better contrast, better viewing angles than virtually all of the comercial LCD TVs. And I dont actually watch TV (free to air) since they only carry episodes over 6 months old and air at stupid times and are never on at the same time 5 weeks in a row.

I played Crysis on some crazy uberbox at a gaming expo. Based around an imported Quad Core, 8 gig of DDR3 and what was apparently a Quad SLI 8800GTS setup (with ~3gb of video RAM).

It was fucking hot.

Now, I'm not willing to buy that much tech to play a game. But probably, like I did with Far Cry about 18 months after release I'll finally have a PC up to scratch to enjoy it. And then I'll play it.

The UT series tends to carry good long-term sales, soft launches can be easily attributed to the jam-packed holiday season, loaded with top-tier games. CoD4 is owning the online multiplayer market, and Bioshock and Mass Effect have a lot of single player gamers locked up.

These aren't bad games, but they're being released in the middle of a storm of awesome games.

Xisiqomelir wrote:

Shinova wrote:LOL, DNF. Maybe they're finally doing something, but otherwise let's not get back to all those old jokes.

No, I'm actually serious, heh.

Dunno if you'll be able to connect to the server, they were incap as of 5 mins ago. Here's a mirror of the roid rage teaser pic. New trailer is supposed to be tomorrow at noon.

Sorry to be off topic, but this made my day. Duke looks awesome, not quite as awesome as UT3, or Crysis, but still very good. I now have something else to think about while I'm at work!

Those games (especially Crysis) have system requirements that are simply far too high. I expect the PS3 version of UT2007 to sell considerably better at least initially.

Crysis, well, I doubt the company cares too much; the game is practically an extended tech demo to sell the engine. They didn't build that engine for the game, they built it to sell the engine to others.

Xon wrote:I use my 19" LCD as my xbox360's monitor since it is lightyears ahead of any TV I can buy for less than a few thousand dollars AUD.

Who gives a shit if it isnt +40" in size, I'm sitting less than a foot away from the fucker, and it has better contrast, better viewing angles than virtually all of the comercial LCD TVs. And I dont actually watch TV (free to air) since they only carry episodes over 6 months old and air at stupid times and are never on at the same time 5 weeks in a row.

Actually this is an interesting point: while housesitting for my parents I had to use a 22" LCD monitor instead of the TV (d'oh TV with DVI not D-sub). Even in shit like Mass Effect I noticed *far* better colour reproduction and contrast: whole details in dark areas were visible I'd never seen before. My 22" is even better, so there's something to using it like that.

I'm just a couch + console guy.

Praxis, UT3 runs *fine* on lowend hardware. It's quite scalable once you turn shit down. I was even surprised how scalable Crysis was (since CryTek's last engine sucked). You only need a hella machine if you want high details.

Seggybop wrote:Yes, you can't play it if you're still using an old computer from a few years ago. But the cost in parts that's actually necessary to play does not even come close to approaching the kinds of figures that are being thrown about. A good dual core processor for $70, motherboard for another $70, 2gb of ram for $50, and maybe a HD3850 video card for $180? That's only like $370 there and that's almost a new computer; most people would only need to be upgrading a video card to play.

Still, that's four hundred dollars. A lot of money for something that isn't essential. I expect Crysis' primary buyer segment to consist of 18-30 year olds, students who on average don't often have money to throw around. But you're absolutely right. It's not exactly unheard of that you might need a new(ish) computer to play the latest high-end game, is it?

I don't really understand the criticism that the requirements are too high either. So what? It's not like you NEED to be able to play a specific game. You don't always get what you would want in life, and players often seem to forget this. Who says Crytek is obliged by anything to make an amendment to reduce system requirements? If they don't reach the sales goal because the consumers don't have computers that meet the requirements, it's their own fault and loss.

Oberleutnant wrote: I don't really understand the criticism that the requirements are too high either. So what? It's not like you NEED to be able to play a specific game. You don't always get what you would want in life, and players often seem to forget this. Who says Crytek is obliged by anything to make an amendment to reduce system requirements? If they don't reach the sales goal because the consumers don't have computers that meet the requirements, it's their own fault and loss.

Far Cry curbstomped the capabilities of every gaming system in the world when it first came out, too. I think it's just how Crytek operates, right on the bleeding edge of consumer tech, and sometimes over it.

Are people these days buying games or real time 3D renderers ?

Oberleutnant wrote:I expect Crysis' primary buyer segment to consist of 18-30 year olds, students who on average don't often have money to throw around.

The biggest gaming demography for this type of game is 25-35 year olds with fulltime jobs.

Maybe more people are like me. I didn't see the need to buy Crysis, as I'd play it once and never go back. I simply borrowed it, finished it, gave it back.

Xisiqomelir wrote:No, I'm actually serious, heh.

Dunno if you'll be able to connect to the server, they were incap as of 5 mins ago. Here's a mirror of the roid rage teaser pic. New trailer is supposed to be tomorrow at noon.

I'm glad they invented normal mapping while DNF was in development, so that they can show us Duke Nukem's sweaty veins as they were meant to be seen.

Is PC gaming actually dying yet?

Fuck no. It's just that those games are pirated, not brought. Most gamers hate EA and I doubt that Unreal Torment 3 is really that appealing. You see, people are not interested in buying the same fucking game as the previous one, just with shinier graphics.

Besides, graphics are overrated, especially 3D graphics. We are at the point where developers have access to more graphics features then they can take advantage of.

Let's take The Witcher or Aquaria for example. One of the best games released lately, one is a 2D game with allot of special effects and the other one runs on a heavily modified Neverwinter Nights engine.

Are people these days buying games or real time 3D renderers ?

That is actually a very good question.