PC gamers are pritty fussy in my opinion

[Nino_Chaosdrache]

When I'm looking through different comments at gaming sites I get the impression that PC gamers are pretty fussy when it comes to certain topics. Most common things I noticed are " Owww the graphics looks like from the PS2 era( although the game looks awesome)", " I want my CPU to be fully stretched when I play"," What? The game is locked to 30 frames? I don't buy it"," The game just loosk worse because of the consoles".

Guys, calm down. I really have the impression that some PC gamers are far to high on their horse and expect the best of best to proof that they are the "glorious master race". Come down people. You don't need the best possible graphics or every little physics effect to enjoy a game. Ok, then WatchDogs doesn't look as good as in the E3 trailers. What's the matter? The game still looks goods, so you don't need to complain, just because Aiden's coat doesn't move with the wind like in the trailer or because the world is more colorful than before. Or when a game is locked at 30 frames, that's not the end of the world as well. I have some console and PC games that are locked to 30 like C&C Generals or Need for Speed Hot Pursuit (360) and Rivals(PC) . And I have no problem with that at all. The games feel as smooth as any other game with 60 frames or more.

Maybe it's because I'm primarily a console gamer and used to the 30 frames thing, but when I look at the other points I think some PC gamers are pretty nitpicky and you should lower your expactations on how a game should look and what it should be able to do, especially when it comes to graphics.

[deezus]

A lot of the people seem to have more fun complaining than they do playing games.

[✪ Snappy]

Some PC gamers are like that though

[Naedmi]

They complain for the attention. Because if someone didn't like something in real life they wouldn't say "it's ♥♥♥♥" infront of every fanboy on a forum.

[Nirnias]

Yes because the PC has a higher standard to live up to. PC's are way more powerful than consoles, ergo we should get more bang for our buck. This habit of making crappy console ports of games and charging the same price is ridiculous. In regards to the watchdogs topic, they advertised it with the superiour graphics, yet left it out of the final release (albeit understandably as it was unstable with those settings).

Me personally i enjoy the older PC games (Giants Citizen Kabuto, Sacrifice, Total Annhilation). There have maybe been 1 or 2 games i can actually say i really enjoyed in the last decade for the PC. DA: Origins, Elder Scrolls: Morrowwind, Deus Ex

[Nonfat Milk]

I do agree that a lot of pc gamers complain way too much about things that don't matter. But there is no reason a game should ever be locked to 30 fps, it is a noticeable downgrade that bugs a lot of people while playing and ruins the experience.

Also watchdogs is more than them just lowering the graphics, they blatantly lied to us.

[Sharp]

Some people are like that. Have to have the best of the best, and if it's not perfect they're not happy. Bad Apples that ruin the gaming community. I enjoy all aspects of gaming, although I will be the first to tell you that I enjoy PC a lot more due to customization and user created content for games like Skyrim, but I am not ignorant in the fact that everyone enjoys games for a different reason and from mobile to PC, gaming is gaming.

[grounded in reality]

basically me.

[Don't feed the ducks™]

Originally posted by Nino_Chaosdrache:

When I'm looking through different comments at gaming sites I get the impression that PC gamers are pretty fussy when it comes to certain topics. Most common things I noticed are " Owww the graphics looks like from the PS2 era( although the game looks awesome)", " I want my CPU to be fully stretched when I play"," What? The game is locked to 30 frames? I don't buy it"," The game just loosk worse because of the consoles".

Guys, calm down. I really have the impression that some PC gamers are far to high on their horse and expect the best of best to proof that they are the "glorious master race". Come down people. You don't need the best possible graphics or every little physics effect to enjoy a game. Ok, then WatchDogs doesn't look as good as in the E3 trailers. What's the matter? The game still looks goods, so you don't need to complain, just because Aiden's coat doesn't move with the wind like in the trailer or because the world is more colorful than before. Or when a game is locked at 30 frames, that's not the end of the world as well. I have some console and PC games that are locked to 30 like C&C Generals or Need for Speed Hot Pursuit (360) and Rivals(PC) . And I have no problem with that at all. The games feel as smooth as any other game with 60 frames or more.

Maybe it's because I'm primarily a console gamer and used to the 30 frames thing, but when I look at the other points I think some PC gamers are pretty nitpicky and you should lower your expactations on how a game should look and what it should be able to do, especially when it comes to graphics.

Because you've openly said you're primarily a console player, there is no point in me even wasting my time with you but I will anyway.

If my PC can run the best games out there then I would be very disappointed if the actual games were not up to standard. Did I spend £1200+ on my PC so it can perform like a peasant box? No.

I fully expect 60 FPS, FOV slider, amazing graphics etc. If the game doesn't have those then what was the point of me investing in a PC?

And you can't defend Watchdogs in any way whatsoever. Ubisoft should be sued for it. False advertising is a criminal offence.

[𝓋𝓇𝒾𝓈𝓀𝒶]

Originally posted by Nino_Chaosdrache:

Maybe it's because I'm primarily a console gamer and used to the 30 frames thing

That's pretty much the reason. Unlike a lot of PC gamers - who are very much used to 60 FPS if not more - I don't actually mind all that much if my FPS drops to the area of 30 frames. This is because back then I was (primarily) a console gamer.

As you get more used to PC gaming and as you continuously upgrade your PC like I've been doing, what was once acceptable back then becomes inexcusable.

[chibilibi]

Never heard any PC gamers say a good looking game looks like it's PS2 era graphics.

As for the rest, we PC gamers hate locks at 30 FPS because many of us (for a fairly large amount of games, myself included) have rigs that can provide 60 FPS constantly. Because you're mainly a console gamer (you stated so yourself), your eyes may not be adjusted to the massive increase in smoothness from 30 FPS to 60 FPS.

If anyone ever tells you "oh the eye can only see 24 fps so fps doesn't matter hurr durr derp derp durr" don't listen. The eye doesn't see in frames, it sees in motion. Higher framerate = smoother motion. 24 fps is just the minimum that your eyes will detect as motion rather than still images.

When we say we want our CPUs and GPUs to be used 100% while we play our games, that doesn't always mean that it has to be highest graphics. We just want the game to be optimized enough to take full advantage of the rigs we spend upwards of $600 no matter what visual settings we choose to use so that we get the best performance possible. It sucks when a game is only using 30% of your GPU because you know that if it was using 100% you'd have a significantly higher framerate.

About Watch_Dogs, we aren't mad at the graphics themselves (indeed, it looks quite good). We're mad (though for me it's more slightly irritated) that Ubisoft said that PC on max settings would look just like the E3 2012 demo and it didn't. We're also angry about the optimization of the game, and how poorly it runs even on dual SLI GTX Titans (watch TotalBiscuit's "WTF Is... Watch Dogs?" for more info).

Also confused at how the E3 2012 demo graphics settings are IN THE GAME'S CODE and can be re-enabled by messing with config files and work just fine and, for some people, increases framerate. If the game crashed more often and had issues with those graphics settings on, I could understand why they removed it. But it doesn't. They work fine.

In some cases, games do look worse probably because of the consoles. The developers spend a large amount of time making a game and getting it to work on consoles, then they don't have enough time and money to make a proper PC version with better visuals and actual optimization. Hence why I say make the PC version first, then put it on low or medium graphics settings and put that on consoles.

Overall, I'd say we PC gamers aren't on a "high horse" necessarily (though there are some of us who have too much of a superiority complex), rather, we spend a lot of time and money on our video games and we want the most out of them. For many of us, we play at a smooth 60 FPS (and for some of us who have a lot of money, 120 FPS) for a majority of the time, and we expect EVERY game to run at that. We want games to look amazing because we know our rigs can handle it.

We want the best of the best, not because we're nitpicky and fussy, but because we know it's possible.

[Blackstar001]

Its is because alot of PC gamers spend ALOTof money on their systems as well as a lot of time to physically build them. True PC s can be more economical for the same level of performance as a console. PCs potentially superior, it where it all comes from when they put game code into a compiler and then it should trickle down. But yeah it really bums me out too when I see all the complaints about the top end details. I am happy to spend a reasonable amount to play at a moderate level. I left the console after 20 years and I have no plans of going back. I had a PS1 6 months before it wass released in the US and I paid 800$ US for it. At the time it was all that and then some. I had no idea about PC gaming back then except it was way to technical to figure out. Plug and play? you say, ok. Until the quantum computing wave washes it all away PC gamers deserve the best.

[Shasow]

Originally posted by Nino_Chaosdrache:

Maybe it's because I'm primarily a console gamer

^ This. PC gamers are entitled, you're not.

[Zioep]

I think it comes down to a case by case basis. Some complaints might be a bit too far, but a lot of them aren't.

[Nomo]

Hey guys. Want an ultimate shock. I can happily run any game with any settings at any FPS. FFS I completed Bioshock infinate on my peice of crap laptop which only has a 1.1 Ghz processor all at 10 FPS on the lowest settings.
Edit: FPS may have been lower than 10

[Ailes]

I'm rolling my eyes/doing an imaginary facepalm in my head whenever I read that stupid "master race" garbage.