Hehe. Thank you for the laugh. Over and out.
Hehe. Thank you for the laugh. Over and out.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
Brown Paper, white paper, stickin' together with the tape, the tape of looove....THE STICKY STUUUF OOOH YEAAHEAHH!!
Uh, no. It's the pirates' fault. The industry's extreme
copy protection is a direct response to all the piracy.
It's frustrating as hell; it sucks, but put the blame on
the pirates for forcing the industry to do this.
Or just abandon PC gaming and focus on consoles
which more and more PC developers are starting to
do because they get screwed over by pirates.
Last edited by Cheeze-It; 03-18-2008 at 10:35 AM.
Staying away from General.
Last edited by maxorator; 03-18-2008 at 12:06 PM.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
Lol, consoles don't stop piracy. Especially since they no longer rely on system specific cartridges. Console users generally just know less about how computer systems work than PC users do, thats all.
Console games are just as prone to piracy as computers. Just that the people that are technically saavy enough to rip a game are generally mroe interested in computers. Force them to play on consoles and the problem will just move. Its not because they have magic architecture, its just a matter of statistics.
As somebody who works on commercial code with lots of complicated licensing features, I have to disagree. The pirates are doing what is natural. Data can be copied, and they copy it freely. What is unnatural is expecting to be able to limit the spread of information in an environment which is fundamentally set up to allow the spread of information.
I do not know of any modern company which has been put out of business or even provably impacted by pirate activities. But I do know of several companies which have suffered because users were unwilling to tolerate onerous licensing mechanisms. They will switch to a product which is easier to install and use.
I have more than once paid for a piece of software, then downloaded and installed the crack so that I don't have to suffer through license problems. The authors of those software programs are lucky that I decided to be honest, because the "paying for it" part is completely optional.
(My personal income directly depends on people purchasing our products instead of pirating them.)
While few companies ever went broke making console games, PC games are where the real money is. By and large PC gamers buy more games per user per anum than console gamers. I buy around 20-30 games a year myself.
This is really what is at the heart of the problem. As I said before any in-place security measures intended to prevent the cracking of a software are always be either insufficient or patchy, no matter what some noobs in this thread may advertise.
The open architecture of today's computers is not lenient on any attempts to protect any kind of business related rights. This however never stopped anyone from making money. On the contrary, some companies emerged and become colossus in the industry pushed by crackers and payed by legit consumers.
Most of the money that is made doesn't even come from direct sales. As a company grows it becomes less and less affected by crackers. And when it is small, the more crackers interested in their products the more exposure they must/will have. Many shareware developers I talked too throughout the years have very interesting things to say about the cracking of their products when you ask them privately.
I'm not advertising crackers are an healthy addition to the industry. However, in the presence of a problem that is simply not going to go away, one better try to make the most of it. Or at least understand the phenomena for what it is.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
Huh? Is that why they're moving away from PC games?
More on more embrace consoles, and more leave the PC in dust.
The PC market is hard to develop for because all computers are different. That means buggy software since companies cannot spend eternal money on ironing out the bugs.
Plus the PC is not a fixed platform, so the developers has to ensure it works on a minimum specs and a recommended/maximum specs, which again, means more time, more complexity. Not to mention they have to develop for both ATI and nVidia.
And because computers are so expensive, people cannot afford to upgrade all the time, which makes all the new games crawl or not work at all, which is another issue.
All in all, this is killing the PC market. In fact, some companies have banded together to save it from shriveling up. No, it won't shrivel up completely due to games like Oblivion and its healthy community, but other games are an entirely different manner.
Keep dreaming, PC's will always outperform consoles in both total cost of ownership and performance. Go try to upgrade your PS1 to run newer games, not goin to happen at any price. Most games don't require you to have the latest and greatest hardware unless you want to run every setting at its maximum. Computer graphics blow away anything you can get on a console regardless of any argument to the contrary, its just facts. Consoles have a low res monitor, TV is approx 720 x 480 IIRC (its actually some oddball number near that), which is why they can keep the frame rate up, not because they are superior. PC gamers don't want to run things that low, most modern PC graphics cards wont even support anything below 1024x768.
The whole PC vs Console argument needs to be added to the "List Of Horses That Have Been Sufficiently Beaten And Will No Longer Be Discussed".
Last edited by abachler; 03-18-2008 at 04:38 PM.
No, a console will always be cheaper than a PC.
This is true however.and performance
It is not a problem, since all games will run on the consoles they are released for, so there is no need to upgrade anything.Go try to upgrade your PS1 to run newer games, not goin to happen at any price.
Ever heard of HD? Both the Xbox360 and the PS3 supports full HD, 1920x1080...Consoles have a low res monitor, TV is approx 720 x 480 IIRC (its actually some oddball number near that), which is why they can keep the frame rate up, not because they are superior.
This just isn't true, my Radeon X1600Pro has no problems with 800x600, or 640x480 for that matter, if i could find a game that would go lower, it'd probably cope with that too, why shouldn't it?PC gamers don't want to run things that low, most modern PC graphics cards wont even support anything below 1024x768.
Last edited by Neo1; 03-18-2008 at 04:48 PM.
How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.