No this is a business decision in this case. If the games don't run on a potato consoles and PC it is less player who can play the game. Very important for live service game and free to play.
Sony PS6, Microsoft neXt Series - 10th gen console speculation [2020]
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
No this is a business decision in this case. If the games don't run on a potato consoles and PC it is less player who can play the game. Very important for live service game and free to play.
Plague Tales is made by a very small team they were 75 on the 150 Asobo employee.
And yet, it’s masterful!
There's a reason why they put system requirements on as well.
Doesnt mean the PC isnt a singular platform, it still is.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
When discussing "PC games", 98% of the time it's going to be about Windows PC's, so bringing Macs into this is just silly (and not even wholly accurate either, as Steam and GoG often offer crossbuy). Linux gaming these these days is Proton - it's running the Windows version.
Platforms are defined by their software compatibility. There aren't separate versions of a game for particular brands of PC that you have to purchase just to have them run on particular PC hardware. Of course if you're trying to run a modern AAA game on 6 year old hardware, you will likely have a poor experience. You can buy that game and suffer through it with very low settings, but when/if you upgrade your PC, that game will automatically take advantage of that new hardware - you don't have to re-buy the 'RTX 3080' version of a game.
Modern consoles are somewhat in-between, in that they can run the previous generation of titles - but not vice/versa. So even when a game is offered as being able to run on PS4 & PS5 for example - and the PS5 version is not an extra expense to 'upgrade' - it's still requires a completely separate install. The backwards compatibility is great, but scaling of older games is very limited, even if the developer bothers to produce a patch. By contrast, a GTX 1060 owner can purchase a modern game and run it like it would on a previous console gen, and just copy over their Steam folder to a new PC and get all the modern enhancements without downloading an extra byte. That's because they bought the 'PC version'.
A PS4/PS5 owner who buys a Series X, has to re-buy that game for the SX version. Because they're separate platforms.
There is no chance of that Xbox Series X game running on the PS5, and vice versa. There is a hell of a higher chance that PC game will run on integrated graphics, but also on a 4090. That's the difference.
If varying hardware capabilities and how well a game actually runs now defines a 'platform', then the current gen Xbox is two platforms - Series S and X. Nobody seriously considers that of course, because they both run the same software. That's what defines a platform.
Last edited:
If open world games not made by Rockstar cease to exist entirely I'd be totally fine with that.
All this about separate platforms regarding consoles is irrelevant, because when developers are making their business they see the console market as a console market and not just as a "Playstation market" and an "XBox market".
Looking at Playstation and XBOX as different markets is a separate more detailed analysis. But more or less they are perfect competitors and almost perfect substitutes if not fully, because they are essentially the same product proposition.
And PCs and consoles are NOT the same product, but an XBOX and PS are the same way a Chrysler is competing with a Lexus. Luxury cars with not fully interchangeable parts
Looking at Playstation and XBOX as different markets is a separate more detailed analysis. But more or less they are perfect competitors and almost perfect substitutes if not fully, because they are essentially the same product proposition.
And PCs and consoles are NOT the same product, but an XBOX and PS are the same way a Chrysler is competing with a Lexus. Luxury cars with not fully interchangeable parts
Instead of juggling 10 balls in the air they chose only 3 and they did it well. One of the most anticipated games of the year. Incredible presentation, despite of running on in-house engine. Amazing how much you can achieve when you decide to work around you strength and set realistic goals. This is almost prime example of Unix philosophy “do one thing well”
Cant wait for the ’psxboxswitch’ stamps on games for consoles.
Thats irrelevant. The dominance of windows gaming in forum discussions doesn't mean PC is a single platform. When you look up supported platforms for any game on most sites (thats not console exclusive) the listed platforms are parsed out by OS not a generic term like "PC".
Is Windows the dominate gaming platform on PC? Yes, but its not dominant to point where other PC platforms are considered irrelevant and we can conflate windows and PC? Why? Because there are enough non-windows PC players to garner support from games like Counter-Strike, Dota2, Team Fortress 2, Rust, Football Manger 2023, Unturned, Ark Survival, War Thunder, SM Civilization VI and RimWorld. That list is composed of half of the games on the top 20 list for the currently most played titles on Steam. Games that natively support mac OS, linux or both.
Why are devs supporting PC OSes other than Windows? For shits and giggles? Do you think when we posted figures about the growth of PC gaming that those figures are devoid of the contribution of linux or Mac titles? A good chunk of devs are supporting those platforms because they generate revenue and more than enough to cover the cost of the effort.
Last edited:
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
For PC gaming, it is utterly dominant. The rise of Linux as a gaming platform recently is precisely because it can now run Windows games so well. Mac is a tiny fraction of the market. It's doing better very recently with the M1 bringing non-shit graphics to the majority of new MacOS buyers, providing a modern performant API like Metal and iOS compatibility, but in terms of AA/AAA gaming it was actually more popular for ports in years past and is now finally clawing its way back.
Are they completely irrelevant? No, but also completely understandable that "PC Gaming" translates immediately to a 'Windows PC in a big box with a GPU' in the minds of most people, especially for AA/AAA games which is the context you making this argument in. It's 'conflated' because it is the reality for the vast, vast portion of the market. It's just pedantry to complain that when someone says "PC gaming" they're going to be confused when Spiderman doesn't run on Chome OS, I mean come on now.
Are you seriously arguing they're in the top 20 due to the contributions from those platforms? Those games are popular largely because they run on 10 year old shitbox PC's, not because they're a massive horde of Mac games playing these titles, and as mentioned, the Linux users are probably running the Windows versions these days!
(BTW, Team Fortress 2 does not run on modern Macs due to it being a 32 bit app which was never updated.)
For the most part with respect to AA/AAA titles, they're...not? Like out of all those games from that top-20 Steam list you gave me, there is not one native M1 version. This may likely grow in the future and I hope it does, but this not an indication of 'garnering support'. Apple certainly didn't engender itself to the Mac porting houses when they axed 32bit app support and killed off a good portion of their gaming back catalog.
For the most part? Yes. This is nothing at all comparable to the PS5/Xbox/Nintendo split.
Again, Steam and GoG often allow you cross-buy for Mac/Linux, I was pleasantly surprised to see several games on my Steam account be available for my M1 Mini/M2 Macbook - albeit actually running them is another matter, considering many of them are OpenGL or at best, Metal/Rosetta and performance can be extremely unpredictable as a result.
Last edited:
Nintendo Switch is utterly dominate when talking portable dedicated gaming devices. Shoud we ignore Steam Deck because its practically <1% of that market? How many sales of the PS2 over the xbox and GC would it have taken for you to consider consoles a single platform during that generation?
Here is a list of native M1 games including WOW, Minecraft and Resident Evil Village
Mac M1 Games: Native & Rosetta 2 supported games | Mac Gamer HQ
www.macgamerhq.com
Its one thing to say "PC" and we all think "windows gaming". Its another to declare "PC is a single platform" ... I have to continue this thought later. I need to go somewhere. LOL
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Is this really the example you want to go to? Steam deck is a PC Gaming platform!
It literally runs the Windows versions of games. There is no Steamdeck development kit that developers have to purchases, there is no Steamdeck graphics API - you write an X86 Windows game using the common API's to that platform, and it runs on Steamdeck.
It's precisely so useful because it's not a separate platform that requires new software purchases and developer support, its entire strength is that it runs your existing library and gives you many of the advantages of being a PC.
~95%? You know, if they were so small that the vast majority of AAA/AA games released on the PS2 never even saw a native Xbox/GC version, like we see with PC/Mac?
And I'm not arguing that Mac OS and Linux aren't platforms. When it at least comes to fully native software, they are - because platforms are defined by what software they run. I'm just saying the conflation of 'PC gaming' to Windows PC's is entirely understandable because it's so completely, overwhelmingly, the AA/AAA gaming market on computers.
Here is a list of native M1 games including WOW, Minecraft and Resident Evil Village
Mac M1 Games: Native & Rosetta 2 supported games | Mac Gamer HQ
That's uh...literally the same page I just linked to in the post you're quoting, lol.
After 2 years, there are less than 25 M1 native games on that list.
If we all think 'windows gaming' when we see 'PC gaming', then it really isn't another thing - it's effectively one platform. If the only outlier from that is the Mac, which is an infinitesimally small percentage, and in many cases (when again, we're speaking of AA/AAA games) it's actually zero because it doesn't actually get ports, yes - in the context of breaking down marketshare numbers in PC vs. console, it is, at the moment, largely irrelevant. There is no publisher thinking "Hmm not sure this makes financial sense to make a PC port...unless I can count on those Mac and Chrome OS sales!".
There is of course a lot of work that goes into a videogame that is shared across platforms, so it's not necessarily an arduous task to support one in addition to another, and especially with the rising cost of development, the relatively low investment required for a port in relation to the potential increased sales make sense.
From the perspective of the developer, each console is a separate platform, as each requires their own development kit. From the perspective of the publisher, each console requires a specific release, separate media, and specific digital storefront 30% haircut. From the perspective of the gamer, each console requires their own peripherals, software, and online subscriptions.
For Windows and Linux, the peripherals are the same. You buy the games from the same digital storefronts. You're running the same software. You can even install the OS's on the same piece of hardware. Only the Mac really has any possible penetration in gaming to be brought up as contributing to PC gaming overall while noting that it too, is a separate platform, but even then many of the games on it are cross-buy to begin with, so it's still not really comparable to the true segregation of console platforms.
Last edited:
Valve’s default process for Steam Deck’s compatibility testing is to test the Linux version if your game has one. If it meets criteria its automatically recommended. Devs have to request windows version testing if that’s their preference. Linux titles have native support.
You want to call PC a single platform because most people play window based games and state that Steam Deck is part of that PC platform while ignoring that window games aren’t natively supported.
Steam Deck is a Linux platform designed as a handheld device that supports window OS based games through a compatibility layer.
You also have platforms like Stadia that’s a PC based service that uses Linux while its software is incompatible with desktop Linux or Windows.
You can make the argument that Xbox consoles are nothing but bespoke PCs where MS controls everything.
If you want to declare windows gaming as a single platform, I’m fine with that. But the PC supports and has supported a number of different gaming platforms and that defined by definition and not perception.
An acknowledgment of a platform shouldn’t be dependent on its number of users or apps.
Last edited:
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
The extra work that Valve has to do to get Windows games to run is irrelevant to the game developer, the publisher, and the end user. It runs PC games. I'm sure Valve considers it 'their platform', but it's immaterial to speaking of marketshare wrt PC games sales; it's completely normal to consider it a gaming PC because it uses PC hardware, uses standard PC peripherals, and runs PC games. It's a PC. Hell, you can install Windows on it if you like.
Steam Deck absolutely does not exist as a product if it could only run native Linux games, full stop. It's DOA if it was actually, functionally, a truly separate 'platform' in every way that actually matters to people that need to consider the aspects of a platform, like PS5/Xbox, when creating/publishing/buying games for it.
No, because that would make no sense, because as I've said, a platform is defined by the software it runs. The Xbox is not a PC because it doesn't run PC software.
I've acknowledged the Mac is a separate platform. I've also acknowledged that in the context of a marketshare discussion for what compromises "PC gaming", especially when we're focusing on AA/AAA console ports, it's largely irrelevant and doesn't move the needle in any appreciable way to complain that someone is ignoring the minuscule fragmentation it offers in terms of total sales %.
Last edited:
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
There's no way COD has the kind of AAA graphics it has if it were only being developed for PC IMO. That's the point I was making. These AAA blockbusters need the sales they get from Xbox X|S & PS5 to justify their massive content budgets.
This doesn't mean that I think PCs are irrelevant or that PCs can't be better for many gamers here. No need to get all excited.
This doesn't mean that I think PCs are irrelevant or that PCs can't be better for many gamers here. No need to get all excited.
This is true, and it's not even just graphics -- literally shipping new features/updates every time on many platforms is a huge lift: you have to pass certification on every platform for every update, you have to deal with platform patches/updates, you have to scope every feature to fit within ever platforms overlapping performance budgets, you need qa to cover the same features * n platforms, etc. It's paradoxical since more platforms (usually) = much more money, so the multiplatform games tend to be the most feature rich and impressive in spite of this force, but shipping on each additional platforms reduces the scope what you can make.
