kornbeaner

Contributor
CRank: 7Score: 75250

Where are my PC ports sony?

This generation has seen the biggest divide among gamers since Mario vs. Sonic. But in a place where you would think there would be a shift to unite there has been no move made.

That place? The PC. Sony came in to this generation wanting an all in one experience and as such went from calling their system a "Computer Entertainment System" opposed to "Videogame entertainment system."

But if this is the case why has Sony not used the PC to further implement this strategy. Outside of everquest and DC online there aren't many games I can think of that Sony has published on the PC.

But why? Their system as built is as close to a PC as the home console has ever been. Standard HDD, multiple ports to allow sharing of files (original fat anyways newer systems are more streamlined) an internet browser and they started off by allowing a Linux OS to be installed (again OG fats). So how is it that we have yet to see an Uncharted or Resistance grace a platform which it so much emulates?

What does Sony have to lose? The one thing I can think about is piracy, nobody wants to work on a game only for people to play it for free while others are stuck paying $60 a pop. The other thing I can think about as well is the initial investment, developing a game for multiple platforms is more expensive than solely developing for 1, but one can argue more money can be made if it sells well.

But what does Sony have to gain? I think depending on the game a whole lot. Games no matter what system they are developed for, are made on PC, so developing a PS3/PC is not really too far of a stretch and think about the possibilities. Take the upcoming Uncharted 3. 11/1/11 is the day most PS3 gamers are waiting for (I am) this series is one of my favorites, but having to explain the game to some of my PC buddies is a bummer, because most will never invest into getting a PS3, because as far as they are concerned its only one game and they are not going to shell out $300+ for a 1 game system. Now lets imagine on 6/1/12 the launch of Uncharted 3 takes place on PC. Now there is no longer that divide, now what you spent talking to your buddies about 7 months ago can be experienced by them and most likely at a cheaper price, either the standard $50 or now that they are getting along, on Valve's Steam service for $40 or below.

Now all of sudden you have just widen you audience, people who potentially wrote off the PS3 may start looking more into it wondering what else they might be missing out on. But this goes further than a few games, this goes into the area of providing a somewhat different experience of the same title if done correctly. Imagine playing Uncharted 3 on a dedicated server! I mean for me its a big plus. I would potentially buy the game twice if I really liked the MP. I would buy it on PS3 to play it close to release with a controller, the only way to play it, and if dedicated server support was active for the PC port I would buy it again to play a game with a lot less lag. Warhawk comes to mind when thinking of games that would succeed as a PS3/PC game. PS3 Warhawk ran on dedicated servers and the game played great when playing in North America (my region) I got pings as low as 20 when playing on my basic cable line, I can only imagine how good that number would be with my upgraded connection. I was playing games with Euro players with a ping of 100-160 which is fantastic considering the distance.

So with is all this, I am left wondering where are my PC ports? I don't think it would be much of a loss to release big name exclusive for the PC, especially now with valve being super supportive. From personal experience, I don't own a X360 so some games that are console exclusives like fable 3, Splinter Cell:Conviction (started off exclusive) were always missed out on because I didn't own a X360, but when taxes rolled around I took my refund invested in a rig and was able to play these games thanks to them being on PC. Same effect can be had with Sony games. If you to think the last line is the reason why Sony wouldn't publish their games for PC here is some food for thought. I really want to play Gears of War 3, but I really don't have a need to own a X360, I played the first Gears when it was ported over to PC, about 4 years ago and I haven't touched the series again since, even though I have this urge to play Gears 2 and 3. Point? As much as I want to play Gears its not enough for me to pay for a X360 and at this point I don't think there is any game that can be released that will make me buy a X360. But, if a Gears of War trilogy collection were set to release on PC I would buy it on release day. So that I can experience the series.

Which goes back to my question. Where are my PC ports Sony?

Ares84HU4432d ago

This isn't anything new.

In the PS1 era, did you see Crash Bandicoot on PC??? Did you see Tekken on PC??? Did you see Ridge Racer on PC???? And there is a ton more.

In the PS2 era as well.

Sony is supporting it's system because they want to sell PS3's. If you want to sell something than it must have something that nothing else has.

There is nothing wrong with that. All I see here is a huge rant over a none-issue.

Microsoft has Windows on PC, hence their support.

kornbeaner4431d ago

Never said it was an issue, I own a PS3 so this doesn't apply to me. My "rant" is why hasn't Sony at least attempted to merge to gap between the two audiences.

Lets just say for the sake of discussion. PS3 owners are getting Uncharted 3. Okay, how much at this point would it hurt Sony to release Uncharted 1 on PC? Resistance 1 or Warhawk? point is PS3 has at least 3 years left of prime gaming why not expand your horizon to a new audience to further promote your system. If said PC gamer likes UC1, Resistance 1 or Warhawk. Wouldn't this be a dual benefit for both Sony and its users?

What if 2% or even 1% of all PC users who can now play UC1 or other franchises decide to buy a PS3 because they enjoyed the series so much that they want to experience the rest of them.

Wouldn't this benefit Sony by essentially promoting their console's games on another platform and it would also benefit users because we might all of sudden have more players to play our games with.

There was no rant here, I just want to see more unity amongst all us gamers. Exclusive early on help promote the name brand and business, but later on I feel it would be idle to at least attempt to bridge that gap between users. I doubt that releasing UC1 5 years later on PC would hurt sony more than it would help.

And if by chance it doesn't have that affect at least now many more people would get a chance to play 5 year old games that should really be enjoyed by as many people as possible. Isn't the true point of this culture? Enjoy all that we can, when we can.

Tony P4431d ago

Yeah, this is pretty much why I don't really care for Sony on the PC side of things.

I've said before, MS isn't exactly good for PC gaming, but at least they've made efforts. Sony doesn't concern itself with PC outside of SOE's MMOs since the primary audience for that genre is on PC.

Eyesoftheraven4431d ago (Edited 4431d ago )

I'd love to see some PS3 exclsives on PC as well, but that's not a simple or cheap task to port games created around PS3's custom archtiecture to the vastly different [hardware] PC world just so a relatively low amount of people can play the games on their PC with high resolutions and better quality settings. Not to mention the addition of proper mouse and keyboard support. Even if every PC user bought the PC version at (let's just say) $60, it still wouldn't be worth it for Sony or the developers to put in all the required work..

bub164431d ago

the reason they dont make uncharted, resistance and exclusives on pc is because it makes you go out and buy a ps3, + it would cost alot of money to port over to pc, + ports are rubbish, + i dont want any xbox fanboy playing uncharted 1 on a PC! you wana play sonys amazing games. you buy a damn ps3 and face facts thats its superior to anything else becuase uncharted 3 rulessssssssssssssssssssssssss sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss ssssssssssssssssssss aaaaaaaaafasdnfkjavnkj vgdbhlk kler vvskvs;dogvsmspomf lrhmd

stevenhiggster4431d ago (Edited 4431d ago )

Sony do actually make quite a few games for the PC, they are just published under the SOE banner instead of the PlayStation banner.

Tony P4431d ago

And, as was mentioned, SOE only makes massively multiplayer games for PC. That's a far cry from supporting PC gaming given their library of games.

Ducky4432d ago (Edited 4432d ago )

Payday is another game that they've done. (Or rather, are doing)

I don't see why they'd make their popular exclusives go to PC though. The exclusives are part of the reasons people buy the console to begin with. They'd loose more than they'd gain by having those games on PC.

However, it would be cool if they ported the older games like Warhawk as you mentioned since PC users would just host their own servers, adding life to an old game.

theonlylolking4431d ago

They should have starhawk be PC and PS3 cross-plat play.

rjdofu4432d ago (Edited 4432d ago )

Ok, 1st, Naughty Dog is Sony's first-party developer (owned by Sony), therefor it's unlikely that they will release their games on other platforms than Sony's gaming system.

2nd, you're asking the last thing Sony wanna do.
It wouldn't be exclusive anymore if it's released on PC. Sony's plan from the beginning is to concentrate on the software quality & quantity to gain profit, hence the need of exclusive titles, and the PS3 reputation is mostly based on those titles -> it's very crucial that Sony has to keep their exclusives to guarantee their profit.

It's true that if there is a PC port, the audience will be widen. However, because a gaming PC always performs game better than consoles (and games come at cheaper price), what's the need of owning that title on PS3 anymore? If it happened to only one good game like UC3, you might think it's not important. But imagine if all future high quality games have port on PC, then what's the purpose of owning a PS3?

Of course, your point maybe valid when you think of it in a gamer view (want to experience every game in 1 system-though it's rather greedy), but in a business sense, it's not gonna work.

Tony P4431d ago

The exclusive argument might make sense in a console vs console argument, but console vs PC is pretty different.

Although PC gaming can be awesome, people still choose consoles for the same reason: ease of use. A lot of the knowledge and expertise needed to run even a decent gaming rig simply isn't needed to get a comparable experience on consoles.

Korn has already pointed out MS's contributions and that was back when they were routinely moving more units than Sony.

So I wonder exactly why MS can apparently make it work and Sony can't, according to you.

A-Glorious-Dawn4431d ago

One thing I constantly hear Sony reiterate at their conferences is 'experiences only available on our platform'

So the business strategy should be quite clear to anyone.

That said I've always wanted to bump up Uncharted to 1080p and 60fps.

Tony P4431d ago

The strategy is abundantly clear.

Meanwhile, MS's strategy has included PC and they don't appear at all weaker for it. Does Sony really think they'd lose console sales in droves if they made a PC port of an exclusive? I find that kind of laughable, tbh.

So I repeat: If they can at least try, then why can't Sony?

A-Glorious-Dawn4430d ago (Edited 4430d ago )

@TonyP

The answer to that is trivially clear, MS owns windows, so publishing games on their OS has almost no repercussion and as most gaming PC's use Windows. Its so obvious, to compare MS's strategy to that of Sony regarding the PC is almost nonsensical.

It is not the same for Sony and their exclusives, I can only see it harming the integrity of their platform were they to offer their experiences on another, much less on an OS that belongs to their main competitor....

If you can experience everything the PS3 has to offer elsewhere, what exactly is the point of owning it?

Tony P4430d ago (Edited 4430d ago )

I think it would be better if you stopped acting like you're explaining something obvious to a moron. It is rather insulting. Thanks.

1) Anyway, Windows is just the OS. Sure, it makes MS the lion's share of its profits... but gaming constitutes a miniscule portion. Being so ahead of Apple in gaming, I'm sure sells some copies of W7. But Sony? Evidently not enough to stop an *entire division* of Sony from devoting itself to MMOs on PC-- if they're so fearful. It's probably because PS3 has nothing to do with Windows OS in any gaming related way.

So imo to say that Windows hurts PS3 as a gaming platform is about as wrong as saying MS takes a hit when an Xbox is played on a Sony brand TV.

2)"If you can experience everything the PS3 has to offer elsewhere, what exactly is the point of owning it?"

Who said they had to offer everything? The whole point of the original argument was to offer at least a sampling. It says it right there in the blog.

RevXM4429d ago

@ Tony P

Microsoft didnt do so well with Games for Windows live, and GeOW for Pc.

And I think its harder to do for Sony.
It would mean that they port their games to a Microsoft Platform (Windows).
They could port old games that arent relevant to them so muc any more(Ps2 games) or that wasnt that good and make them better. (haze?, Lair?)

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4429d ago
TheDivine4432d ago

I think they want you to buy a ps3 for those games. They make money off of systems and games. Also they hype games as only possible on playstation so if say uncharted 3 looks better and runs better on pc it wouldnt help them much. If their games were on pc i wouldnt own a ps3 period and many others wouldnt. They could brand a cell cpu/gpu combo so that all pc's could run their games and make $$ but it defeats the purpose of a pc.

Ms can do pc ports because they have windows to to make money off of, very different than sony's situation although it would be awesome.

smashcrashbash4432d ago

What will Sony do with the PS3s that people don't buy because of the PC ports? Throw them in the trash? If the game is exclusive to my system you will be enticed to buy them for the PS3. If it is on multiple systems I lose money for every PS3 you don't buy. That is why they are called EXCLUSIVES. Just because some people insist that a PC is better don't expect Sony to just throw their PS3 profits out the window to facilitate your needs.

kornbeaner4431d ago

I guess I have to explain myself, because apparently waiting for UC3 is not enough to let people know I own a PS3.

all I want to see is some unity as far as games that we get to experience. At this point would it hurt Sony to port UC1 or resistance to PC some 5 years later?

Would it help?

Maybe/Maybe not but at least now when speaking to people who strictly play PC games, we can at least now mention how good UC1 is and that they should play it.

I mean that has been a great thing about having a PC. Fable 3 and Splinter Cell:Conviction were games I really wanted to play, I don't want or need a 360. But I was still able to experience it on PC, which allowed me to at least talk about and even recommend these games to my friends who only play on 360 and skip them over.

Having that ability via PS3 franchises would only bring unity to the community.

If it wasn't for Gears 1 on PC, I never would've played the franchise. As much as I wanted to I never would've brought myself to buying a 360, so then I would've have missed out completely. I think at this point giving the part 1's to all of Sony's Franchises would at least lay down some ground work for future entries maybe even for the PS4 as far as a consumer base goes.

I made my choice, PS3 and PC. For those who only have PC a move like this might entice them to become PC and PS4 gamers for the upcoming generation.

If not we can at least discuss Great games with our PC brothers.

Enate4429d ago (Edited 4429d ago )

I understand what you are saying but as much as you wanna push the idea I just don't see a need for it. I know guys that can clearly see the benefit of owning either console or a pc and do so however they please without the need for to play anything on them. Multiplats already provide that unity and common ground. Though more often then not it just creates debates. Like what was said before Microsoft has some stake in the PC market and throws it a bone every now and then so that much makes sense.

An I to own a PS3 and a PC and have no need for a 360. I played splinter cell as well but that was hardly an exclusive along the lines of GOW3 or Halo Reach, it was 3rd party after all. PS3 thrives on its exclusives and part of that stands only on playstation no exceptions. The people that still wish to remain PC exclusive do so on their own accord. An for one reason or another do not feel the need to buy a PS3 and a little bit of the classics isn't going to change that.

I personally love playing on my PS3 and PC it gives me all the choice I need. An 360 would be nice to play Forza but I won't fold just to play one game.