First of all, this seems like baiting people for self promotion youtube clicks?
Frankly, your premise that people should just be happy with how games look and run if it meets your self-defined minimum standard of acceptable is kind of ridiculous.
Of course the Switch version of Outer Worlds looks totally fine and is completely playable and recognizable as a videogame, but that doesn't mean everyone should just blindly accept that and be happy with whatever they get. If I am paying $60 for a game and I have the capacity to play it on multiple consoles or the PC, then I absolutely want to get the best version of that game for me.
What is the best version of that game? That is the part that is completely subjective, and also what you are trying to argue about. If you can accept that the switch port is the worst looking version of the game graphically and in terms of performance because you value the portability, or you are able to play it on your TV or whatever, then that's awesome and totally valid. For me personally, I want to play the version where I can get the best framerate because I enjoy the smoothness that 60+fps provides, so the PC version is the best version for me. Also valid.
Discussion about these differences by gamers and websites like Giant Bomb are important because it helps everyone make informed purchasing decisions and protect people from spending a lot of money on something that might not meet their expectations.
Also, while it might be true that the average gamer at large doesn't have a nice gaming PC, it's also important to consider that Giant Bomb absolutely caters towards the more "hardcore" audience that has a lot more invested on average than the typical gamer, so I don't think your assumptions there are really very accurate.
OKAY, and now to talk about what I agree with in what you're trying to say.
Yes, obviously people take the relatively small (sometimes) differences in versions of games and blow them up to huge deals. The games industry and gamers in general are huge fucking babies and do this shit all the time and its annoying as all hell. That being said, in my many years of experience, its generally a vocal minorityish of gamers, and generally its very young gamers that feel the need to defend and justify their (or their parent's) purchase decisions to others online.
I grew up playing games on low settings or enduring really awful framerates because it didn't really matter to me that much back then, and I was still getting most of the experience out of the game. As I'm sure a lot of GB veterans will attest to, as I got older and had more money to spend in gaming hardware and in life, my expectations for what was acceptable increased. I still think people that say they can see the difference between 120 fps and 144fps are snobs and full of shit, but definitely playing games on 3fps feels bad to me now on some games, especially first person stuff when I'm trying to aim, So I understand both arguments pretty well.
PS: Good luck with the money situation dude.
Log in to comment