Yeah, I understand that right now this blog is pretty cumbersome to navigate and its not really easy to find the stuff you readers need. I have planned some changes which include, but not limited to, adding proper tags for all posts and dividing the page into sections. It might take some time, because Blogger is somewhat inflexible in this regard (which means I need to make manual modifications to the built-in template and add some custom code). I'm also planning to write reviews for selected games.
I'm hope I can keep my current readers engaged, and at the same time attract new ones too.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Finally, a new gaming rig!
So I'm back, after a hiatus of over two months! Really crappy stuff were going on in my professional and personal life (some issues still remain), but I'm good enough to get back to gaming and writing this blog again!
A little 'accident' (if I might say that) resulted in me getting my hands on a spanking new gaming rig which made me poorer but happier. My naughty 5-year old nephew poured a jug of water into my PC cabinet, which rendered my processor, motherboard, graphics card and power supply (some of the most expensive components) useless. He dealt the same treatment to my keyboard and mouse as well. Surprisingly, my other components (hard disk, optical drive and RAM sticks) survived this brutal assault. I knew it was time to replace the blown components. Thinking in terms of gaming, my PC was due for an upgrade anyway.
Before I describe things further, let me get my new specs out of the way (which includes some older components that still worked):-
Next, it was time to choose the most important component for a gamer - the graphics card. I did a lot of research, and finally settled for the card mentioned above (Sapphire R9 280x) because that's the only one which fit my budget and also provided splendid performance (actually it crossed by budget a wee bit). This card is pretty power hungry, and I didn't want to skimp on a power supply this time (as I had been doing all these years). So I went for a 800W power supply from Corsair which was an overkill, but definitely future-proof.
Finally, only the keyboard and mouse were left. I had always used standard keyboards and mice, which wouldn't last long. This time I wanted to go for a gaming keyboard and mouse, so that they would last a few years at least with heavy use. I settled for a Cooler Master Devastator keyboard and mouse combo, which offered the best bang for the buck.
With this, I was all set to begin my next chapter in gaming, or rather continue from where I left off but with a ton of improvements. As of now, I'm thoroughly satisfied with my rig, as I'm able to run even the most resource-hungry games (such as Crysis 3 and Wolfenstein: the New Order) at 50+ frames per second on the highest possible settings (1920x1080 resolution). I'm also getting immense benefit due to the increased framerate while playing competitive multi-player games (such as Counter-Strike and Titanfall).
To sum it up, I'm a happy man now because my new monster of a PC is running circles around most games! Stay tuned for my next post, which (hopefully) won't take as long as this one!
A little 'accident' (if I might say that) resulted in me getting my hands on a spanking new gaming rig which made me poorer but happier. My naughty 5-year old nephew poured a jug of water into my PC cabinet, which rendered my processor, motherboard, graphics card and power supply (some of the most expensive components) useless. He dealt the same treatment to my keyboard and mouse as well. Surprisingly, my other components (hard disk, optical drive and RAM sticks) survived this brutal assault. I knew it was time to replace the blown components. Thinking in terms of gaming, my PC was due for an upgrade anyway.
Before I describe things further, let me get my new specs out of the way (which includes some older components that still worked):-
- AMD FX 8320 3.5 Ghz 8 core processor
- Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 motherboard
- Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 280x 3GB Dual X graphics card
- Corsair 800W Power Supply
- Corsair Spec-01 cabinet
- Transcend 8GB DDR 3 1333MHhz RAM
- Seagate 1 TB internal hard disk
- Asus DVD writer
- Logitech 5.1 surround speakers
- Western Digital 3TB external had disk
- Viewsonic 21.5 inch 1080p monitor
- Cooler Master Devastator keyboard and mouse combo
Next, it was time to choose the most important component for a gamer - the graphics card. I did a lot of research, and finally settled for the card mentioned above (Sapphire R9 280x) because that's the only one which fit my budget and also provided splendid performance (actually it crossed by budget a wee bit). This card is pretty power hungry, and I didn't want to skimp on a power supply this time (as I had been doing all these years). So I went for a 800W power supply from Corsair which was an overkill, but definitely future-proof.
Finally, only the keyboard and mouse were left. I had always used standard keyboards and mice, which wouldn't last long. This time I wanted to go for a gaming keyboard and mouse, so that they would last a few years at least with heavy use. I settled for a Cooler Master Devastator keyboard and mouse combo, which offered the best bang for the buck.
With this, I was all set to begin my next chapter in gaming, or rather continue from where I left off but with a ton of improvements. As of now, I'm thoroughly satisfied with my rig, as I'm able to run even the most resource-hungry games (such as Crysis 3 and Wolfenstein: the New Order) at 50+ frames per second on the highest possible settings (1920x1080 resolution). I'm also getting immense benefit due to the increased framerate while playing competitive multi-player games (such as Counter-Strike and Titanfall).
To sum it up, I'm a happy man now because my new monster of a PC is running circles around most games! Stay tuned for my next post, which (hopefully) won't take as long as this one!
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Bringing PC exclusives to consoles - boon or bane?
This has been an age-old debate, with both console and PC gamers at loggerheads regarding the matter. So what exactly are the advantages of bringing games or franchises which were perceived as PC exclusives, to consoles? Or is it actually harming the gaming industry in general?
There are several aspects we need to analyze, before we can draw any satisfactory conclusion. The first one would be the profits, of course! Every game maker (or publisher) would obviously increase their profits if a successful PC game (or franchise) is brought to consoles, due to the increased user base. Also, people who only play games on consoles would also get a chance to experience these games. So, this would certainly result in immediate gains, both for the publisher/developer and the console gamers. But when the long term implications are considered, it paints a somewhat different picture.
When porting PC games to consoles, developers need to make a lot of compromises and trade-offs because consoles in general are a lot less powerful compared to gaming PCs. They need to find a balance so that the game performs reasonably well on consoles, while still making it as enjoyable as possible. Its a really tough task, which may sometimes even be unachievable due to the hardware limitations of consoles.
Ok, lets just say the developers did manage to port a PC game to the console along with some compromises, and the console gamers enjoyed it. This results in more game sales, which obviously translates to more profits. The game company gets buoyed by this response, hence they obviously plan the next game in the franchise so that it offers a similar experience to PC and console gamers right out of the box. Since consoles are quite underpowered compared to PCs, they have to develop the game primarily for consoles and then port it to the PC. On the surface, this may not seem like a problem. But doing this would result in a watered-down game for the PC, with only some graphical enhancements compared to console versions. This will surely alienate core fans of the series, which definitely hurts the game-makers in the long run. One way to achieve this without any compromise is to develop two different versions for PC and consoles, but it requires a lot of work and developers often feel that taking this approach would be a waste of their time and resources.
A classic example of this would be the Crysis games by Crytek. The first two games of the franchise (the original Crysis and its spin-off Crysis: Warhead) were technically marvelous open world games. Both were highly praised for their technical capabilities as well as their gameplay. When they were initially released, they remained exclusive to the PC. For the next game, the developers wanted to 'expand' the series to the consoles (read "make more money"). But it was impossible to create vast open worlds on current generation consoles at that point, due to technical limitations. Hence they eliminated the open world altogether, and settled for a game which played just like most other corridor shooters. The PC version did offer much prettier graphics, but no changes in the world or gameplay compared to console versions. This game (Crysis 2) sold well across all platforms, which prompted Crytek to even port the first two Crysis games to consoles. But the result was a mess, as reported by those who played them on console after initially playing them on PC. These decisions by Crytek (or maybe EA, who knows?) also left longtime fans of the series fuming. To combat this issue, Crytek decided to make the environment in Crysis 3 much bigger than Crysis 2, but it was still not a open world. The maps in Crysis 3 only gave the illusion of an open world, but they were just reasonably large areas 'boxed in' by clever use of environmental effects like hills, tress etc. Once again, the only 'advantage' it offered to PC gamers was the extremely gorgeous visuals. But Crysis 3 turned out to be such a dull and boring game that it failed to meet EA's sales expectations.
Crytek worked on another game called 'Ryse: Son Of Rome" exclusively for XBox One, but it turned out to be a massive critical and commercial failure. Now, Crytek just has one project (the Homefront reeboot), and several reliable sources are indicting that Crytek may not survive as a game development studio for much longer (they recently laid off a lot of their employees). So its pretty much obvious that Crytek seems to have dug their own grave by focusing on short term profits over long term benefits.
Of course, this doesn't always have to be true. Some types of games can be brought to consoles without too many compromises. But usually, that just wouldn't be possible for most games because PCs are always technically superior to every console of that particular generation.
There are several aspects we need to analyze, before we can draw any satisfactory conclusion. The first one would be the profits, of course! Every game maker (or publisher) would obviously increase their profits if a successful PC game (or franchise) is brought to consoles, due to the increased user base. Also, people who only play games on consoles would also get a chance to experience these games. So, this would certainly result in immediate gains, both for the publisher/developer and the console gamers. But when the long term implications are considered, it paints a somewhat different picture.
When porting PC games to consoles, developers need to make a lot of compromises and trade-offs because consoles in general are a lot less powerful compared to gaming PCs. They need to find a balance so that the game performs reasonably well on consoles, while still making it as enjoyable as possible. Its a really tough task, which may sometimes even be unachievable due to the hardware limitations of consoles.
Ok, lets just say the developers did manage to port a PC game to the console along with some compromises, and the console gamers enjoyed it. This results in more game sales, which obviously translates to more profits. The game company gets buoyed by this response, hence they obviously plan the next game in the franchise so that it offers a similar experience to PC and console gamers right out of the box. Since consoles are quite underpowered compared to PCs, they have to develop the game primarily for consoles and then port it to the PC. On the surface, this may not seem like a problem. But doing this would result in a watered-down game for the PC, with only some graphical enhancements compared to console versions. This will surely alienate core fans of the series, which definitely hurts the game-makers in the long run. One way to achieve this without any compromise is to develop two different versions for PC and consoles, but it requires a lot of work and developers often feel that taking this approach would be a waste of their time and resources.
A classic example of this would be the Crysis games by Crytek. The first two games of the franchise (the original Crysis and its spin-off Crysis: Warhead) were technically marvelous open world games. Both were highly praised for their technical capabilities as well as their gameplay. When they were initially released, they remained exclusive to the PC. For the next game, the developers wanted to 'expand' the series to the consoles (read "make more money"). But it was impossible to create vast open worlds on current generation consoles at that point, due to technical limitations. Hence they eliminated the open world altogether, and settled for a game which played just like most other corridor shooters. The PC version did offer much prettier graphics, but no changes in the world or gameplay compared to console versions. This game (Crysis 2) sold well across all platforms, which prompted Crytek to even port the first two Crysis games to consoles. But the result was a mess, as reported by those who played them on console after initially playing them on PC. These decisions by Crytek (or maybe EA, who knows?) also left longtime fans of the series fuming. To combat this issue, Crytek decided to make the environment in Crysis 3 much bigger than Crysis 2, but it was still not a open world. The maps in Crysis 3 only gave the illusion of an open world, but they were just reasonably large areas 'boxed in' by clever use of environmental effects like hills, tress etc. Once again, the only 'advantage' it offered to PC gamers was the extremely gorgeous visuals. But Crysis 3 turned out to be such a dull and boring game that it failed to meet EA's sales expectations.
Crytek worked on another game called 'Ryse: Son Of Rome" exclusively for XBox One, but it turned out to be a massive critical and commercial failure. Now, Crytek just has one project (the Homefront reeboot), and several reliable sources are indicting that Crytek may not survive as a game development studio for much longer (they recently laid off a lot of their employees). So its pretty much obvious that Crytek seems to have dug their own grave by focusing on short term profits over long term benefits.
Of course, this doesn't always have to be true. Some types of games can be brought to consoles without too many compromises. But usually, that just wouldn't be possible for most games because PCs are always technically superior to every console of that particular generation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)