Bungie’s Destiny Not Destined For PC… For Now

By Nathan Grayson on April 29th, 2014 at 8:00 am.

It’s kind of a fantastic time to be a PC gamer, if you haven’t noticed. Pretty much everything of note is coming to our platform of choice, and also we get productivity software! Does it get any better? That does, however, make rare exceptions like Halo creator Bungie’s new (don’t-call-it-an) MMOFPS Destiny all the stranger. So why can’t the multi-million-dollar-banking mega-dev – dual-wielding newfound pseudo-freedom and a series not synonymous with Microsoft’s bawkes of eckses – pump out a PC version? “It’s complicated,” apparently. But there is hope, dim though it might be, for the future.

Speaking with Eurogamer, design lead Lars Bakken explained the situation on Bungie’s end:

“I wish it was that simple. It’s pretty complicated. That doesn’t mean it can’t happen in the future, it just means it won’t happen right now.”

A major part of the problem? Bungie’s not outsourcing any of the development, even though Destiny’s got four (in some cases, vastly) different destinations.

“The console SKUs are really important for us and that’s what we’re focusing on. We’re doing it all internally ourselves. That’s a huge endeavour. That’s not something we’ve ever done before. So when I’m playtesting and I’m trying to play PS4, Xbox One, Xbox 360 and PS3, that’s a lot of work. Adding another thing on there is just crazy. It’s crazy to think of right now.”

For the time being, then, PC gets the short end of the stick (read: gun), but it may not stay that way forever. Bungie COO Pete Parsons is hopeful that his company will bounce back to PC… eventually.

“What is also true is that, as you might imagine, we’re all hardcore PC players. We play everything. It doesn’t matter if it’s a phone, PC or console, we play it. And there are 500 people up there. So we care a lot about the PC.

“I look forward to our future conversations around PC.”

So, PC version some not insubstantial number of moons from now? Seems possible. As we’ve pointed out previously, it’s kind of, well, insane that Bungie’s pushing PC to the back of the line in this day and age, but oh well. For now, all we can do is watch and wait. And hey, what do you know? Here’s seven minutes of footage to watch right now. If you put it on repeat a few hundred-thousand times over, the PC version of Destiny will (probably) be out in no time.

__________________

« | »

, , .

90 Comments »

  1. BobbyDylan says:

    It’s OK. We got Star Citizen and Elite 4. I think we’re better off.

    • Glottis1 says:

      Don’t forget about Broken age(scifi) and Next car game(can be played with other people).

    • dontnormally says:

      But we don’t have a proper Myth sequel (3 didn’t happen).
      There’s still a part of me holding out hope that Bungie will return to the source of its true greatness.

    • Vin_Howard says:

      Yah, if we were to play Destiny, we would do so with a mouse and keyboard. But you know what they say: “We made the game run without a mouse and keyboard. And now nobody plays shooters the way they used to play them before Halo ’cause nobody wants to.”

    • Corb says:

      This just looks like bungie is trying to apply warframe’s art direction to borderlands 2….It looks cool, I’d love to have it on PC, but there’s no reason to protest or hold your breathe for it.

  2. epeternally says:

    At this point, not releasing for PC is just foolish. PC gaming has gone from the seedy underbelly of the gaming industry to being one of the, if not the, strongest sector. Additionally, porting shouldn’t even be that difficult given the architecture similarities (or rather, the architecture being basically identical) to the PS4 and Xbone. I’m not particularly interested in playing this one, being both not a fan of modern shooter (basically anything that has a cover system and you can’t carry every weapon at once) and I don’t play online games much, but it is in everyone’s best interest for this to come out on PC. Hopefully they’ll make it happen eventually.

    • LionsPhil says:

      What do you mean “gone from”?

      Turn of the millenium, the PC was riding high. UT, Quake 3, Deus Ex, Half Life: PC games, first and foremost, (some) ported to consoles later.

      • Gap Gen says:

        Yes, console shooters only really took off with Halo (although Goldeneye was a good example, it didn’t have many successful imitators). Plus for the MMO market, I don’t think consoles ever really achieved market dominance.

      • epeternally says:

        For shooters, sure, PC has always been on top, but look at the percentage of AAA PS2/Xbox/Gamecube games that got ports to the PC versus the percentage of AAA 360/PS3 games that have. It’s massively smaller because PC has grown from a niche platform for shooters and strategy games to a thriving, vibrant platform where you can release most any game and make money at it, at least if it’s good. PC never got a golden era of 3D platformers, I can’t even think of an 1997-2005 3D platformer that was on PC except Psychonauts and Rayman 2/3. PC never used to get the arcade ports of most major titles that almost inevitably showed up on consoles (Marvel vs Capcom, Street Fighter III, Soul Calibur, need I continue?). And all of that is changing, it’s changing because the status of PC gaming has massively moved up in the world during the last seven-ish years.

        • Smoky_the_Bear says:

          This I agree with, other than certain things like fighting games that according to market research at least, don’t sell well on PC (this is also true for a lot of sports games).
          Also the reverse of what you said is true, for a couple of reasons. Firstly every console player has gone gaga for FPS games during the PS3/X360 generation, lots of money being pumped into them. This gave developers a reason to start porting these games to PC because it is the traditional platform for FPS games and they realised there is a market there.

          Also game development costs have skyrocketed during the PS3/360 generation, lots of demand for expensive open world stuff and the like. This gave developers more of a reason to port because its a lot cheaper than making another game from scratch now so it’s the better choice financially. Back in the PS2 days devs were churning out games by the bucketload because they were much cheaper to make back then, as evidenced by the sheer amount of stuff released for the PS2 over its lifetime.

          Port quality however is still an issue. Lots of companies see the PC as secondary, they make the console version then port to PC as cheaply as possible. Even in 2014 lots of games are coming out on PC with nonsense such as XBox pad controls by default, no mouse support in the menus and other crap like that, this should have stopped long ago and needs to be a thing of the past. I won’t bitch about texture quality and the like, because to me that is being slightly PC master race, I will bitch about companies not doing rudimentary things like mouse support that PC games have done for 20 years because either they can’t be arsed or its “too expensive”.

    • 2late2die says:

      Actually it never was the “seedy underbelly” of anything. PC gaming has always been strong it’s just that for a while the console kiddies were old enough to be so loud about the consoles that everyone thought PC gaming was on the way out. ‘Course now that those console kiddies are becoming adults they’re realizing the limitations of consoles and are wisening up to the ways of the PC, hence the apparent “come back”.

      As far as Bundie, honestly it’s their loss. Destiny looks cool but there are so many awesome games coming out on the PC it won’t be missed all that much.

      • FD says:

        I agree that PC gaming was never the seedy underbelly of gaming but 5 or 6 years ago the impression of a lot of developers was of PC as the seedy underbelly. There was the piracy issue, there was the variability of hardware issue, there was the splintered market issue. All of these issues were overblown to some degree but it didn’t matter because they were what the people making the decisions believed. If you go back to games released during that period there are still games that were console exclusive that haven’t been ported (and probably never will be ported) to PC.

        A lot of things have changed since then. Last generation’s consoles started to become very limiting due to outdated hardware. The rise of Steam as the dominant PC gaming store front helped make a lot of developers a lot more comfortable with the piracy issue and partially solved the splintered market issue. We can debate whether the rise of Steam has been a good thing for PC gaming but it certainly helped quell some developer worries about PC development. The pace of hardware progression on PC slowed so hardware variability became less of an issue.

        PC gaming in the past few years has been redeemed in the eyes of developers. Last generation a game like Titanfall probably skips PC development, this generation it doesn’t. Dark Souls 2 is a good example, last generation we had to beg to get a pretty terrible console port, this generation we get a solid port on the release schedule. It’d be nice if we had simultaneous release but its certainly a step in the right direction. We PC gamers have always known that our platform wasn’t the “seedy underbelly” of gaming but it took quite a while for developers to start to see it our way.

  3. XhomeB says:

    Frankly, I don’t care. The only Bungie games I ever liked were Myth 1&2. All right, liked is an understatement, I LOVED those.
    Marathon was merely ok-ish, Halo never grabbed me (lame Power Rangers-like aesthetics, plasticky weapons and horrible level design didn’t help). This thing looks like a Borderlands clone set in a large , Halo-ish world. Meh.

    • Maritz says:

      I think I put more multiplayer hours into Myth 2 than any other game before or since – mostly in the core game, but many hours into that Vietnam mod too. Those were the days! Might just have to reinstall it now.

    • El_Emmental says:

      Myth II almost gave me nightmares when I was a wee lad, the gore and the foggy lands…

      • BobbyDylan says:

        Oh man. And the story almost brought me to the brink of tears (as a child). It felt so hopeless.

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          It was such a grim game for its time. I freakin’ loved it!

    • Subject 706 says:

      I hold out a (vain?) hope that some Bungie refugees will kickstart Myth IV or something similar. Loved Myth 1 and 2. Even quite liked Myth III (don’t hurt me please).

      • Maritz says:

        Myth 3 was a perfectly respectable entry in the series but the only one I didn’t play more than once, for reasons I can’t remember now.

        • jonahcutter says:

          Myth 3 didn’t feel like “Myth” to me. Too much emphasis on special units and powers, eclipsing the elegant simplicity of the core units of the previous games. And the jump to 3d was jarring. The sprites from the first two games were brilliantly done and the change seemed to muddle the established visual language without bringing enough benefit. (Though just thinking about it now makes me curious to go back and try it again…)

          As well, it was a prequel. Which for me personally is always much more of a hard sell. I wish they had given us a third act to the narrative.

          The whole game felt like much more a player-made mod than a proper continuation of the series.

          There was also no more bnet at that point. Mnet and Playmyth still existed with some of the old intensity but also much smaller in numbers. The overall community was scattered, with many long-time players taking the opportunity to leave the series behind. And considering the broken and buggy state of the Myth 3 release, no fanbase was ever built for it. It really felt like the final nail in the coffin of the larger experience.

    • jonahcutter says:

      Myth TFL and Myth 2 SB remain two of the greatest games ever created. I’ll be truly interested in a Bungie game again when it’s a proper Myth sequel (or spiritual successor). I want real-time. I want formations. I want small unit positional tactics. I want melee. I want archers. I want shambling, implacable thrall. I want ghols tossing pus. I want my dorfs sometimes blowing up my own lines. I want magic so powerful and rare, to use it is as much a risk to myself as to my enemies. I want shovel-toting journeymen. I want big blue trow kicking people to pieces. I want explosive physics and heads rolling down hills.

      And the atmosphere… so beautifully bleak. Fighting desperate, small battles in blasted, post-war lands. Before there was Dark Souls, there was Myth/Myth 2.

      I’m proud to say I was there on the day they finally pulled the plug on bnet. To all my old venice blind friends, you are not forgotten…

  4. nimbulan says:

    If that video is any indication of the release quality, we aren’t missing anything. It’s like an awkward mashup of Borderlands and brown military shooters without the developers understanding what makes either of those games fun. They even managed to make Peter Dinklage sound boring.

    • Anguy says:

      I never got the hype around this and Halo before it either. Ever since they first announced the game last year (or was it the year before that?) it seemed bland and not very memorable or innovative. Doesn’t look any better now.

      Also the graphics are a bit underwhelming. They probably should have ditched last gen consoles

      • iainl says:

        At the time Halo was really, really good. The AI hit just the right combination of smart and stupid to make you feel badass for beating them, yet without requiring you to sneak around the whole time snipping away at the edges in a boring way. And the movement that feels so sludgey on mouse and keyboard for the PC port was perfectly balanced to the controller. The recharging shield was a brilliant solution to a world that couldn’t quicksave its way out of trouble or cover the place in transparently artificial health packs. And the two-gun limit elegantly forced you into making meaningful choices about what to carry and forced people to use guns they would have avoided had the “best” one always been available.

        But these are all things aimed at making a shooter work on a console, so of limited interest to primarily PC gamers.

        • Gap Gen says:

          Yes, I think early prototypes were more “PC” before the limitations of the XBox forced the level sizes down (I remember in Mass Effect the developers had a game where they tried to get from one end of the Citadel to the other without crashing, using the FPS counter as a radar to avoid memory-intensive hotspots).

        • SuicideKing says:

          Halo’s AI is probably one of the best I’ve seen in any AAA game.

    • SillyWizard says:

      You mean Lance Reddick?

      About as far from Peter Dinklage as humanly possible to be…

      Otherwise, absolutely correct — this game looks beyond dumb.

  5. Evil Pancakes says:

    This really is just a strange decision.
    I can understand not wanting to outsource development to a degree, but given the amazing quality some studios like Nixxis deliver, it just baffles me that they don’t just pay them a couple million of the (probably) massive budget Activision has available to them. This way they are missing out on the platform with the biggest install base by far.
    Really, the only business advantage consoles have over PC is that console sales are generally stronger short term, but pretty much die off after a year or so. Whereas PC will probably sell less in that first year, but continue to sell over a longer period of time. Although, maybe Activision’s pricing policy will adversely affect such trends, since they still sell CODBLOPS(1) at full price, which is just retarded.

    After watching that video; that score is great. As expected of Martin O’Donnell. Too bad I won’t be able to experience it ingame. Oh well, might try to find the soundtrack at some point.

    • hotmaildidntwork says:

      Did it ever come out why they fired him, or is that still unknown?

  6. Stimpack says:

    Why are so many news outlets reporting on this same exact story, as if it hasn’t been said consistently throughout its development?

    • Moraven says:

      Because they just had a press event at their studio that had free coffee and sandwiches and let journalists play the same 20 minute segment over and over while giving the same PR speak.

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        And brownies. They were given brownies.

        It all makes sense now.

  7. Williz says:

    Well looks like me buying a PS4 to play Destiny and then selling it a few months after is back on the cards…

    • Matias Otero says:

      Don’t. Console manufacturers pay developers to make their games exclusive to force PC owners to buy redundant hardware. Rather than compete on price or performance, they manufacture artificial product differentiation by using their vast resources to pressure developers into artificially limiting the scope of their products. Developers are of course told not to talk about it, so we get the “porting is too expensive” drivel. Yes, porting costs money. No, it’s not a significant amount of money in the context of a AAA-game. It’s practically a cartel, and buying consoles to play these “exclusives” reinforces the practice.

      If Bungie (or more likely, Activision) chose to take a lump sum from Microsoft and/or Sony over getting income from PC sales, then that’s a statement on how good of a game they think they have.

      • iainl says:

        “Console manufacturers pay developers to make their games exclusive to force PC owners to buy redundant hardware.”

        They don’t, in general. It’s quite common for one console manufacturer to pay a publisher to not release a game on the other companies’ consoles, but I’ve never heard of Sony (for example) paying a company for there not to be a PC release, but still allowing an Xbox version.

        • The Random One says:

          Agreed, that’s just conspiracy theorist talk. Microsoft and Sony aren’t united against the PC, they see it as a distant competitor far less important than one is to the other. In fact, Microsoft would be more likely to allow a game they’ve given a giant bag of dollar bills to to come out on PC than on Sony’s things, since they do have some stakes on PC gaming

    • Moraven says:

      Buy it for the other good games, not just for this. Not really sure what makes Destiny a system seller. Might as well stick to the Borderlands 2.5.

      • bee says:

        Isn’t it obvious? It’s a system seller because its a game people want to play that isn’t available on a platform they already have.

  8. Lobotomist says:

    What a shocker!

  9. int says:

    ‘Twas not fated to be

  10. Tridae says:

    Don’t kid yourself – dim hope of a PC port is just PR talk for “NOPE, but we still wanna seem like the good guys so believe whatever you want”.

    • silentdan says:

      Yeah, the PR thing has gotten to the point where I just feel silly for believing anything they say. Even if it eventually turns out to be true, I’m usually left with the suspicion that that was an accident, like looking at a stopped clock precisely 12 hours after it stopped and seeing the correct time. While I’m sure there are good PR people out there who are just trying to keep unfortunate misunderstandings from getting out of hand, for the most part, PR folks lie and/or mislead without a shred of remorse. When someone says, “maybe it’ll come out on PC eventually” I hear “we’re going to release it two years late, at full launch-day price, and it’ll be a lazy console port with no options screen and menus that cannot be navigated with a mouse, and when it does poorly, we’ll yell about piracy and cite this event as our reason for not developing for PC.”

  11. Bull0 says:

    Poor lad definitely is working hard, his words are coming out wrong. Not releasing the game for PC, but releasing it for 4 different console marks, that’s what’s crazy. I think this probably has more to do with not wanting to compete with the impossibly broad range of high-quality titles available for PC. Console gamers (particularly the newest gen) are pretty starved for anything half-decent to play, so they’ll all buy this.

    • silentdan says:

      I can’t be bothered to find reliable statistics, but it’s been my understanding that “console” is a bigger market than “PC” only if you count every console platform together as one entity. On a per-platform basis, where the Wii is its own thing and 360 is its own thing and XBone is its own thing, the PC dwarfs them all. It seems to me they’d find the best balance at PC + XBone + PS4. The former is huge and profitable in its own right, and the latter two suffer from a dearth of games, so people will lower their standards in the face of minimal competition. Why skip the single biggest platform just to accommodate four lesser-thans?

  12. Flappybat says:

    With the small install bases for next gen consoles you’d think they’d get better sales out of PC than at least one of the two new consoles. Better profit margins too, no console cut.

    • Baines says:

      The idea seems to be that people who buy the 360/PS3 version will “upgrade” to the Xbox One/PS4 version when they buy a new console. Bungie has already said that you’ll be able to import your character from a last gen system to the related current gen system. (Likely no cross-company importing though, due to restrictions by Sony and/or Microsoft.)

  13. Armante says:

    Releasing for four consoles seems strange, until you think about their closed architectures. Bungie doesn’t need to worry about the game not running because of video card or driver issues on consoles.

    Releasing it on PC basically opens pandoras box of tech issues.

    • Baines says:

      And any issues caused by hardware/software will get blasted as examples of a lazy port or the PC being treated as a second class citizen.

      Combine with that the dismissive attitude that a vocal group of PC gamers have against Bungie and console-based FPS (just look at other comments to this article for examples.)

      I can see why Bungie would look at the expenses and the drawbacks of the environment and decide that they don’t necessarily want to bother with the PC market right now.

      • silentdan says:

        And any issues caused by hardware/software will get blasted as examples of a lazy port or the PC being treated as a second class citizen.

        Given that hardware and software are the only two things that can create technical issues, I’m not sure it’s unfair to wonder why lazy console ports have more of these issues, and responsible cross-platform titles have far fewer. If it’s because one platform is considered an afterthought, unworthy of the craftsmanship dedicated to the “preferred” platform, then these criticisms are valid, I think. It’s pretty much what “second-class citizen” means.

        Combine with that the dismissive attitude that a vocal group of PC gamers have against Bungie and console-based FPS

        Well, you know, you get burned a few times, and you start to wise up. The pigeon-hole-and-generalize method might not be fair to every title, but we don’t always have the time or wherewithal to get all the consumer information we need, so we sometimes fall back on heuristics. It’s silly to do that without keeping at least a partly open mind, though, so I share your frustration with the folks who treat such general rules like they bestow ironclad certainty.

        I can see why Bungie would look at the expenses and the drawbacks of the environment and decide that they don’t necessarily want to bother with the PC market right now.

        I can’t. Looks like a fear of being criticized leading to a lot of money left on the table. That makes very little sense to me.

  14. Rao Dao Zao says:

    “Some of my best friends are PC gamers.”

    • DanMan says:

      “Hell, who hasn’t had weird thoughts about becoming one themselves at some point in their lives, right?”

  15. gbrading says:

    Not surprised at all. Bungie hardly released any Halo games on the PC. I don’t see Bungie pulling a Remedy Entertainment ala Alan Wake and releasing this years down the line; they’re not that kind of studio. Fully expect this will remain a console exclusive.

  16. Zallgrin says:

    The new footage supports what I felt before.

    This is weird mush-up of MMO and single-player game and both parts suffer from being combined. You can’t make the story and environment as epic as in singleplayer, but the MMO aspect is lacking as well. What interactions can you have with other players except from shooting at the same target?

    If your players don’t interact and basically ignore each other until it is time to group up… well, that makes the MMO part really irrelevant.

    I hope that there is something that I completely missed and that this might indeed a completely new experience, but right now it looks like an average co-op shooter that really lacks focus.

    • bartman says:

      Much like Elder Scrolls online then. Combining single player games and MMO to produce something that’s less than the sum of its parts. Developers and publishers need to learn that you don’t make an eagle by gluing two turkeys together.

  17. Arithon says:

    So we’re not getting a sub-standard console port a year late in order to promote DX12? Damn, I’m gutted.

    So Bungie want to exclude the most profitable sector of the games market? Great business strategy. Good luck with that.

  18. Text_Fish says:

    Someone really needs to start a petition demanding that Bungie stay true to their word and don’t bother releasing any of their shitty games on PC.

  19. KirbyEvan says:

    Although I am a Bungie fan, I don’t think a borderlands clone with halo aesthetics looks entirely appetizing to me.

    What appealed to me in the Halo series was mostly the giant arcade-y battlefield sandbox feel it had; it was essentially Unreal Tournament on crack.

    Halo 3 and Reach were my favorites due to the ingenuity of the community in creating it’s custom maps.

    Halo 4 was pretty damn terrible, mostly because it eschewed the entire feel of the game and made it feel like Call of Duty copulated with Battlefield and had a mediocre baby, although the visual design looked fantastic, almost like a Metroid Prime game. (shame about everything else)

    • reggiep says:

      Borderlands, aside from a few redeeming qualities, is really a piece of shit. It’s playable and fun at times, but the fact that Gearbox thought the first game was good enough to release all over again with almost no improvements says a lot. Combine that with Aliens Colonial Marines, and it’s clear Gearbox is a shit developer. Bungie, on the other hand is not. Destiny, for example, will have instanced loot.

      • Vodka, Crisps, Plutonium says:

        I wanted to argue about consideration of “shit developer” term as lacking the spark of talent, but competent.
        But then an utter disaster of complete product mismanagement example immediatelly springs to mind.

  20. peterako1989 says:

    Frankly there are a gazilion online shooters for pc to care for this one.

  21. Darth Gangrel says:

    Yeah, yeah, whatever. Anything that doesn’t come with a separate offline singleplayer mode can go and delete itself as far as I’m concerned. Even if I didn’t have tons of games waiting for me, I still wouldn’t mourn this decision. There are plenty of other games coming that are more interesting.

  22. buzzmong says:

    What I find most interesting is him saying all 4 consoles are important still.
    I very much would have thought that 360 and PS3 development would be nearing a close as it must be a pain in the backside to port down to that level when you’ve developed on a powerful pc for the XBone and PS4.

  23. Seafort says:

    Let them do what they want. They’ll soon come running back to PC once they find out console gamers don’t like MMOs much :)

    I’m tired of the PR BS from these “AAA” developers and thinking PC gamers are retarded and can’t see through their thinly veiled contempt for PC gaming.

    They seem to hate to not have control over their players so they stick to consoles gamers as they are easily malleable to accept any BS they come up with.

  24. derbefrier says:

    this game is one of the big reasons I got a Xbox One. I love most of the Halo games and I am excited to see how this goes. Too me it looks like, as some have said Borderlands with a bit of Halo thrown in. It may not be breaking any molds but hat doesn’t mean its not gonna be a fun game.

  25. P4p3Rc1iP says:

    Heh, I’d seen some of the concept art before (like this: http://gamingbolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Destiny-Concept-Art-26.jpg) and imagined some deep sci-fi setting with a dark, gritty feeling.

    Seeing the game in action just makes it look incredibly boring and shallow.

    Also, what’s with those ridiculous perspective changes? Don’t take my camera away from me!

  26. HiFiHair says:

    I hope they hadn’t been banking on using Gamespy this whole time!

  27. DanMan says:

    I couldn’t care less if they release this on PC, but I bet they’re developing it on a PC, so all these excuses are just bullcrap.

    • Baines says:

      KOFXIII was developed for a PC-based arcade board.

      It was ported to consoles without much issue, despite architecture differences. Despite being originally designed for PC architecture, it was the eventual PC port that faced months of bug fixing. To be fair, SNKP was operating on a shoestring budget by that time, had some rather silly ideas about PC ports and made some sloppy mistakes, but the wildly varying hardware expectations caused various issues.

      Just because you are developing a game on a PC doesn’t mean the reasons that you aren’t releasing it on PC “are just bullcrap”. The PC market can be an ugly place to enter if your team and/or budget are stretched, because your game isn’t going to run right for some unknown percentage of users for reasons.

      Look at games made for PC. Developing entirely for a PC user base, you can have some small edge case complaints, or find half your audience finds your game unplayable. Developers can spend months trying to fix games before they finally give up. (At least the developers that try at all, as some just decide to leave their games broken from the start.) Those profits you make at first from a PC release can be eaten away by trying to fix your release for the 1% to 50% of people who bought your game and cannot get it to run to their satisfaction (assuming you actually care and really try to get your game running properly post-release. So many publishers don’t, after all.)

      • DanMan says:

        Bugs are just that, bugs. Unless they appear in some PC-specific area like M+K controls, you’re bound to have them on all platforms. Then there’s only performance problems, but a PC is the most potent platform anyhow. I haven’t had hardware-related problems in ages. When people complain about something not working on PC, it’s usually either because they have a messed-up system, or the dev implemented something in a very non-standard way – probably because they didn’t know well enough (see MG:Revengeance).

        • Baines says:

          “Bug fixing” in the case of KOFXIII included things caused because PC hardware varies so much, issues that were not in the arcade or console releases (that came out around a year before the PC port. Things like graphical glitches caused with some AMD graphics cards/drivers, some loading issue involving SSDs, failing to run if installed on a partition/drive that is larger than 2TB (which it seems is an issue a few games have), unexpectedly heavy CPU usage on some machines, weird stuff like input lag when run full screen that wasn’t present when running windowed, etc. Some more expected issues that wouldn’t crop up in normal “for PC” development were things like game speed being off if your display was set to something other than 60Hz, because the original PC-based arcade boards guaranteed a 60Hz display.

          I’ve seen plenty of hardware related issues in PC games.

          Remember Magicka? There was a game that wouldn’t even run on many laptops of the time, because the devs openly admitted that they saw no future in laptop gaming and had apparently simply ignored that whole area of support. Allegedly, they even increased the minimum required specs after the game was released.

          I’ve seen Unity-based games that have issues, sometimes rendering them unplayable, when run on machines with mobile or integrated graphics solutions.

          Graphics cards are of course still a constant source of incompatibility fun. Remember psychedelic Battlefield 4, caused by some faulty nVidia drivers? (Which makes me wonder if nVidia ever fixed the root cause of the performance/leak issues it introduced into its drivers a year or two back. It looked like they refused to roll back to their known working drivers, instead sticking with trying to fix the faulty new driver code, resulting in months of reports of issues through multiple driver revisions.)

          • DanMan says:

            I’ve already addressed most of that stuff: something was either implemented badly by the dev (60Hz dependency), or if it was indeed a hardware related problem, then the dev couldn’t have done something about it anyway (BF4 glitch you mentioned).

            So the latter wouldn’t impede on the devs development time anyway, and the former is self-induced.

  28. Iskariot says:

    I don’t care as this seems to be multi player only anyway. I have not been interested in multi player for decades.

  29. SealedSun says:

    I agree: Their loss.

  30. zentropy says:

    “BEST FPS IS HALO”

    Not on PC

    …denied :3

  31. Moraven says:

    Bungie must not agree with this analyst:

    Globally, PC game revenue now exceeds console game revenue

    http://gamasutra.com/view/news/216281/Analyst_Globally_PC_game_revenue_now_exceeds_console_game_revenue.php

  32. Megakoresh says:

    It’s interesting that in light of the current gen consoles finally stepping in, and everyone switching to them from the PS3 and Xbox360, they sacrifice the everlasting PC, which is ALWAYS ahead of everything, regardless of day and age, when they could have just not released the game on the old generation consoles.

    Not that we’d cry a lot about it, but just an interesting business strategy.

  33. SuicideKing says:

    My take on this:

    1. They have only one play-tester.

    2. They don’t want PC players out-performing console players, since the “persistent universe” is apparently the same.

    3. They’re making it harder for themselves by porting it to the Xbox 360 and PS3. New consoles to PC would have been a much easier port.

    4. They just lost a lot of money. It’ll be comical if most of their audience has moved on to the new consoles by the time it releases.

  34. cylentstorm says:

    Wow…want some cheese to go with that whine? A PC port could happen eventually, just don’t get your panties in a twist if it doesn’t happen overnight. They could even outsource that particular task. Just take apill/have a smoke/drink and chill–there are plenty of other shooters on PC…yeesh.

    • fiendling says:

      You seem to be lost, let me direct you back to your usual stomping ground.

      In your browser’s address bar type the following “www.ign.com” and then press ENTER.

  35. Smashbox says:

    What’s even the incentive? It’s not even locked to a money-hat deal…

  36. Shooop says:

    So what everyone’s been hyped about is…

    Halo with better friendly AI.

    That’s it? Wow. Talk about lowered expectations.

  37. Zaxwerks says:

    If Bungie are wanting to keep everything internal rather than farm out to a third party developer then we probably have little to no chance of seeing a PC version, Bungie just don’t have the talent employed in the company to write a AAA PC game, the last PC game they developed was Halo 2 a decade ago in 2004, ever since they have been concentrating solely on Xbox 360.

  38. MkMax says:

    they care so much about PC they are completely ignoring the platform, i always wonder what kind of material they coat their faces with to keep them straight

  39. InternetBatman says:

    That looks really, really slow for a shooter.

  40. Wytefang says:

    Doesn’t bother me all that much, really. I expect as much from Bungie, frankly. Plus, based on the underwhelming Halo series, I doubt I’m missing much.

  41. HisDivineOrder says:

    They should push back the Xbox One version. The PC version would outsell it by a large margin. Xbox One is pretty much a dead end anyway, so it’d be better for them and for Activision if they ignored it (for now) and focused on platforms with lots of sales potential. ;)

  42. SupahSpankeh says:

    RPS EDITORS!

    I know clicks pay the bills, and I know Destiny/Halo tags generate clicks, but can you please refrain from talking about non-PC gaming?

    Many thanks.

  43. StevieW says:

    So, Destiny = Halo + (Brighter Colours x2), yes?