Remind me of the last Gearbox game that was on par with anything Valve, id, or Crytek has ever made?

This is what happens to all those 13 year old modders who think they are hot stuff, but in reality suck.

Nothing to see here, move along all.

A lot of people played Crysis and enjoyed it, myself included. If inability to port to consoles is a problem, is definitely not my problem and I couldn't care less. There are already too many crappy console games out there that are PC-ports wannabees and I enjoy a pure PC based gaming company that still caters to it's fan base.

Never even heard of these guys.

lol. Y can run Crysis fine with a $120 4850.

As for not Crytek, isn't Crysis 2 going to be multi platform (and esp. aimed at PC and PS3)?

EPIC FAIL on Pitchford's part.

I'll do one better...who the hell is Gearbox software anyways? Never even heard of them. Bashing Crysis is funny and it isn't Crytek's fault the consoles can't handle Crysis. This guy is having some nerd rage but he will see the light soon enough.

Boarderlands

It's lots of fun to play, a little buggy on the PC though.

grear box makes ok games for some of the titles .. but to be honest there nothing worth mentioning .. as far as im concerned microsoft and sony should take a more proactive approach tell why it wouldnt make sense to do so .. modular system upgrades .. and just update the firm ware and drivers for the various modules. i know the games are designed for a specific hard ware set up .. but quite frankly using antiquated hardware to play next gen games on seems kinda crazy .. and not every one likes the wii lol
dam visual gaming sounds like a lot of exercise.. and trust me after work i dont feel like doing much... and another thing why the heck would you wanna rent online when netflix is cheap and you get a better service

Excuse me, but Crysis was a pretty revolutionary game. On very high settings, it's still rather beautiful to look at. On top of that, I have yet to see any game with a more interactive and realistic environment. I actually wonder if the trees were made of Voxels (discussed in another article on here). It would explain why it taxes the hardware so much.

id Software made the Doom series and Quake series, names that every gamer knows. On top of that, I'm sorry, but Rage looks better than anything Gearbox has worked on, with the possible exception of Borderlands (which was primarily 2k anyway.)

Btw, Gearbox assisted in Half-Life ports and expansions, Halo on the PC, Brothers in Arms series, and Borderlands.

No one gives Crysis credit for how scaleable it actually was. Sure if you crank it to 2560 and max settings it brought systems to their knees. But when the game came out in 07 I played it on my crappy little Athlon X2 5000+ and x1950 Pro. Sure I had to play on low to medium settings and 1680x1050 res but even at those settings the game still looked gorgeous. Now when i return to the game and have the ability to crank the settings it just looks that much better. If game developers followed this guy's suggestions we wouldn't make any graphical advancements until the next gen of consoles come out. Sorry but PC technology is moving too fast for games to look the same for 6-7 years.

FU! they did just fine without the consoles, and I'm glad they aren't stooping to your level.

didn't you make borderlands? that sucks on the pc due to the borked interfaces coming from the consoles, so just stfu!

crysis can't run on the current consoles? well thats their fault! not crytek's! these consoles were meant to be next gen!! get back to your bandwagon n00b, wouldn't want them to leave you behind. you'll have us all playing fps's with a controller on PC if you could!

what a douchebagunov

Brother In Arms were good but they werent anything special. INFACT BiA was made on UT3 Engine so it wasnt really that original either... I dont want to play BIA quality games all the time. Learn from others and start innovating if you dont want to, shut your face and dont demote progress and innovation... Wi

I'm sure gearbox would rather re-issue 'pong' with moderately upgraded graphics so that it's a console game... Console gaming will always fall behind PC games, within a year of the console coming out, for content, visuals and complexity of story and environments. That means five plus years these days of ever weakening ports of PC games to consoles. I'm sure gearbox would rather there be no PC games so that only consoles got attention.

Randy Pitchford is ALMOST the new John Romero. Bashing Valve, iD, Crytek, and Fallout 3... Borderlands is good, but it's not good enough to make his outlandish bashing anywhere near credible. This guy needs to be knocked down a peg or two.

I agree. Borderlands is good but have some very obvious short comings. He should learn to Shut the F__k up. Randy, you are not a powerhouse in the industry. You have no pull, power, or bragging rights just yet. You have made a whole bunch of mods and 1 game. While those were definitely above par, they were not awe inspiring or industry changing.

Funny considering Borderlands has a major flaw they have yet to fix preventing their users multiplayer content from being saved. Yep, they are so far ahead of the other companies.

Maybe I'm just too old or too ignorant, but the only game I recall Gearbox dooing that had widespread aclaim was Opposing Forces. Wasn't that a Half-Life Mod?

Again, I've been out of touch with the overall gaming community for the last few years, but still. It's the only title I can think of.

Yeah, Opposing Force rocked my socks... but seriously, id software pretty much invented 3D gaming as we know it. It kinda sucks that they got bought by ZeniMax Media though - if anything ruins id it'll be corporate BS not anything their devs do.

I like Borderlands, it is a great multiplayer title. Other than that I think gearbox should try to make a few more good games before criticizing the big names in their industry.

I really don't think Borderlands is a good looking game like Crysis. The cartoon graphics just ruin it imo... whoever though cell shading looked good needs to set it up next to a realistic game. Rocks in borderlands look like they're drawn by a 10yo kid. I like the game, it's fun, just doesn't have the graphical appeal that Crysis did.

As far as this guy is concerned, I do think that he is speaking from a strictly business point of view. Everyone is pushing consoles now, eventually there won't be anything but ports of year old console games on PC. As such, he is right in saying that if a company doesn't prepare for consoles as their primary source of income, they will encounter financial difficulties or fail outright.

I think it will take another generation of consoles for this to happen though. It is only just starting now and a strictly PC game can easily survive just as Crysis did.

A rather small developer is knocking companies that BUILD the engines that multiple games run on. Think about that. They also keep building rendering engines that other games will run on in the future. id and Crytek aren't just simple game companies. They are out to set the visual landscape of an entire industry for years to come. At this point when you think of Epic do you think of Unreal or the Unreal Engine? I have a feeling Epic makes a bit more money off their engine than they do their games. id and Crytek want the same piece of the render engine pie. This guy can fight over his game crumbs all he wants. His bashing of Valve had so many holes in its logic it wasn't even funny. Was he even involved creatively or on the technical side of any of Gearbox's games or mods? And why am I getting so worked up over a Kevin Parrish piece anyway? He writes crap like this just to get a rise out of people, not to actually report anything worthwhile.

As for comments about consoles taking over: Yes, consoles are an extreme piece of the growing pie, but taking a linear approach to future markets in this case may not be a good idea. With so many incalculable variables, instead of the future being devoid of pure pc games, we may see a technological merger between consoles/pc's/and notebooks resulting in a completely new market segment. There will always be a supply where there's a demand, so this direction is really up to us as the consumers.

oh and vfighter: I agree, what's up with Parrish's drama-seeking articles?

I don't get his point really! Does he blame Crytek and id software not sony and microsoft not releasing faster/more competent consoles?
I don't think id or Crytek think that evolution should stop just because two, rather big, vendors stop innovating.

"software not sony and microsoft" ; should've been "software for sony and microsoft"

i can't wait fort eh day to see modular consoles , though not sure how it would fly , nintendo tried something similar on the N64 (it had a modular ram upgrade), from what i gather it neer erally went to wella dn few games made much use of it.

however today is a difernt story ,MS proved that at least some parts being modular works (sucha s thier 360 hard drive ) the tirck is how do you make a console with modular Cpu, GPU , and ram updates , that still looks like somethign you want sitting in yoru living room ? not to forget heat concern issues , if teh cpu adn gpu becomes modular on consoles , cooling will become a big concern because likely such parts would be hosue in a seperate chassis that attached (or slots into) the main deck , so you have to ask how would you go about cooling these components if they were modular.

given these thoughts i don';t think well will see modular consoels any tiems soon and certainly not in teh next two generations , currently weare at a plateu on "how small" we can goa dn stil cool off high end components the 360 adn teh ps 3 are both showcases of this , even the slimmed down ps3 is running rather hot compared to consoles of yesteryear , adn i don't even need to mention teh ehat off the 360 even after multiple die shrinks and so such it still puts out alsmot as much heat as a computer. I think next generation consoles will be a touch bigger than this gen , merely to make air flow room for teh components. which to em is not a bad thing , i'd rather the 360 been insde a mid size PC chassis than to have had teh heating issues it has

^Good lord, keep him away from a keyboard, my eyes are bleeding^

just don't read his comments - I always skip them

Gearbox who?
“he offers up Crysis, a game he claims that many people couldn't play on the PC due to hardware requirements, thus it was difficult to market”
gearbox does have a point.. why even make a game that most people cannot enjoy to its full potential.
I have mixed feelings about crysis.. when I first played the game I spent more time trying to get good fps and visuals than actually playing it. Now I can play at max visuals in HD..@ 720 and I must admit.. it seems like a different game.
Because I couldn’t enjoy all the visuals before.. I just hurried through the game. I felt it was mediocre at best.
To use the scalability reason seems like a bad business model. If you want good sales numbers you don’t limit your customer base.. and then go one step further by limiting that base down to the hard core only.
At least on a console you can put your best foot forward right from the get go. I hate playing on consoles… but it seems pc gamers are getting left behind.
GTA IV is a good example.. I can play Crysis on high.. but GTA is a slide show on high.. and I am not jumping through hoops just to get that game to run. I will wait till my hardware can do it.. or a patch.. but rockstar has several platforms so im sure PC sales are not a real concern.

Crisis could be run on Xbox360 if they downgrade the product quality.
Any company could do that if they really want to.

... the problem is the hardware... at this point.
What do you think ? It's an 5 year old console.

Gearbox's Randy Pitchford just CRY because he can't run Crisis on his Xbox360 and BASH company who doesn't DOWNGRADE their product to run on console.

This just mean one thing: 5 year old console is the same as a 5 year old PC, you can't run every games on it (at MAX quality).

Man, a lot of people take it personally when someone talks about the platform they like. All he (Randy Pitchford) did is speak from a business risk perspective, that is all.

No one needs to have a 'legendary history' behind them to make an argument, it simply provides credibility but even geniuses can be wrong and 8-year olds can be right so long as their argument is logical.

All he said is basic 101 in investing, if you don't diversify, your bets become riskier. How many average FPSs sell millions of copies on consoles? How many average FPSs sell millions on PC? Not as many right? That's all he's saying, if they want to stay safe, its in their best interest to support multiple platforms for their titles. You can still focus on PC and make it your #1 priority but shutting out a whole channel of potential income (ie console gaming) just out of pride is not good business sense.

PC Gaming is better anyway. I love companies that cater to superior gaming, graphics, and experience. If people are too poor to afford a good gaming machine, well then that's just life. Deal with it.