Something I don't get

[Kain]

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

[Mangler]

Try going to a console dominated site.

[daPhoenix]

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by daPhoenix

[CoolNitro]

Both setups are roughly the same in terms of gaming that is if you disregard graphics settings and hardware, physically playing the game is the same experience is what I mean.

Where a console however takes a lead is in it's accessibility and user friendliness, any person even one who has never used a console would easily figure out that upon sticking the CD into the drive you can start playing a game.
PC's don't have that option, even though the process of setting up a game and launching it may seem simple to anyone used to using a PC it's damn near impossible for someone who doesn't use one.


Simply put consoles make gaming easy so they get the large pool of people who just want simple gaming machines no more no less.
As for the whole Cod thing I think the word sheep comes to mind for the people who are still buying into that franchise.



I personally prefer using a PC to play games simply because the type of games available on consoles are generally not what I like playing and for the most part I feel the controller only really works well with those same games that I don't really play, with those genres being third person action, racing, and platform style games. As for the types of games that I do play the FPS, RTS, and RPG's for the first two being forced to use a joystick to play either genre just always felt stupid and slow and for those games that do play better with a pad you nearly always have the option of using one with a PC if need be.

[Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Kain

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

Mcdonalds sells a lot more then any other kind of restaurant

[sumpwa]

Justin Bieber sells a lot more albums than other musicians.

[Lazy8s]

Originally Posted by Kain

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

Disregard anything anyone says about it anywhere forever.

Form your own opinion. I refused to buy a console for years, finally broke down and bought an Xbox last week. Wish I had done it ages ago.

It isn't that no one's opinion matters, I would just rather form my own on what's acceptable to me and what isn't.

[ThirdEye]

The words opinion and ignorance are interchangeable.

[Sundance Kid V2]

Originally Posted by sumpwa

Justin Bieber sells a lot more albums than other musicians.

Bieber rulez

[jolle]

They keep widening the gaming audience, so then the old audience becomes a smaller percentage, and then all of a sudden they´re "too few" to matter, even though they are as many or more as before, just a smaller set of a larger audience.

This forum is probably largely a fairly old subset of gamers, which are a minority now.
Now the talk is that consoles arent viable cause they´re so "hardcore", since the new gaming audience now includes every asshat with a smartphone that plays angry birds on the bus.
So now you´re actively loosing money by not catering to them, and by "scaring them away with a complicated controller" etc..
Think that is a kinda skewed math but hey.. real games cost money to make, angry birds doesnt (in a relative sense)

But anyway, the PC is flat out a better gaming platform now, alot of console centric people seem to play the games on PC since the consoles are so old, just stick a 360 controller in there and go.
It´s probably cheaper to get a decent gaming PC now then ever, which helps a bit.
Devil May Cry is a good example of high res and a **** ton of FPS compared to the tired old console versions.
But that is largely cause the console generation stuck around for so long, as soon as the new consoles roll out that´ll probably revitalize those who acctually had a gaming PC and went back to that.
I would also guess the PC enhanced versions of late has something to do with getting peoples fingers wet with DX11 GPUs and x86 for the upcoming generation.

But better doesnt mean more popular or more sales.
1) a decent PC is more expensive, and upgrading it adds further costs.
2) it´s tricker to get a decent PC into a living room setting, where a lot of people prefer to play their games now.
3) some of the average Xbox COD players would probably freak out facing any sort of issues with a PC, a lot of people assume you need to be a nuclear physicist to deal with PCs since they dont really know anything about it.

So technically superior, better, but not as popular.

[Sazar]

Originally Posted by Kain

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

Lowest common denominator, costs, marketing, consistent experience.

[Akumajo]

Originally Posted by Kain

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

When you refer to Battlefield 3 versus Call of Duty keep in mind that Battlefield 3 became a technological masterpiece with that one game meanwhile Call of Duty has been consistently year after year making annual game releases and simply catering to their very limited gameplay, graphics and tech.

Basically Call of Duty has been established for a much longer time and they also don't really offer much in terms of tech advancements since the game is literally stuck in the Quake III days and even pre-Halo days that said, its much easier to play CoD and I have found many non-gamers who easily get into CoD like many women who never used to play videogames before.

Consoles easily sell more than PCs for a very simple reason, consoles are much easier to set up and play a videogame than a PC, its less of a commitment to just buy a game disc, pop it into your Xbox360 or PS3 or Wii U and just play than it is to do the same for a PC.

Obviously PCs can boast much better graphics but that does not mean that the people you will be playing against online will have a similar experience to yours.

You can also ask yourself why a game like Crysis 1 and Warhead which had 64bit executable and Dx10 support way back in 2008 then turned around and lost that with their sequels... and its not really simple to blame "consoles" but the fact that not only did Microsoft base their console on Dx9 in 2005 but that Call of Duty simply outsold Crysis, just like its outselling B3.

Better still you should look up sales stats.

[nutcrackr]

call of duty is like a way of life for consoles. I don't think anybody would have expected it's rise to popularity after COD 4 hit. It just kept getting bigger. There is just something about the series, the characters, the multiplayer that was so appealing to such a big group of gamers. There are signs that the sales are waning, but it will be a while before the series is on its death bed. BF3 took some market share back from CoD, EA sees it as a raging success. I don't want to get into the whole console vs pc debate, but one of the reasons CoD is preferred over BF is because it's simple and constrained.

[Alientank]

COD is straight forward killing. Appeases the masses.

[AdelphiaX]

Originally Posted by Kain

Everywhere on the Internet, nearly everyone is saying that PC > consoles and nearly everyone is saying Battlefield 3 > Call of Duty. However, the results are consoles sell more and Call of Duty sells more.

Why are the results so different to what everyone on the Internet says? Do the "noobs" not post their opinions on the Internet?

It seems, regardless of PC or Console, just don't ask what a game is like and you'll be fine.

Play what seems appealing to your time/lifestyle and let it be fun.

[mabran]

Originally Posted by sumpwa

Justin Bieber sells a lot more albums than other musicians.

Don't insult musicians but including Bieber in the same statement.

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by ThirdEye

The words opinion and ignorance are interchangeable.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

[Sundance Kid V2]

Average (make it 90%) of population don't know how a pc works etc. They don't want to spend money on upgrades. They don't want to learn how it works (network, internet etc). They just want to plug and play.

That is where consoles comes in. Solves all the problems. And now the masses can plug and play.

But now games can't be too difficult because you'll lose you audience. Audience wants to play quick , see lot of effects (COD) and have badge(s)/trophies for their game play...

So the devs gives them that.. playing a movie while pressing some buttons to win.

[ThirdEye]

Originally Posted by caveman-jim

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

[Akumajo]

Originally Posted by Sundance Kid V2

Average (make it 90%) of population don't know how a pc works etc. They don't want to spend money on upgrades. They don't want to learn how it works (network, internet etc). They just want to plug and play.

That is where consoles comes in. Solves all the problems. And now the masses can plug and play.

But now games can't be too difficult because you'll lose you audience. Audience wants to play quick , see lot of effects (COD) and have badge(s)/trophies for their game play...

So the devs gives them that.. playing a movie while pressing some buttons to win.

This!

Also the other problem is that most newbies WANT to win so if the learnin curve is a bit high to steep... even for seasoned veterans of Call of Duty when they try Battlefield 3 they may not like it that the building crumbled, that someone used a vehicle, etc and they will go back to CoD... and when CoD doesn't really try to push the gameplay or tech then...

We will see what happens in the next gen since the consoles are moar power but until the games are retail we won't know for sure how much certain franchises adapt, change or stay the same...