And where exactly did I mention I was a console player, or are you just a prejudiced person by nature? I'm not saying that games shouldn't be geared with better technology in mind, all I'm saying is that I understand why they aren't. Many people here obviously have money to burn and have nothing better to spend it on than high tech gizmos, but the reality is that most people can't afford to upgrade their computers every 18 months. And obviously the software industry understands that as well.

http://blogs.forbes.com/oliverchiang/2011/02/15/valve-and-steam-worth-billions/





Wikipedia:
"There are over 1,400 games available on Steam, and in October 2010 Valve announced that it had surpassed 30 million active user accounts"

Sorry I forgot a zero.

It is a HUGE market. Steam is the best available representation of the PC gamer market. If you want to lose sales, then release bad ports with console interfaces, etc. It guarantees a loss in profit for a good game.

He/she's prejudiced? You're the one calling me an elitist and claiming that the inclusion of current tech would exclude everyone with lesser rigs from playing the game.

Am I wrong?



There's no game that I currently can't play with my actual 3 year-old PC. I can't max it, but I can play it a low settings. That's what you don't understand, and that's why I stated you are a console player.

If a program is designed solely for DX11, then it's not going to work on a DX9 system. Period. While you can add DX11 features to a DX9 program, it doesn't work the other way around. And as long as roughly 50% of home computers, based on that Wiki article, still use Windows XP then this will be a consideration to any game developer who is trying to make a profit. Sorry for your luck, but that's just the way it works.

There is absolutely nothing stopping them from supporting both.

That just says that Steam is a profitable company, no mystery there. But it in no way supports your claim that they are out selling retail.



There are easily 10 times that many people in the world who play computer games. Sorry, but it's still a very small market segment.

Yeah, my brothers' computer which only uses for Office and web browsing, which uses XP, and who couldn't care less for PC gaming (or gaming in general) is the perfect targeting market where Bethesda aims.

You've been given all the points. If you don't see or wanna see them it's your problem.

Xbox live also has an estimated "Over 30 million" users - is that also a very small market segment? 30 million people is not small by any measure!

Money. It doesn't make economic sense to have two versions of the same game, especially when some features of one format can still function with the other.



Compared to the total number, yes it is. Not to mention that the numbers given for Steam and Xbox Live are distorted by some people having multiple accounts.

Wow, then a lot of games doesn't have "economic sense". Oh, look! Crysis amongst them!

It's not "two versions", it's called "modularity". A concept you don't seem to understand.

If many DX11 features will still work on a primarily DX9 game, how exactly are they limiting their potential market? They would be however, if it were the other way around.



And Skyrim will have some DX11 features, how is that not being modular? You're just going around in circles here.

They're just two separate renderers, not two separate games. There's not even a reason to ship two executables, just switch to the DX11 renderer if any of the DX11 features are enabled, or grey out the option on a non-DX11 capable system. No money loss neccesary.

As for the numbers, no, 30 million is significant regardless of what the total is. PSN has 70 million accounts, so if we assume that every single account is unique and tied to a gamer, that's 130 million accounts. Since when was 10 times greater than 30 130?

DX11 is backwards compatible.
It also doesn't make economic sense to stay with 10 year old operating systems. The technology is developing further and further, and like with cell-phones and everything, it expects us consumers to follow it, and the great majority do, more or less. Those who doesn't want to follow got themselves to blame, not the development itself or those who use it.

Consoles are a good alternative for those who like to stick with one hardware for a longer time, but even they have to change eventually, as we're now clearly seeing.

You're not getting the point at all..



I've never complained about that

I'm sorry but this is untrue. In 2010 PC games owned over 42% of the market with the closet competitor being the Wii at 24%. This is quite simply a case of shafting the majority of the market to reach highest sales possible. In all honesty I can't wait for the next generation of consoles, it means my machine won't be held back by cross-platforming until the end of the next console cycle.

http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2010/04/19/hear-that-knocking-sound-its-pc-gaming/

Now to give that link to Todd!

What I also hope is that the new XBOX is also DX12 at least.

Actually, this is one feature not mentioned about DX 11. It makes scalability, back to DX 9/10 much easier than say between DX 8 and 9. That's one of it's major design qualities. No offense, but you clearly do not know what you are talking about. You can have an opinion, but when your opinion wanders into replacing facts with wishful thoughts that support your faulty concepts, it's just not worth talking to you anymore. :cryvaultboy:

Also, the 50% of PC that use XP are mostly not gaming PCs. As I have proven looking at Valve's user statistics, which clearly shows Win 7 64 bit as the most used gaming OS. You are, again, factually incorrect.

I may have to put that link in my sig.

Indeed, we all should.

Exactly. The evidence really favors what PC gamers are saying. Part of the issue is that developers blame piracy for the low support in ports. However, pirates claim that they won't buy games not designed/optimized for their platform. Again, some of the highest selling games in history had NO DRM! Developers just need to step back and stop with all the punishment of their biggest market. Spend money on customizing, optimizing, and retooling games for the PC market, and sales will increase.

Blizzard has been making a killing on the PC market for a while now. They've had success with battle.net as a feature that promotes the same effect as DRM, but users like it. Thus, their sales have been huge for a LONG time because they got this long ago. Plus, they optimize and change their UIs for different markets. Instead of releasing the same game to every country, they look to see what people actually want. Again, they are one of the only companies doing this, and it actually works.

You can't stop pirates, you can only convert them with games designed to solve the issues they have with modern gaming.(Anyway, I'm getting off on a tangent.)

My main point is that a lack of support and development on the PC is killing sales more than developers think. If you release a good DX 11 game, people will upgrade their PCs just to get those effects. That's how enthusiasts operate. The PC market is all about enthusiasts, not mainstream/casuals.

Well if it's easy as that, then maybe you have a point. Frankly I don't really know how it works. I only have a DX10 card right now and can't afford to upgrade, so DX11 hasn't been a consideration. But the point I've been trying to make is that it's entirely understandable why Bethesda would try to maximize their market potential as much as possible. While DX11 is obviously the future, we aren't quite there yet.



Well certainly it's a force to be reckoned with, but it's still a small segment of the total. It certainly isn't an indication that Steam is outselling retail by any means. They still have a long way to go before that happens.

That plus "Say NO to cross-platform communism!" in red

I'm doing it right now.

It's 1/3 of the entire PC gaming market. Steam, is highly representative. Not to mention, the Intel article clearly shows that PC gamers far out number Console gamers (combined). The 130 million PC gamers are enthusiasts, people who buy the latest tech just to benchmark crysis, and who WANT more than consoles can offer. Developers just don't get it, and sales have been poor because you can't sell something to someone if it doesn't appeal to them. Add the entusiast features -> DX11/10 support, + UIs, larger textures, more graphical options, etc and people will buy your product in spades.

Sounds like a plan.