BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Ive already showed you that you misunderstood the message, why persist?

I understand that he was saying that BC2 was basically getting more praise with PC gamers than MW2. I also understand that steams stats can't be used to argue the point.

You assume that the word is in a comparitive context.

Can the word longer be used correctly and not be in a comparative context?

[[Expletive Deleted]]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Baza added to his post. A LOT of people took it to mean "combined." Including Kotaku. But he meant, "PC currently has more people playing than either console."

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

I understand that he was saying that BC2 was basically getting more praise with PC gamers than MW2.

Who was? Because I had myself in mind in that quote.

I also understand that steams stats can't be used to argue the point.

Only if you ignore the point which was argued. BC2 impact on MW2 can very accurately be measured using MW2 player stats on Steam. Ive already described the methodology.

Can the word longer be used correctly and not be in a comparative context?

Yes, if you stop nitpicking an ignoring the context. You assumed I was directly comparing communities, in the context of the post I was saying that the lifecycle of a single game is more likely to be long if it was on the PC. You keep on ignoring the posts, twisting the context and message around to find a loophole you can use to declare yourself the "winner" of this argument. You already lost when you tried to claim I was wrong by telling you that there are more gaming laptops sold than current gen consoles. Everything else after that has been a stupid dance.

The reason for longetivity of games on PC has been described to you by two different people.

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Who was? Because I had myself in mind in that quote.

Only if you ignore the point which was argued. BC2 impact on MW2 can very accurately be measured using MW2 player stats on Steam. Ive already described the methodology.

Yes, if you stop nitpicking an ignoring the context. You assumed I was directly comparing communities, in the context of the post I was saying that the lifecycle of a single game is more likely to be long if it was on the PC. You keep on ignoring the posts, twisting the context and message around to find a loophole you can use to declare yourself the "winner" of this argument. You already lost when you tried to claim I was wrong by telling you that there are more gaming laptops sold than current gen consoles. Everything else after that has been a stupid dance.

The reason for longetivity of games on PC has been described to you by two different people.

You are nuts man and you keep saying I said this and I said that when I did no such thing. I never even mentioned laptops. I just stated that you have no idea who is using a computer for what and you don't!

He said that PC gamers marry there games and that consoles flit around like butterflies. The comment doesn't describe why. He does talk about commercials like they contribute to the fluttering of the console faeries. (which you already disagreed with)

To be frankly honest I don't disagree with his comment at all. I do think that these are bigger reasons: PC upgrade costs; the time it takes to get a game that can replace the current popular game of its subcategory; MODS; busy playing consoles..ect. Not anything to do with being spread out across more games.

Anyone on the forums that work in an industry where they see their customers computers often like the installation of internet will tell you that most people do not have these badass *PC gaming systems what you have been led to believe.

Nice laptops although are pretty common. They are comparable to cellphones; everyone and their daughter's bestfriend's grandmother wants the coolest one. Have you recently talked to a computer salesman? I thoroughly enjoy it and will venture to that department in fry's just to be hustled on laptops. The crazy stuff people will believe when it comes to computers.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

I never even mentioned laptops. I just stated that you have no idea who is using a computer for what and you don't!

This is the perfect example of me having to spoonfeed you. Im so busy overcorrecting you while you nitpick that if I slip once and leave "and gaming desktops" out, your train of thought immediately stops and you pick something out you can use as an "argument" even though the point and message can easily be seen if you worked alongside the guy youre arguing against. I specifically told you in the very first post that I was talking about gaming PCs (including laptops). Which means they are manufactured with gaming in mind. Now, if I have to do your argumenting for you, I would assume that the whole idea behind your doubt was that comparatively not that many PC users actually play videogames. Wrong. The sum of all PC games sold compared to all console games sold does not directly show proof of which games are being played, as the third most popular game on Steam shows, even games from 1998 are extensively played even today.

Heres the deal, you were either trying to tell me that realistically COD4/MW2 sales compared to consoles reflect the gaming state of PC market compared to the console market and used retail shops as an example, which is obviously me giving you too much credit. Or, you were just picking that out out of context.

He said that PC gamers marry there games and that consoles flit around like butterflies. The comment doesn't describe why. He does talk about commercials like they contribute to the fluttering of the console faeries. (which you already disagreed with)

I also edited my post (nice attempt at once again taking posts out of context, this one is called "quotemining"). And the reason "why" is open to debate and discussed or mentioned multiple times in this thread, where have you been? What have you been reading? Word of mouth, community being more interactive with one another with games and loyalty to games not setting boundaries to communication, gamers generally "consuming" games as general entertainment products, and so on and on and on. And its still not enough for you to even start thinking about the subject for yourself, constantly asking to be spoonfeed just to save that bit of dignity. It makes you look slow.

To be frankly honest I don't disagree with his comment at all. I do think that these are bigger reasons: PC upgrade costs; the time it takes to get a game that can replace the current popular game of its subcategory; MODS; busy playing consoles..ect. Not anything to do with being spread out across more games.

Wrong, wrong again. You assume two things, which again are, unsurprisingly- wrong.
A) The only way you can play a new popular PC title, is by having the best hardware. The biggest leap before BC2 was a leap from BF2 to COD4. Both games were easily played with 2-3 year old hardware. BC2 can be played at reasonable framrates with 2-4 year old hardware. I run it at minimum graphics and ~50 FPS (Beta) on hardware which is 5-6 years old (!). Which means that in order to run a new game, you dont always have to be forced to upgrade.

B) PC gets less games than consoles do. A PC gets actually *more* games than a either of the consoles. Furthermore, multiplatform titles which have amassed a massive following crowd on X360/PS3 at their peak time failed to even hit the 1000 peak player mark online (peak = unique visitors per day /spoon). Time and time again, a game which came out on X360 and gathered a massive following, got ditched for a "new and better" game while it got completely smashed and ignored on the PC-s, just like the next "new and better title". In short, we get the same ammount of games, if not more, during the same timeperiod, but fewer of them break through. And the timedifference between the releases is close to 2 years. So wouldnt it be reasonable to suggest that hardware limitation would enable more games to rock the sales and popularity on our platform? No, because hardware has nothing to do with it.

The hardware excuse has always been the misinformed extremist console fanboy who still thinks you have to spend thousands of dollars on a rig, and thousands each year to keep new games running on it.

Furthermore, the PC crowd is extremely spread out, what are you talking about? RTS crowd, MMO crowd, FPS, TPS. Youre more likely to find some RTS fan who hasnt played a single FPS game on a PC. On consoles, HALO RTS came out and it didnt matter the preference, people bought it up, many praised it. The fact that PC games dont have a timestamp on them, and can be played potentially until the end of times (obvious exaggeration /spoon) means that we are very likely to have people segmenting into different groups of fans based on our hardware capabilities, genre, franchise and games. And it looks to me that the only time we "come together" is when PC elitists are arguing console fanboys.

How long have you been at TGN? Take a very close look at the game menu that we have? Weve had dozens and dozens of subforums created and died in a matter of weeks/months because this forum is largely populated by Battlefield fans.

Anyone on the forums that work in an industry where they see their customers computers often like the installation of internet will tell you that most people do not have these badass gaming systems what you have been led to believe.

Except that Steam hardware survey disagrees with you. Even though Counter Strike 1.6 is the third most popular game on Steam, Steam hardware survey says that there are vastly more modern gaming platforms than there are obselete ones. I bolded out these specifically for you so you could try to understand where the comparison comes from and how its applicable.

I hope Ive done enough spoonfeeding for the evening. Should give you something to think about. But once you hit that quote button, you better be more specific, have a position and have proper arguments. Makes for an easier dialogue for both sides.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Longer than a typical console player.

BF2 came out in 2005 and quite a few people are still playing it online. Try playing an Xbox game from 2005. If two people from this thread jump into BF2MC, it will bump the player numbers to 12. TOTAL. PC gamers tend to marry their games while console gamers tend to flit around like butterflies, pouncing on the next big thing until something else comes out with more commercials with distorted guitar and raspy announcers.

Many console games that rely on matchmaking can't even be played at all anymore. They count on the idea that multiple people from the same area will try to play the same game at the same time. That only works right when a game comes out or if it's popular. Once popularity starts to decline, it drops rapidly as matchmaking has a harder and harder time sticking people in a round. It's like they've built in a half-life to make people want to jump to the next game.

It doesn't help companies like EA and Capcom take down servers when the new game comes out; they shut us out of RE: outbreak, and good luck trying to play Burnout 3 nowadays; or any PS2 online title for that matter. If we got dedicated rented servers on consoles like you can rent on PC, you'd see more console players "marrying" their games for a long time. BF:MC is en exception becaus eI don't know why they still have xbox 360 servers running, when other EA games have shutdown.
It's not just the players, companies will shut down multiplayer servers on a whim. MW2 multiplayer model makes sense in this context for CONSOLE, but not for PC.

Believe me, if we could still maintain MGO servers, Outbreak servers, we would.

[jake_]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Question about something way back when in this thread:

What qualifies a "gaming" computer?

You assume that the word is in a comparitive context.

O_o

Every time someone corrects you, you immediately proceed to tell them that they're being stupid and taking things out of context.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Well a gaming computer is a PC built around the playing of games in 3D-2D, biggest of everything you can afford I'd say. In the context of "gamers" it is a machine that has above average components, it should have at least one component considered as top of the line at the time of its aquiscition; IE, even if you whole computer is 4 years old, if you have let's say, a Radeon 3870 in it, it's a gaming computer; also if you have one "brand" component: Corsair memory, Coolermaster PSU, a monitor that is considered "big" even by standard users (in resolution, not size)

Tough not by definition, I think it's generally accepted that a gaming computer is a computer built for getting maximum performance in a "real" game, as in games you need a dedicated video card to run; not web-browser minigames. And this battleing over semantics arises from the fact that there is not an unified architecture for playing games, there are so many configurations that a 500 dollars PC can be considered a gaming PC nowadays.

Just the very fact that there are components for "quality" "performance" and "enthusiast" makes the definition hard to standarize; you can't argue that consoles are for gaming, but you'll be very hard pressed to come to a consensus of what exactly defines a pure gaming PC; at least now we only deal with two major processor platforms, and two video card platforms, with somewhat standarized monitor technologies and hard drive storage and ram memory.

---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:40 PM ----------

Just as en axample; my PAvilion slimline desktop computer; intel E7600 C2D, 4 GB of RAM single channel, integrated graphics GF7100. I use it for gaming, ROHAN online, some Ragnarok Online, I can even play A.V.A. and drift city on it. Is it a gaming computer? I bet I could run BF2 on that one with craptastic performance, but I'd be able to score somtimes, so technically I'd be gaming.

[jake_]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

[/COLOR]Just as en axample; my PAvilion slimline desktop computer; intel E7600 C2D, 4 GB of RAM single channel, integrated graphics GF7100. I use it for gaming, ROHAN online, some Ragnarok Online, I can even play A.V.A. and drift city on it. Is it a gaming computer? I bet I could run BF2 on that one with craptastic performance, but I'd be able to score somtimes, so technically I'd be gaming.

Exactly.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

What qualifies a "gaming" computer?

Why do you ask?

[EDIT] Im game, jake.

50/250

[Mavrik347]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

You're an idiot. If I say "I'm a faster runner than both you and your brother." That does not mean that I can run faster than your combined top speeds. When someone says that something is better than both one thing and another, that means that it is better than the first thing AND better than the second thing. Not better than both combined.

This.

[CaptainKirk]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Nice Redfield. Back to the good ol' days of the epic four page flamewar "discussions?"

Anyways /nostalgia. Carry on.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Nice Redfield. Back to the good ol' days of the epic four page flamewar "discussions?"

Anyways /nostalgia. Carry on.

Youre right, Im sorry.

[Minmaster]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

retarded arguments FTL. chris, go find something better to do please than coming here and turning threads into crap.

[=MNKY=Frosty]

Re: BFBC2 is a WIN for PC!

Sup guys can I join in? I might copy paste the bible and win at wall-o-texting!

I think we should get back to the point at hand....

So more PC people playing BC2 than the consoles, either the PC side of things took a real good shine to BC2, or the console side were too lazy to buy the game (probably noobing around in ac-130's and with G-18's no doubt!). Or ofcourse a mix of both of these.