UT3 PC Sells 33,995, Crysis Sells 86,633 in US in November

Naikon

conzymaher wrote: »

ha sli......

Again you fail because PC Gamers know whether or not their machine has a pci-express slot? Like I said PC gaming isn't for everyone, and those that aren't able for it should just buy a console, but those who are able for it can reap the rewards... It isn't complicated I mean back to the bicycle analogy, A car seems a lot more complex to use at first, but once you know how, its a lot better than a bike.....


Oh and btw, XBL is down atm

I agree, PC gaming is not as "difficult" as it's made out to be.
Building a pc is like expensive lego construction, setting up a home LAN is a piece of cake these days, and if you aren't capable of maintaining a windows machine, you should be nowhere near a personal computer.

If average joe had to get a game working on Linux through WINE or something, then I would agree about the difficulty and "issues", but pc gaming almost seems too trivial these days to be perfectly honest.
Any game which states it will run on a specific architecture with the minimum to recommended hardware, is a guarantee that no catastrophic issues will arise across a range of different configurations.

Quality assurance never irons out every issue, but its good enough if a proper fix is on the way.
Call of Duty 4 plays very well on my 3 year old system, the only issue being the absence of a patch.
Btw, a small LAN kicks playing on a split screen console "with the mates" by a country mile.

Blowfish

mcgovern wrote:

Hence more people buy consoles, hence more games are bought on consoles and less on PCs which is the topic of the thread.

Once again, the number of units shifted is not valid comparison to determine the size of the userbase. It's even less valid when you start to take into consideration the 'casual' market who buy their PC for something else, but will end up playing flash games etc.

mcgovern

Blowfish wrote: »

Once again, the number of units shifted is not valid comparison to determine the size of the userbase. It's even less valid when you start to take into consideration the 'casual' market who buy their PC for something else, but will end up playing flash games etc.

Once again thats not the point at all.
I didn't say "more people play on consoles than on PC", I said more people play consoles i.e. than previously.
Which is true.

@conzymaher
Please learn to read. I said your average joe does not know if his PC has SLI, not PC Gamers. 2nd or 3rd time I've had to tell you this now?

And all you PC gamers seem to be missing the point of the thread. Its not how PC are better than consoles, its why PC games sales are slowing, the ease of use of consoles with most top games being on them, and the changing market for games, being major reasons.

Blowfish

mcgovern wrote: »

Once again thats not the point at all.
I didn't say "more people play on consoles than on PC", I said more people play consoles i.e. than previously.

While conveniently ignoring the fact that more people play games on the PC than previously.
Which is also true.

papu

mcgovern wrote: »

And all you PC gamers seem to be missing the point of the thread. Its not how PC are better than consoles, its why PC games sales are slowing, the ease of use of consoles with most top games being on them, and the changing market for games, being major reasons.

no its just that more people are buying games for the console , also the HUGE pirate side of the pc with torrents cracks and iso's proably 2 or 3 times the sales away from that games. the pc is a far easier medium to pirate games from.

L31mr0d

papu wrote: »

no its just that more people are buying games for the console , also the HUGE pirate side of the pc with torrents cracks and iso's proably 2 or 3 times the sales away from that games. the pc is a far easier medium to pirate games from.

see my view on this is, PC game companies pretty much have multiplayer sewn up when it comes to piracy, ergo, you can't play most pirated games online as they usually require some form of online activation, which protects against using keygens for the S/N. People have a way of getting around it using unofficial servers, but these are usually P2P with no dedicated server so the pings can be awful.

What I don't understand is why the game developers don't make the online side of the games better, I mean TF2 is a shining example of great multiplayer design. I don't understand why more games don't have an online co-op side that is as if not better than the single player. This way it forces people to register their copy of the game and reduces the piracy.

steviec

L31mr0d wrote: »

What I don't understand is why the game developers don't make the online side of the games better, I mean TF2 is a shining example of great multiplayer design. I don't understand why more games don't have an online co-op side that is as if not better than the single player. This way it forces people to register their copy of the game and reduces the piracy.

That's easier said than done. TF2 took, what, 6 years to perfect? And multiplayer games take up a large chunk of player's time. People aren't playing UT3 or Crysis online because TF2 is better. However, people will still play other single player games even if HL2 is better, because once you complete it you move onto something new.

So making a big multiplayer game is no small challenge.

papu

steviec wrote: »

That's easier said than done. TF2 took, what, 6 years to perfect? And multiplayer games take up a large chunk of player's time. People aren't playing UT3 or Crysis online because TF2 is better. However, people will still play other single player games even if HL2 is better, because once you complete it you move onto something new.

So making a big multiplayer game is no small challenge.

also saying that , tf2? wonder how many copies that sole , vavle wont give numbers out , i bought cod 4 and biosshock over steam , so my purchases arent figured into those sales charts ;/

steviec

I'd imagine Orange Box sold in huge numbers compared to other PC games.

Probably bigger numbers on 360 though.

OctavarIan

papu wrote: »

if that happens everytime you wanna play a game , there is somthing seriously wrong , thats like like getting into the car and the steering wheel falls off .

90% of those error messages crash's ect are user based , if you give someone an xbox and tell them go so set it up , register on xbl and play a game , to parent or a 10year old kid thats a no go tbh

I never said that they happen every time you play a game. Some games are released chock full of bugs (The Witcher, BF 2142) that ruin the player's enjoyment. Some games require you to download the latest patches before you can play online. Some games just plum don't work on some systems (although these are rare nowadays). Consoles are just much easier for the average gamer to use.

Actually about 35% are user based. I know a few kids with xboxes, they don't have any problems on xbox live or setting it up. Of course I can't talk for the majority in that case, but it's easier setting up a pc, then installing and patching a game. (Faster too) Parents are mostly clueless, both about consoles and computers in general. (Using Office apps and browsing the web doesn't count as knowing anything about computers.)

0ubliette

L31mr0d wrote: »

still doesn't change the fact that

PC > Console... with a cherry on top *booyah*

Sure it is. I guess thats why Crysis got all those 10/10 reviews. It did get 10/10 across the board, didnt it?
Enjoy playing the same 5 MP games for the next 6 years.

As a final word on this, i love my PC gaming. Day of defeat source has provided me with some of the best gaming memories ive ever had. Ditto Battlefield Vietnam and counter strike source. I too built my PC from scratch and have tweaked and upgraded it ever since. However unlike some people, im not blinkered by my KB and mouse and as 2007 has been possibly the leanest year for PC gaming that i can remember, with what used to be PC exclusives like HL2 going multiplatform, can see how limiting yourself to one platform because 'its got per-pixel accuracy and doesnt take 2 seconds to turn around!' and '22" is greater that 640x480' blah blah blah is not a viable option if youre an actual gamer. If you enjoy games, you go multiplatform. If you enjoy tweaking and maxing out FPS, get a job in tech support.

Blowfish

OctavarIan wrote: »

I never said that they happen every time you play a game. Some games are released chock full of bugs (The Witcher, BF 2142) that ruin the player's enjoyment. Some games require you to download the latest patches before you can play online.

That has absolutely nothing to do with PC's, and everything to do with lazy development studios not releasing fully functional games.

conzy

0ubliette wrote: »

Sure it is. I guess thats why Crysis got all those 10/10 reviews. It did get 10/10 across the board, didnt it?
Enjoy playing the same 5 MP games for the next 6 years.

im not blinkered by my KB and mouse and as 2007 has been possibly the leanest year for PC gaming that i can remember...

ahahahahaha

2007 is the PC gaming renaissance! one sec *Deep Breath*

Crysis
Bioshock
Unreal Tournament 3
HL2 Episode 2
Portal
Team Fortress 2
Call of Duty 4
World in Conflict
more Company of Heroes
Command and Conquer: Tiberium Wars
Enemy Territory Quake Wars
Supreme Commander + expansion
new WoW
Hellgate London
Stalker
Tabula Rasa
Oblivion Expansion
new Guild Wars
Universe at War

Not to mention the hundreds of awesome mods and bonus content we get for free \o/ Good luck getting Microsoft to release that chastity belt they have on the 360....

And about multi platform, why? The only console game that has made me want to buy a console in recent years is MGS4, new GTA and Burnout all of which wont be out for weeks / months

robby^5

Blowfish wrote: »

That has absolutely nothing to do with PC's, and everything to do with lazy development studios not releasing fully functional games.

You're sort of missing the point here. This isn't about what is wrong with the PC as a gaming platform, we're talking about reasons for the lackluster sales as of late. Poor support from games developers is an obvious one.

With a console game, sure it can take time to get games patched, but its a hell of a lot easier to get patched, you're pretty much spoon fed patches.

Also the point made about games not working with certain systems is a good one, because with consoles there is a universal standard that all players can expect, with PC gaming it varies depending on what system you have and how good it is. I know a lot of people who simply cant play some games, they'd need to shell out a lot of cash to buy a new system.

All in all, both have pros and cons, although a lot of the console cons mentioned seem kinda moot coming from pc-fanboys who are really just fighting the pc-gaming corner for the sake of it, and not to make any valid points (judging from the amount of negativity shown towards playing/owning a console)

AlmightyCushion

robby^5 wrote: »

With a console game, sure it can take time to get games patched, but its a hell of a lot easier to get patched, you're pretty much spoon fed patches.

I'd have to disagree with this. One of my friends has an xbox 360 and a laptop. His 360 isn't online (ports are blocked) and he doesn't have the hard drive. If he buys a buggy game and needs to get a patch, how does he install it?

If he gets a buggy game on his laptop and he needs a patch it's fairly easy for him to get the patch installed.

Creamy Goodness

robby^5 wrote: »

With a console game, sure it can take time to get games patched, but its a hell of a lot easier to get patched, you're pretty much spoon fed patches.

sorry to go completely off the point here but why the **** do console games need to be patched? fair enough if it adds new content, but more often or not it's just to fix bugs that should of been found at the testing phase.

with the advent of console game patching i fear that a lot of game will be rushed out to meet certain deadlines with the response of "well we can patch it later".


ARGH!!!

robby^5

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I'd have to disagree with this. One of my friends has an xbox 360 and a laptop. His 360 isn't online (ports are blocked) and he doesn't have the hard drive. If he buys a buggy game and needs to get a patch, how does he install it?

Firstly, Microsoft does certify games before they can be released, so theres a certain level of quality assured. I myself have never encountered a buggy console game that would do things a buggy pc game would do like crashing. (not saying crashing doesn't happen, but its usually hardware related)

Secondly, these problems you mention have nothing to do with patching being bad on the 360, these are isolated problems. He should have known when making the consumer choice not to buy a hard drive that you cant get new content, its pretty much implied, also its either his or his isp's fault that the ports are blocked. Oooh I'll also add that offline patching happens with XBox 360, things like dashboard updates are added with new games, ie. when I bought Ace Combat my xbox updated from the disc.

I could ask you to same question really, what if i have a buggy pc game but my laptop isn't online, how then do i get a patch? So you're point is moot tbh.

Cremo wrote: »

sorry to go completely off the point here but why the **** do console games need to be patched? fair enough if it adds new content, but more often or not it's just to fix bugs that should of been found at the testing phase.

More often than not its just to add new content. But then again, this is would be down to bad development, the patching process is still great.

Cremo wrote: »

with the advent of console game patching i fear that a lot of game will be rushed out to meet certain deadlines with the response of "well we can patch it later".

Isn't that EA's motto?

Creamy Goodness

but the whole reason i would buy a console would to be to get away from what some people call "hassle" of patching games on a pc. pretty pointless if i have to do the same on a console.

i see the reasoning for patches on pc's as the permutations on hardware are sky high but with a console you have one permutation of hardware

also sucks if i buy a new game and bring it to a mates house i have to patch up before playing, if he has no internet then what then?

anyways to cut a long story short, patches on consoles are like ronnies on women.

robby^5

I really wouldn't worry, its non existent. The last major patch i heard of was for Orange Box, to sort out lag with xbox live play, there not so much patches as they are updates. Like theres no different versions of games running, you wont run into that problem.

I haven't needed to patch any of the games ive bought for 360 this year, except for new content.

papu

no but ye do have dashboard updates..

Creamy Goodness

robby^5 wrote: »

I really wouldn't worry, its non existent. The last major patch i heard of was for Orange Box, to sort out lag with xbox live play, there not so much patches as they are updates. Like theres no different versions of games running, you wont run into that problem.

I haven't needed to patch any of the games ive bought for 360 this year, except for new content.

well fair enough i can't speak for the 360 but this weekend i went out and bought two games for two different consoles.

assassin's creed ps3.

mario galaxy wii.

before i could play mario galaxy i had to do a system update of the wii, fine enough the system update was included on the disc.

same thing for assassin's creed system update needed and i was going mad like christ i only want to play the game, you can then imagine how angry i got when it said "no, you can't play you need to download assassin's creed patch v1.xx or whatever" it took like 30 minutes to download install and then play.

consoles were designed for simplicity sake these patches and updates shouldn't be required before you play the game, you should just get a nice message saying there are updates for this game, give you a change log and then ask you would you like to update the game.

maybe i had bad luck in picking two games, but still my point stands firm.

robby^5

Wow wouldnt let ya play without the patch? Thats kinda ****, that doesn't happen with 360, usually ask if you wish to download content, and if ya don't you just go about your merry way.

In the end, this sort of thing is down to developers, and it doesn't say much for them if they cant make a game work with one console with one set of software/hardware.

papu wrote: »

no but ye do have dashboard updates..

Do you even read my posts or what? Yes 360 has dashboard updates I mentioned that, they are available online or offline and take all of 2 minutes to complete, If you find that to be a problem, then you must have the patience of a saint to deal with pc games. The dashboard updates are actually something most live-gamers look forward too, the last one gave Europe down loadable movies.

Blowfish

robby^5 wrote: »

With a console game, sure it can take time to get games patched, but its a hell of a lot easier to get patched, you're pretty much spoon fed patches.

I'm not seeing how it is much easier for consoles. With consoles it's, load up, see "new patch available....downloading...done", with PC's it's exactly the same.

robby^5 wrote:

Also the point made about games not working with certain systems is a good one, because with consoles there is a universal standard that all players can expect, with PC gaming it varies depending on what system you have and how good it is. I know a lot of people who simply cant play some games, they'd need to shell out a lot of cash to buy a new system.

Agreed. It's not a good idea however to extrapolate that PC games are low, while basing it on one game (Crysis) that the developers gimped by limiting the market they can sell to, and another game (UT3) that the developers gimped by not actually creating a particularly good game.

Speaking of the game industry in general, it seems that they are *finally* starting to realise that the "ooh shiny graphics" part isn't as big of a selling point as they used to think. Some of them *cough*Crytek*cough* haven't actually managed to get to the point of realising this yet, where as others (e.g. Nintendo and Blizzard) have.

L31mr0d

Blowfish wrote: »

Some of them *cough*Crytek*cough* haven't actually managed to get to the point of realising this yet, where as others (e.g. Nintendo and Blizzard) have.

the only good thing about this is that Crytek HAVE created a fairly good game engine with an excellent map designer that other developers that actually know something about storyline and gameplay could build on. Like what Dark Messiah did for the Source engine, or Prey did for the Doom 3 engine.

I could actually see a lot of community singleplayer mods being released as well (see Blackmesa, maybe a FarCry remake in the CryEngine2?). Most of the BF maps have already been moved over to the CryEngine2. Plus there have already been a few games in development that have licensed the cryengine2.

muppetkiller

Sorry guys if this has been mentioned before but there's too much ranting in here for a proper discussion.
The simple reason for higher console game sales at the moment is the simple fact that these are new consoles and the games are being bought alongside them.
I mean Wii Sales Over 1.2 Mil this christmas and PS3 Sales 700k...most people will snap up a game with them ...Mario Galaxy most likely with Wii (as it will be highly recommended) same with Assassins Creed/COD4 etc on the PS3.
PC Sales will not be bought with a sole gaming reason 99% of the time, So they will not have the same level of sales ...I'd say a better comparrison would be PS2 game sales. what PS2 game beat Crysis on the PC this year ?

steviec

muppetkiller wrote: »

Sorry guys if this has been mentioned before but there's too much ranting in here for a proper discussion.
The simple reason for higher console game sales at the moment is the simple fact that these are new consoles and the games are being bought alongside them.
I mean Wii Sales Over 1.2 Mil this christmas and PS3 Sales 700k...most people will snap up a game with them ...Mario Galaxy most likely with Wii (as it will be highly recommended) same with Assassins Creed/COD4 etc on the PS3.
PC Sales will not be bought with a sole gaming reason 99% of the time, So they will not have the same level of sales ...I'd say a better comparrison would be PS2 game sales. what PS2 game beat Crysis on the PC this year ?

That's not really a very good comparison considering the PS2 is losing support and it's sales are way, way down on what they were a couple of years ago.

That said, I don't have figures to hand but I'd be very surprised if a lot of PS2 games didn't outsell the best on PC because even with sales down there's a massive market there and there's still been some big releases on the console this year like Final Fantasy XII, Okami and of course the likes of FIFA.

robby^5

PS2 Games might not be selling well, although i have no idea the sales fugures arent regualry publicised anymore, but the console still sold more than any other consoles this fiscal year.

Its a good point that console sales @ xmas = console games sales too. After all there arent very many parents buying their kids €1000+ rigs this christmas.

Jazzy

i tell all the moaners and whiners on PC MP games to get back to xbox live

Live is good in theory but i find it almost offensive to play certain games on due to 80% of the users.
Its all pretty much the same though and it all comes down to preference of games tbh.
and PC multiplayer games are a doddle to setup tbh. im a complete idiot when it comes to technical things and I seem to be able to manage to get around easy enough on the PC. they also offer more depth then console MP games as u can have different mods and set up the games far easier with more options attached.
again, though - its down to preference of game. when it comes to being available for both tho the PC wins hands down

robby^5

I think the main problem with xbox live users being having the reputation of being 80% annoying kids is that everyone on live has a mic, everyone. Cause we all know you get your fair share of idiots in online games, mic spam etc. but its much easier for this to happen on live unfortnately

I rarely have voice enabled, except for a choice few games that are idiot free such as ace combat 6.

papu

robby^5 wrote: »

I think the main problem with xbox live users being having the reputation of being 80% annoying kids is that everyone on live has a mic, everyone. Cause we all know you get your fair share of idiots in online games, mic spam etc. but its much easier for this to happen on live unfortnately

I rarely have voice enabled, except for a choice few games that are idiot free such as ace combat 6.

main pc mic spam = css

but it has a really handy mute button so pc online gaming is voice spam free \0/