PC games getting to far ahead of existing technology

[Animegamer]

A trend ive been seeing lately has been disturbing me. And that is that every major PC game coming out lately, or due to be coming out soon has rather insane graphical requirements. Not that this bothers me because I keep a high end pc... but the fact is these games tend to be alienating the majority of the market.

Sure allot of tech nerds out there will buy 8800GT's and quad core processors, and won't have any problems on these new games. But honestly how many years do you think it will take systems like that to reach the main stream market? The kind that buys their pc's from Compaq or HP? Or those cheapo brands nobody ever even heard of from Walmart? (like Everex)

I honestly thought the industry learned something after the release of World of Warcraft, and that is that keeping system requirements within reasonable limits helps sale your games better.
-----
Age of Conan:
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-2/110498/pc2.jpg

New mmo from Funcom, they have dropped over USD $80 million into this game in hopes it will be the next World of Warcraft sales wise. But the fact is only the top 10% of pc's will probably be able to run it.

Aion:
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-2/110498/pc1.jpg

A new mmo from NCsoft (makers of Guild Wars) where you play as an angel like race, flying around from continent to continent doing battle with demons. With mid air combat and the fact that you fly over massive continents expect massive lag unless you have a high end system.

Crysis:
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-2/110498/pc3.jpg

This game needs no comments.

...and yes, there are many more, I just didn't want to get to deep going into examples.
-----


So what do you think? Do you think its ok to develop games that only the top 10% of PC's can run?

[zomfgbie]

i dont play any PC games but i remember when i was a kid i got zoo tycoon 2 and my comp needed a new sound and graphics card to play it which pissed me off cause zoo tycoon 1 was awesome =[

[mishkamash]

DAMN IF ONLY I HAD 20,000 DOLLARS

[MRat]

Crysis can run on computers 2 years old now. Sure the MAX requirements are high, but the game is perfectly playable on the lower graphics settings. My PC is horrifyingly outdated, and I can run Crysis.

My concern with new games isn't that the graphics are getting ahead, though I'll admit I guess they sort of are, but it's the obession of the audience to play games with graphics like these. Lifeless overrendered super-shiny designs that any ape with a camera could of concieved.

The most recent game with graphics that I would even consider decent (excluding Nintendo games, because they don't care about graphics really) would be Psychonaughts, which has brilliant designs. Good graphics to me have nothing to do with the rendering, and all to do with the creativity in the designs. I'd rather see Halo looking like Half-Life 1 but with unique looking models, then how it does now with the really clear textures and 9billion polygons but designs that look a hundred years old and that are completely boring.




/end rant

[Gerkinman]

I got a quad core and 4gb of ram just for my flash work... i should try playing crisis to see how it runs i suppose...

[rtil]

i play worms and my machine is 10 years too advanced for it so i'm good

[ZekeySpaceyLizard]

its always been like this.

[MRat]

its always been like this.

[adamant]

stop reading the news asshole