System Wars is a one of a kind destination where gamers can discuss, rant, and debate about systems, platforms, handhelds and the games. Not many people survive System Wars. The mightiest system warriors back up their arguments with facts.
Rules are simple:
- Read the Terms of Use and System Wars Survival Guide.
- Must be Level 10 or higher to create topics.
- Keep your discussions around what belongs here: platforms, games, developers, publishers, and stats.
- Don't quote more than one image in your post.
- Do NOT post or bump extremely abusive discussions (adult material/illegal activities/illegal advertising/etc).
PC has no AAAA Game in the History of Gaming
- Jul 10, 2010 6:25 am GMT
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Review (PC)
"Modern Warfare 2 boasts an exhilarating campaign, engaging cooperative play, and addictive multiplayer, but the high price and limited multiplayer features may tarnish its appeal."
But it's identical to the consoles multiplayer, and the same price too.... so why score lower?
From the review:
- Costs more, has fewer multiplayer features than other PC shooters
- Campaign is short
- Plot is muddled and inelegant.
- Jul 10, 2010 6:28 am GMThere I posted something about this very same discussion to someone else... please disregard any smart u-know-what remarks...they were intended for someone elsecalvinsora wrote:ducati101 wrote:I'll say again, the best recent example is MW2. Better graphics, faster loading, better framerate, choice of controls on the PC version yet it scores a little lower than the console version. Because it has (for PC users at least) limited and basic online functions.calvinsora wrote:
I'm just going by the review and things I've heard from others. Bugs don't always pop up for everyone, but the reasons for it being scored lower is in the review GS wrote. 'Tis not a secret.
That is basing it all on MP, though, which I find is a irrelevant feature. Regardless, this does not prove that it is a general policy to have higher standards on the PC. Should I give mediocre PC games a good score just because I do not like the overall library?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if you bothered to actually read the PC review.. you will know that the reason MW2 PC scored lower than the console versions is because it was being judge against other pc games... for example :
MW2 PC REVIEW
The Bad
- Costs more, has fewer multiplayer features than other PC shooters
- Campaign is short
- Plot is muddled and inelegant.
again incase you didnt see
The Bad
- Costs more, has fewer multiplayer features than other PC shooters
- Campaign is short
- Plot is muddled and inelegant.
not only that but evidence of pc having different standards or higher standards..call it what you will.. is apparent
"If you compare Modern Warfare 2 on the PC to its console counterparts, the game is every bit as awesome and enjoyable. Yet when compared to other online shooters on the PC, the multiplayer component is decidedly limited."
"Furthermore, there is no support for user-created content, so rather than enjoying free mods and community maps, PC users will have to pay for downloadable content. And the money issues don't stop there: Modern Warfare 2 costs $10 more than most full-price PC games."now the following describes MW2 as a PC FPS compared to other PC FPS games *this was written only on the MW2 PC review*
"Though it features a robust variety of playlists in which to ply your deadly trade, Modern Warfare 2's competitive multiplayer is still limited compared to modern standards and will likely disappoint many hardcore shooter fans"now when talking about the console version the reviewer said this*console review*
"With a robust variety of playlists in which to ply your deadly trade, Modern Warfare 2's competitive multiplayer is the best in the series and one of the best available on consoles"
and with that I leave you with evidence that the PC version was indeed knocked down in score because it was being compared to other PC fps games.. thus pc having higher standards or different.. whatever you call it
.... seacrest out
Edited on Jul 10, 2010 6:29 am GMT
[QUOTE="calvinsora"]
[QUOTE="ducati101"][QUOTE="calvinsora"]
I'm just going by the review and things I've heard from others. Bugs don't always pop up for everyone, but the reasons for it being scored lower is in the review GS wrote. 'Tis not a secret.
[/QUOTE] I'll say again, the best recent example is MW2. Better graphics, faster loading, better framerate, choice of controls on the PC version yet it scores a little lower than the console version. Because it has (for PC users at least) limited and basic online functions.[/QUOTE]
That is basing it all on MP, though, which I find is a irrelevant feature. Regardless, this does not prove that it is a general policy to have higher standards on the PC. Should I give mediocre PC games a good score just because I do not like the overall library?
[/QUOTE] here I posted something about this very same discussion to someone else... please disregard any smart u-know-what remarks...they were intended for someone else:oops:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if you bothered to actually read the PC review.. you will know that the reason MW2 PC scored lower than the console versions is because it was being judge against other pc games... for example :
MW2 PC REVIEW
The Bad
- Costs more, has fewer multiplayer features than other PC shooters
- Campaign is short
- Plot is muddled and inelegant.
again incase you didnt see
The Bad
- Costs more, has fewer multiplayer features than other PC shooters
- Campaign is short
- Plot is muddled and inelegant.
not only that but evidence of pc having different standards or higher standards..call it what you will.. is apparent
"If you compare Modern Warfare 2 on the PC to its console counterparts, the game is every bit as awesome and enjoyable. Yet when compared to other online shooters on the PC, the multiplayer component is decidedly limited."
"Furthermore, there is no support for user-created content, so rather than enjoying free mods and community maps, PC users will have to pay for downloadable content. And the money issues don't stop there: Modern Warfare 2 costs $10 more than most full-price PC games."now the following describes MW2 as a PC FPS compared to other PC FPS games *this was written only on the MW2 PC review*
"Though it features a robust variety of playlists in which to ply your deadly trade, Modern Warfare 2's competitive multiplayer is still limited compared to modern standards and will likely disappoint many hardcore shooter fans"now when talking about the console version the reviewer said this*console review*
"With a robust variety of playlists in which to ply your deadly trade, Modern Warfare 2's competitive multiplayer is the best in the series and one of the best available on consoles"
and with that I leave you with evidence that the PC version was indeed knocked down in score because it was being compared to other PC fps games.. thus pc having higher standards or different.. whatever you call it
.... seacrest out - Jul 10, 2010 8:06 am GMTWhenCicadasCry wrote:
OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games.
As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. 
No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption
GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games. :lol: As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. :|
[/QUOTE] No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption :| GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA :| - Jul 10, 2010 8:09 am GMTNerubianWeaver wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:
OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games.
As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions.
No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption
GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA
He obviously didn't read what Kevin wrote either, an AAAA game on any platform is a remarkable game in any standard.
...or something to that effect, sorry if I got it wrong
Blank.[QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"][QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games. :lol: As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. :|
[/QUOTE] No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption :| GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA :|[/QUOTE] He obviously didn't read what Kevin wrote either, an AAAA game on any platform is a remarkable game in any standard. ...or something to that effect, sorry if I got it wrong :P - Jul 10, 2010 8:23 am GMT
_____________________________________________________________________
CLAN: Australian Unit of Destruction [AUoD]
Owner of PS3 and a Gaming PC aka 'The Perfect Combo'
PC: |-RAMPAGE II MOBO-|-i7 930-|-6GB DDR3 RAM-|-HD5850-|-2TB HDD-|
PSN: b1gsmk
[QUOTE="BPoole96"]This can only mean that PC Gaming is doomed
[/QUOTE] it's been doomed for so long when will it just die!? - Jul 10, 2010 8:26 am GMTRead the review guidelines, PC has higher standards. Not sure why this thread is still going, there's nothing left to discuss.
- Jul 10, 2010 9:18 am GMTRavensmash wrote:NerubianWeaver wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:
OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games.
As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions.
No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption
GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA
He obviously didn't read what Kevin wrote either, an AAAA game on any platform is a remarkable game in any standard.
...or something to that effect, sorry if I got it wrong
Nobody said their not. Doesn't change the fact that games are judged against others on the same platform.[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"][QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games. :lol: As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. :|
[/QUOTE] No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption :| GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA :|[/QUOTE] He obviously didn't read what Kevin wrote either, an AAAA game on any platform is a remarkable game in any standard. ...or something to that effect, sorry if I got it wrong :P[/QUOTE] Nobody said their not. Doesn't change the fact that games are judged against others on the same platform. - Jul 10, 2010 9:23 am GMTWhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example. - Jul 10, 2010 9:30 am GMTAgree with KevinV there...
Just Cause 2 runs excellent my HD 5870. And the graphics on max settings at a 1080p resolution look sooo much better than the console version, its almost as if they were running on medium. In my opinion.Agree with KevinV there... :) Just Cause 2 runs excellent my HD 5870. And the graphics on max settings at a 1080p resolution look sooo much better than the console version, its almost as if they were running on medium. In my opinion. - Jul 10, 2010 9:39 am GMTKevin-V wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.Lucky for me i never had any problems with GTAIV. I think my 2x GTX480 has something to do with that. Although i hear the patches have resolved the poor performance on lower spec machines.
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
Lucky for me i never had any problems with GTAIV. I think my 2x GTX480 has something to do with that. Although i hear the patches have resolved the poor performance on lower spec machines.
- Jul 10, 2010 9:41 am GMTI never had those problems people speak of in GTA4,so to me itīs by far the best version of the game.ducati101 wrote:Kevin-V wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.Lucky for me i never had any problems with GTAIV. I think my 2x GTX480 has something to do with that. Although i hear the patches have resolved the poor performance on lower spec machines.
[QUOTE="ducati101"]
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
Lucky for me i never had any problems with GTAIV. I think my 2x GTX480 has something to do with that. Although i hear the patches have resolved the poor performance on lower spec machines.
[/QUOTE] I never had those problems people speak of in GTA4,so to me itīs by far the best version of the game.
- Jul 10, 2010 9:42 am GMTGTA IV runs poorly on consoles as wellKevin-V wrote:
I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.
[/QUOTE]GTA IV runs poorly on consoles as well :|
- Jul 10, 2010 9:44 am GMTKevin-V wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.Ironically, for me, Just Cause 2 ran horribly, and GTA4 ran flawlessly.
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
Ironically, for me, Just Cause 2 ran horribly, and GTA4 ran flawlessly. :P
- Jul 10, 2010 9:54 am GMTKevin-V wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
Edited on Jul 10, 2010 9:56 am GMTReal Fps Gaming Stands the Test of Time.
- **Windows 7 Enterprise **Gigabyte870A - UD3
- **4gb G-skill ddr3 ram**AMD Phenom iix4 3.4ghz
- **EVGA Gtx460 768mb (800Core 1600Shader 1925Mem)
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
- Jul 10, 2010 10:17 am GMTjedikevin2 wrote:Kevin-V wrote:WhenCicadasCry wrote:Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower?
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]Ignoring the MP, the PCs singleplayer campaign is superior due to better graphics, true HD, ect, yet still gets scored lower? :?[/QUOTE]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
[/QUOTE]
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score :|
- Jul 10, 2010 10:21 am GMT
Real Fps Gaming Stands the Test of Time.
- **Windows 7 Enterprise **Gigabyte870A - UD3
- **4gb G-skill ddr3 ram**AMD Phenom iix4 3.4ghz
- **EVGA Gtx460 768mb (800Core 1600Shader 1925Mem)
@NerubianWeaver
So basing on your statement, you don't care if games are under a higher microscope depending on platform? All you care about is seeing a 10/10 score? Not only that but when you start the thread asking why there is no PC games with 10 and the editor has come in and explained you don't care and don't care what people say?
Remember, you started this thread with , "PC has no AAAA Game in the History of Gaming I just noticed that. Not only this Gen but all the whole time. I wonder why?"
That has been answered by one of the editors of this website.
- Jul 10, 2010 10:22 am GMTThis response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.NerubianWeaver wrote:jedikevin2 wrote:Kevin-V wrote:
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score
[QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"]
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]
[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]
It's a given that the PC version of a multiplatform game is gonna look better. But MW2 on PC is getting compared to other PC shooters. I played that version, not the console versions, and while MW2 looks good, it looks no better than what you'd expect it to look like. If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
When I look at cases where the PC version did score higher--Metro 2033 and Just Cause 2 jump right to mind--it's because on that platform, there was something that made the game soar, or conversely, made the other version(s) pale. In Metro 2033's case, movement and shooting in the X360 version was clunkier and looked worse than should have been expected. For Just Cause 2, not only were the PC's visuals extraordinary compared to other open-world PC games (AND the game ran like butter to boot), but the console aiming problems were seldom an issue on the PC.
You want an open-world PC game in which the PC version is far and away the superior version? Just Cause 2 is just that. I am surprised anyone would hold up the buggy, poorly performing GTA IV as such an example.[/QUOTE]
This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
[/QUOTE]
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score :|
[/QUOTE] This response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.
- Jul 10, 2010 10:24 am GMTArach666 wrote:This response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.NerubianWeaver wrote:jedikevin2 wrote:
This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score
You should be made aware, nobody listens to Nerubian Weaver Players[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"]
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]
This Thread is Over. KevinV has come in and just killed it. Nuff said, moving on, thread needs be closed, editor has spoken, and the truth is out.
If our standard of comparison for PC games was "the console version," the PC version would get a higher score than the others over 90% of the time.
[/QUOTE]
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score :|
[/QUOTE] This response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.
[/QUOTE] You should be made aware, nobody listens to Nerubian Weaver Players :P - Jul 10, 2010 10:27 am GMTBirdy09 wrote:Arach666 wrote:This response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.NerubianWeaver wrote:
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score
You should be made aware, nobody listens to Nerubian Weaver Players
Very true indeed
[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"]
No matter what you say it didn't got a higher score :|
[/QUOTE] This response clearly shows that you donīt know what else to say and that you obviously lost your argument.
[/QUOTE] You should be made aware, nobody listens to Nerubian Weaver Players :P[/QUOTE] Very true indeed :D - Jul 10, 2010 12:00 pm GMTNerubianWeaver wrote:No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead RedemptionWhenCicadasCry wrote:
OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games.
As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA If the GTA4 for consoles deserver 10/10 then the pc version deserver 12/10 because the pc version is superior in every way. But as you know pc have higher standards so the games tend to score lower.
[QUOTE="NerubianWeaver"][QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]
OP needs to go and read the review criteria. Games are reviewed based on what is on the system at the current time. It's not the PCs fault that it has such a diverse library, and the reason why MGS and GTA4 got 10s is because the consoles had no decent games. :lol: As proven by GTA4, though being SUPERIOR on the PC, got rated lower then the console versions. :|
[/QUOTE] No Decent games? How about Uncharted 2, Gears Of War 2, Forza 3, God Of War 3, and Red Dead Redemption :| GTA IV is still a bad port even if they patch it that's why it got AAA :|[/QUOTE]
If the GTA4 for consoles deserver 10/10 then the pc version deserver 12/10 because the pc version is superior in every way. But as you know pc have higher standards so the games tend to score lower.
