PDA

View Full Version : Gaming Platform: PC vs Console


dirk digler
11-08-2005, 07:23 AM
Which do you prefer?

I use to be big into consoles, I had Nintendo, Sega Genesis, and Nintendo 64. I know they are old but I haven't bought one since I became a PC junkie.

I prefer PC but I am wanting to try out the new Xbox/PS3.

Pants
11-08-2005, 07:28 AM
Both. With XBL the difference has been greatly minimized.

dirk digler
11-08-2005, 07:34 AM
Both. With XBL the difference has been greatly minimized.

What's XBL?

Saulbadguy
11-08-2005, 07:43 AM
XBox live.

jspchief
11-08-2005, 07:46 AM
I've been a PC guy in the past, but I'm beginning to believe that it's cheaper to keep up with console technology than PC technology.

Pants
11-08-2005, 07:50 AM
I've been a PC guy in the past, but I'm beginning to believe that it's cheaper to keep up with console technology than PC technology.

Ehh, good TV + good sound system + a next gen console = a lot of money. PC's provide a lot more services and unless you mod your console, it's hard to borrow games from the intraweb (I hear it's possible).

dirk digler
11-08-2005, 07:55 AM
Ehh, good TV + good sound system + a next gen console = a lot of money. PC's provide a lot more services and unless you mod your console, it's hard to borrow games from the intraweb (I hear it's possible).

Yes plus brand new PC's will cost less than a new Xbox 360.

jspchief
11-08-2005, 07:59 AM
Ehh, good TV + good sound system + a next gen console = a lot of money. PC's provide a lot more services and unless you mod your console, it's hard to borrow games from the intraweb (I hear it's possible).Yea, but I already have the good TV and home theater, so all I have to do is upgrade consoles every 2-3 years.

Meanwhile, my PC works great for all the other uses it provides, but it seems like I need a new CPU every 2 years, not to mention graphics cards, RAM, etc.

You get the choice of a new console ($300 every 2 years) or a new PC ($1500+ every 2-3 years).

ChiefFripp
11-08-2005, 08:11 AM
Consoles are better for casual gamers who don't want to break the bank everytime they have to upgrade for the next Battlefield game. PC gaming is geared more towards the kind of gamer that spends loads of time playing games and doesn't mind shelling out cash to upgrade every 1.5 years. Consoles only stay on thecutting edge graphically for the first year of their shelf life and then they are overshadowed by the customizable PC. PC games are also supported by huge modding communities that breath a long life into a game. Even though you spent a ton of money building your machine, you may still find yourself playing a single game religiously 3 years after its release while console games seem to get stale after a month or two.

Pants
11-08-2005, 08:17 AM
Consoles are better for casual gamers who don't want to break the bank everytime they have to upgrade for the next Battlefield game. PC gaming is geared more towards the kind of gamer that spends loads of time playing games and doesn't mind shelling out cash to upgrade every 1.5 years. Consoles only stay on thecutting edge graphically for the first year of their shelf life and then they are overshadowed by the customizable PC. PC games are also supported by huge modding communities that breath a long life into a game. Even though you spent a ton of money building your machine, you may still find yourself playing a single game religiously 3 years after its release while console games seem to get stale after a month or two.

Yeah, aks the guys who still play CS after 8 years of doing it. Both have advantages and disadvantages. PC's are also very customizable in terms of pricing, you have options at what you want to improve and how much you want to spend. You can't play with 3 other friends sitting on the couch, though...

htismaqe
11-08-2005, 08:25 AM
I used to be a hardcore PC gamer. As time went on, more and more games that I *really* wanted to play were only being released on console.

In addition, sports games just flat-out sucked on the PC at about the time that the PS1 --> PS2 transition took place.

The advent of firewire/USB 2.0 controllers has pretty much negated the issues with sports games on the PC, but for me it's too late.

I'll never play another football game on the PC.

ChiefFripp
11-08-2005, 08:28 AM
Yeah, aks the guys who still play CS after 8 years of doing it. .

I would if I had CS. No way you're going to get ahold of htose guys otherwise.

dirk digler
11-08-2005, 08:40 AM
Consoles are better for casual gamers who don't want to break the bank everytime they have to upgrade for the next Battlefield game. PC gaming is geared more towards the kind of gamer that spends loads of time playing games and doesn't mind shelling out cash to upgrade every 1.5 years. Consoles only stay on thecutting edge graphically for the first year of their shelf life and then they are overshadowed by the customizable PC. PC games are also supported by huge modding communities that breath a long life into a game. Even though you spent a ton of money building your machine, you may still find yourself playing a single game religiously 3 years after its release while console games seem to get stale after a month or two.

I agree. I built my own system which of course cost quite a bit more than buying one from Dell for $400 but it lasted me 2 yrs until I wanted to play BF2 so I just upgraded the mobo/cpu/ram/video card. Now I can expect my PC to last 2-3 more yrs and play any game out there.

dirk digler
11-08-2005, 08:42 AM
I used to be a hardcore PC gamer. As time went on, more and more games that I *really* wanted to play were only being released on console.

In addition, sports games just flat-out sucked on the PC at about the time that the PS1 --> PS2 transition took place.

The advent of firewire/USB 2.0 controllers has pretty much negated the issues with sports games on the PC, but for me it's too late.

I'll never play another football game on the PC.

My favorite Football game on the PC or ever was Sierra FrontPage Sports Football. Man that was an awesome game and was so customizable.

Damn I miss that game.

htismaqe
11-08-2005, 08:56 AM
My favorite Football game on the PC or ever was Sierra FrontPage Sports Football. Man that was an awesome game and was so customizable.

Damn I miss that game.

Specifically FPS 95...that was the best version.

dirk digler
11-08-2005, 09:00 AM
Specifically FPS 95...that was the best version.

Yep, great game and the one of the main reason why I wanted a PC.

:deevee:

StcChief
11-08-2005, 09:18 AM
I like the console...Keeps my kid off the PC for games.

KC Jones
11-08-2005, 09:52 PM
PC:
advantages for FPS, strategy, simulation games, RPG, and genre stretching games (think Black and White).

Console:
advantage for sports, driving, fighting, and arcade style games. However they've recently come close to catching up for RPGs.

Graphics and multiplayer have traditionally been squarely in the PC camp, but this next generation of consoles will have better graphics capabilities and they've added multiplayer with the last generation already. I have yet to see 64 players on a single server like you get in battlefield or thousands like you get with MMORPGs, but I won't be surprised if/when it happens.

I've never been all that in to consoles but the new ones are tempting. However, all of my gaming time comes when the kids are in bed and my wife is watching her shows (crap like Oprah), so it's not like I'll get to use the main TV for console gaming much anyway.

Saulbadguy
11-08-2005, 09:54 PM
Yep. I can't play FPS on Consoles. Just does not feel right. They seem to move much slower, too.

Pants
11-09-2005, 02:47 AM
Yep. I can't play FPS on Consoles. Just does not feel right. They seem to move much slower, too.

LOL

nubzor

AeroSquid
11-09-2005, 10:00 AM
keyboard/mouse >* console

graphics are better on the pc and the games are free.

Count Zarth
11-09-2005, 10:42 AM
the games are free.

Heh.

htismaqe
11-09-2005, 11:33 AM
keyboard/mouse >* console

graphics are better on the pc and the games are free.

My XBox games are free...

TrickyNicky
11-09-2005, 12:25 PM
Console for sports/JRPG's and PC's for RTS, MMORPG and FPS. If I had to choose just one though, I would go for the PC because I can't bring home work to a Xbox360.

Count Zarth
11-09-2005, 12:50 PM
My XBox games are free...

Do you have to mod Xbox chips, too?

AeroSquid
11-09-2005, 01:52 PM
My XBox games are free...

not XBox 360 games tho ;)

htismaqe
11-09-2005, 02:24 PM
not XBox 360 games tho ;)

Tis true.

I'm getting too old and lazy to bother with it anymore anyway. That's why I got me a high-paying job... :D

KC Jones
11-09-2005, 04:59 PM
Console for sports/JRPG's and PC's for RTS, MMORPG and FPS. If I had to choose just one though, I would go for the PC because I can't bring home work to a Xbox360.

What's a JRPG? Does that mean single player or Just RPG? I'd still take a PC for those over a console by a wide margin. Console RPGs can't come anywhere close to the non-linear wide open areas of a Morrowind. Nor can they come close to touching the extensibility and replayability of something like NWN and the Aurora toolset (literally hundreds of mods available for free). Any decent RPG game from the console world can be played on a PC, but the reverse is not true. However, an arcade action style RPG like Jade Empire is better suited to the strengths of a console.

Pants
11-09-2005, 06:19 PM
What's a JRPG? Does that mean single player or Just RPG? I'd still take a PC for those over a console by a wide margin. Console RPGs can't come anywhere close to the non-linear wide open areas of a Morrowind. Nor can they come close to touching the extensibility and replayability of something like NWN and the Aurora toolset (literally hundreds of mods available for free). Any decent RPG game from the console world can be played on a PC, but the reverse is not true. However, an arcade action style RPG like Jade Empire is better suited to the strengths of a console.

You do realize that Morrorwind is available on Xbox and is the exact same game, right?

Ever heard of KOTOR?

TrickyNicky
11-09-2005, 06:51 PM
What's a JRPG? Does that mean single player or Just RPG? I'd still take a PC for those over a console by a wide margin. Console RPGs can't come anywhere close to the non-linear wide open areas of a Morrowind. Nor can they come close to touching the extensibility and replayability of something like NWN and the Aurora toolset (literally hundreds of mods available for free). Any decent RPG game from the console world can be played on a PC, but the reverse is not true. However, an arcade action style RPG like Jade Empire is better suited to the strengths of a console.
When I say JRPG's I mean Japanese RPGs. Or turn-based Final Fantasy style games.

KC Jones
11-11-2005, 08:41 AM
You do realize that Morrorwind is available on Xbox and is the exact same game, right?

Ever heard of KOTOR?

I wasn't aware of Morrowind being on the xbox and I have heard of KOTOR. There is nothing technically preventing KOTOR from being a PC game other than licensing restrictions. I still think PCs are better for stand along traditional RPGs than consoles.

jspchief
11-11-2005, 08:50 AM
I wasn't aware of Morrowind being on the xbox and I have heard of KOTOR. There is nothing technically preventing KOTOR from being a PC game other than licensing restrictions. I still think PCs are better for stand along traditional RPGs than consoles.I agree. I don't think we'll see a massive story driven RPG like Baldur's Gate being available on console for a long time.

Pants
11-11-2005, 08:55 AM
I wasn't aware of Morrowind being on the xbox and I have heard of KOTOR. There is nothing technically preventing KOTOR from being a PC game other than licensing restrictions. I still think PCs are better for stand along traditional RPGs than consoles.

Both KOTORS were released on PC as well. Look man, you can't argue that PCs are better than consoles for RPGs because you have zero experiecne with RPGs on console.

KC Jones
11-11-2005, 09:22 AM
Both KOTORS were released on PC as well. Look man, you can't argue that PCs are better than consoles for RPGs because you have zero experiecne with RPGs on console.

I can argue anything I want. There are things you can do with a PC that cannot be done with a console therefore PC > console for RPGs.

End of Story.

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 09:30 AM
IThere are things you can do with a PC that cannot be done with a console

Like what?

jspchief
11-11-2005, 09:39 AM
Like what?surf porn

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 09:43 AM
surf porn

1) untrue in the case of the latest generation of consoles

2) what does that have to do with gaming? :D

KC Jones
11-11-2005, 10:07 AM
Like what?

Build an extensible RPG toolset that the community can enhance to build their own modules/campaigns or even AI scripts. The official NWN campaigns - NWN, SOU, and HOU pale in comparison to the quality of some of the community built campaigns. Even things as simple as including a custom image for your character portrait. People can even run persistent worlds on their own servers - one project is attempting to create all of the forgotten realms in its entirety - http://www.alandfaraway.org/. Or, you can use peer to peer networking for MMORPG instancing like with Guild Wars. Hence GW can make money without selling subscriptions because they don't need anywhere near the server farms of traditional MMO games.

That's a start, but I'm sure there's plenty more. It all comes down to the PC being a flexible and extensible general purpose platform that allows players to build on and modify the game world. That will never be possible with Consoles because they are all about a singular entity having total control. That kills ingenuity and creativity, and completely limits the possibilities or life form that the game/engine can take on in the future. Something like counter strike never would have been born in the console world. Half Life would have stayed half life and that would be that. Not to mention the genre stretching mods like Natural Selection.

TrickyNicky
11-11-2005, 11:09 AM
Build an extensible RPG toolset that the community can enhance to build their own modules/campaigns or even AI scripts. The official NWN campaigns - NWN, SOU, and HOU pale in comparison to the quality of some of the community built campaigns. Even things as simple as including a custom image for your character portrait. People can even run persistent worlds on their own servers - one project is attempting to create all of the forgotten realms in its entirety - http://www.alandfaraway.org/. Or, you can use peer to peer networking for MMORPG instancing like with Guild Wars. Hence GW can make money without selling subscriptions because they don't need anywhere near the server farms of traditional MMO games.

That looks amazing. I think I'll reinstall NWN and check out some of the mods.

In another mod argument, you could say that Counter-Strike (#1 Online FPS for a few years) is a direct product of allowing a community to mod and work with game codes to extend and create games far beyond their original capacity.

Cochise
11-11-2005, 11:31 AM
I used to be PC only, but I got sick of having to upgrade my stuff at great expense every year or so, to truly be able to play everything. (on high detail and all that).

Xbox works great for me. I play a lot of games but I dont have to have the new stuff when it first comes out. Hell, I bet I haven't paid more than $20 for a game in a long time. Most of my games I get from the used game ads on Amazon for $10 or so.

AeroSquid
11-11-2005, 11:40 AM
why are pc's better gaming platforms than consoles?

better games! Counter Strike Source anyone? no? How about F.E.A.R. or Quake 4. most games that are ported from console to pc suck. games made for pc own console games in eyecandy.

upgradeability. you can't replace the video card in your console.

longevity. how many ps2's are at the bottom of a landfill right now because the shitty dvd drive burned out? lots.

utility. i can rip and burn a dvd while i'm playing my favorite game and the wife is watching the HDTV. (hugsX2) Just try and explain to your wife that your're going to play a game instead of her watching Desperate Housewives. haha good luck. Consoles do 1 thing well while pc's can do a wide variety of stuff.

pc resolution > console resolution

compatibility. My pc can play games against anyone else who has the game and a pc. Try that with an Xbox and a Playstation.

kb/mouse >* yeah sure you can get a kb and mouse for your ps3, have fun with that in your living room. I'll be at my desk fragging comfortably until the wee hours.

consoles and their games are aimed at a younger crowd. the FCC (or whatever agency oversees this stuff) will be watching closley for inappropriate content especially in console games.

Without pc gamers consoles would never have advanced to their current state. pc gamers drive innovation, the newest and best graphics will always be on pc.

Pants
11-11-2005, 12:52 PM
why are pc's better gaming platforms than consoles?

better games! Counter Strike Source anyone? no? How about F.E.A.R. or Quake 4. most games that are ported from console to pc suck. games made for pc own console games in eyecandy.

upgradeability. you can't replace the video card in your console.

longevity. how many ps2's are at the bottom of a landfill right now because the shitty dvd drive burned out? lots.

utility. i can rip and burn a dvd while i'm playing my favorite game and the wife is watching the HDTV. (hugsX2) Just try and explain to your wife that your're going to play a game instead of her watching Desperate Housewives. haha good luck. Consoles do 1 thing well while pc's can do a wide variety of stuff.

pc resolution > console resolution

compatibility. My pc can play games against anyone else who has the game and a pc. Try that with an Xbox and a Playstation.

kb/mouse >* yeah sure you can get a kb and mouse for your ps3, have fun with that in your living room. I'll be at my desk fragging comfortably until the wee hours.

consoles and their games are aimed at a younger crowd. the FCC (or whatever agency oversees this stuff) will be watching closley for inappropriate content especially in console games.

Without pc gamers consoles would never have advanced to their current state. pc gamers drive innovation, the newest and best graphics will always be on pc.

I don't think one is better than the other. I enjoy both worlds and I'm not going into a huge argument about what's best. To me WoW owns anything else that's out right now and WoW is on PC (and I don't even have that game, lol). But that doesn't mean I stopped renting games for the Box from time, not to mention how much fun Halo2 on XBL is.

Having a good PC experience is much more costly, though, and it's pretty anti-social, lol. To each his own... to me it's both worlds. What I don't like though, is people who've never played RPG's or some other games on consoles that argue how much better they are on PC...

AeroSquid
11-11-2005, 01:10 PM
anti social?

tell my clan that hehe. our teamspeak server is often overloaded.

Pants
11-11-2005, 01:18 PM
anti social?

tell my clan that hehe. our teamspeak server is often overloaded.

Yeah I have eleventy fourty two computer friends...

My point was you can't have 8 people sitting on the couch passing the bong and taking turns at playing each other with a computer.

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 01:29 PM
Build an extensible RPG toolset that the community can enhance to build their own modules/campaigns or even AI scripts. The official NWN campaigns - NWN, SOU, and HOU pale in comparison to the quality of some of the community built campaigns. Even things as simple as including a custom image for your character portrait. People can even run persistent worlds on their own servers - one project is attempting to create all of the forgotten realms in its entirety - http://www.alandfaraway.org/. Or, you can use peer to peer networking for MMORPG instancing like with Guild Wars. Hence GW can make money without selling subscriptions because they don't need anywhere near the server farms of traditional MMO games.

That's a start, but I'm sure there's plenty more. It all comes down to the PC being a flexible and extensible general purpose platform that allows players to build on and modify the game world. That will never be possible with Consoles because they are all about a singular entity having total control. That kills ingenuity and creativity, and completely limits the possibilities or life form that the game/engine can take on in the future. Something like counter strike never would have been born in the console world. Half Life would have stayed half life and that would be that. Not to mention the genre stretching mods like Natural Selection.

You're dramatically overestimating the motivation for developing PC games that include extensible toolkits.

If you really think it has anything to do with ingenuity or creativity or control, come back from your dream. This isn't the 60's.

It's simple economics.

Developing a game for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

QA and post-sale support for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

I'm not saying the the PC is not a viable gaming platform. It's just that it's now an afterthought. It simply doesn't generate revenue like it used to.

And again, that wasn't the original argument.

The original argument is the PC platform, in terms of hardware performance, is superior to the consoles. When 90% of the PC titles out there were ported FROM THE CONSOLES, then the original argument is patently false. The PC at that point, is nothing more than a souped-up, $2500 emulator.

Pants
11-11-2005, 01:36 PM
You're dramatically overestimating the motivation for developing PC games that include extensible toolkits.

If you really think it has anything to do with ingenuity or creativity or control, come back from your dream. This isn't the 60's.

It's simple economics.

Developing a game for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

QA and post-sale support for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

I'm not saying the the PC is not a viable gaming platform. It's just that it's now an afterthought. It simply doesn't generate revenue like it used to.

And again, that wasn't the original argument.

The original argument is the PC platform, in terms of hardware performance, is superior to the consoles. When 90% of the PC titles out there were ported FROM THE CONSOLES, then the original argument is patently false. The PC at that point, is nothing more than a souped-up, $2500 emulator.

90%??? Whoa, where do you get your info?

Go to any major gaming website, I guarantee you, the PC section will be the first category and it will probably have the most content or at least as much as any other console. I don't think you realize how huge the PC market is, even with the rampant piracy. The fact is, pretty much every middle class household (and higher) has a PC at home, that opens up the door to PC gaming... where there's potential, there's a market.

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 01:44 PM
90%??? Whoa, where do you get your info?

Go to any major gaming website, I guarantee you, the PC section will be the first category and it will probably have the most content or at least as much as any other console. I don't think you realize how huge the PC market is, even with the rampant piracy. The fact is, pretty much every middle class household (and higher) has a PC at home, that opens up the door to PC gaming... where there's potential, there's a market.

"When 90% of the PC titles out there were ported FROM THE CONSOLES" is conjecture - it implies future tense. I'm not saying that 90% are, I'm saying that they WILL BE. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

As far as the rest of your post, walk into any electronic retailer and look around. The PC games used to be 4 full rows -- it's now 1. The other 3 rows are filled with productivity software and anti-virus products. The other HALF of the store is dedicated to console gaming.

Yes, every middle-class household has a PC. Less than 1% of those PC's fit the bill that AeroSquid described -- ie. they have significantly more horsepower than a console and were built specifically for gaming.

The simple fact is that developing games for a platform that has very little in the way of hard and fast standards is difficult and costly. In the end, PC titles have become watered-down and poorly supported.

That doesn't mean there aren't a few gems, like WoW. But they stand out even more so now, because there's very little decent competition.

Pants
11-11-2005, 01:50 PM
"When 90% of the PC titles out there were ported FROM THE CONSOLES" is conjecture - it implies future tense. I'm not saying that 90% are, I'm saying that they WILL BE. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

As far as the rest of your post, walk into any electronic retailer and look around. The PC games used to be 4 full rows -- it's now 1. The other 3 rows are filled with productivity software and anti-virus products. The other HALF of the store is dedicated to console gaming.

Yes, every middle-class household has a PC. Less than 1% of those PC's fit the bill that AeroSquid described -- ie. they have significantly more horsepower than a console and were built specifically for gaming.

The simple fact is that developing games for a platform that has very little in the way of hard and fast standards is difficult and costly. In the end, PC titles have become watered-down and poorly supported.

That doesn't mean there aren't a few gems, like WoW. But they stand out even more so now, because there's very little decent competition.

Walmarts/Kmarts always had 1 isle or section and still do. Best Buys/Circuit City's still have the 2 isles per platform (at least the ones I go to), I don't know man. People were saying PC gaming was going to be dead when PS2 came out. Same thing was said when Xbox came out... still waiting for PC gaming to die.

Shit, it seems like there are always huge titles about to come out on PC, much more than the consoles. I just don't know how familiar you are with PC gaming, but it's still pretty huge man...

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 02:05 PM
Walmarts/Kmarts always had 1 isle or section and still do. Best Buys/Circuit City's still have the 2 isles per platform (at least the ones I go to), I don't know man. People were saying PC gaming was going to be dead when PS2 came out. Same thing was said when Xbox came out... still waiting for PC gaming to die.

Shit, it seems like there are always huge titles about to come out on PC, much more than the consoles. I just don't know how familiar you are with PC gaming, but it's still pretty huge man...

Walk into a Gamestop sometime. They used to have 3/4 of the store filled with PC games. Now they have more space for USED DVD's than for PC games.

I play games on all the platforms. I have an XBox, Gamecube, PS2, and 3 PC's.

The PC gaming industry isn't dead, but it's sick.

And yes, there are some huge titles announced for PC, but think about it like this:

Diablo II was launched for the PC and EVERYBODY knew it, not just PC gamers. When's the last time you saw a launch for the PC that actually crossed into mainstream consciousness? The big launches, like Madden for instance, are on the consoles, and the games like Madden that make it to the PC (IF they make it to the PC) are mediocre ports of the console version...

Those types of launches don't exist anymore. PC gamers are HARDCORE gamers - the PC no longer has gaming appeal to a cross-functional demographic.

We as a society are driven by two things -- time and money. Appliances are cheap and convenient and they're steadily taking over a genre once dominated exclusively by the PC...

Pants
11-11-2005, 02:16 PM
Walk into a Gamestop sometime. They used to have 3/4 of the store filled with PC games. Now they have more space for USED DVD's than for PC games.

I play games on all the platforms. I have an XBox, Gamecube, PS2, and 3 PC's.

The PC gaming industry isn't dead, but it's sick.

And yes, there are some huge titles announced for PC, but think about it like this:

Diablo II was launched for the PC and EVERYBODY knew it, not just PC gamers. When's the last time you saw a launch for the PC that actually crossed into mainstream consciousness? The big launches, like Madden for instance, are on the consoles, and the games like Madden that make it to the PC (IF they make it to the PC) are mediocre ports of the console version...

Those types of launches don't exist anymore. PC gamers are HARDCORE gamers - the PC no longer has gaming appeal to a cross-functional demographic.

We as a society are driven by two things -- time and money. Appliances are cheap and convenient and they're steadily taking over a genre once dominated exclusively by the PC...
I can see what you're saying. However, Madden is pretty much the biggest gaming franchise and it's multi platform, everybody knows it, it's been around forever and is a huge deal. The other titles I can think of that crossed into the mainstream boundary are your Halos and GTA's. The rest are just like PC games.

Naturally consoles have taken and continue to take a huge chunk of the market as they become better, but just because you see a few console game commercials on TV doesn't mean they've somehow killed the PC. I guess it's assumed PC gamers will get their news from the internet and not the TV, but you don't have to be a hardcore gamer to use the internet.

I also don't see the same future you do, where 90% of the PC games will be ports...

PS: I think I'm too young to have ever caught the time when PC games took 3/4 of a video game store, lol. That'd be insane.

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 02:38 PM
I can see what you're saying. However, Madden is pretty much the biggest gaming franchise and it's multi platform, everybody knows it, it's been around forever and is a huge deal. The other titles I can think of that crossed into the mainstream boundary are your Halos and GTA's. The rest are just like PC games.

Naturally consoles have taken and continue to take a huge chunk of the market as they become better, but just because you see a few console game commercials on TV doesn't mean they've somehow killed the PC. I guess it's assumed PC gamers will get their news from the internet and not the TV, but you don't have to be a hardcore gamer to use the internet.

I also don't see the same future you do, where 90% of the PC games will be ports...

PS: I think I'm too young to have ever caught the time when PC games took 3/4 of a video game store, lol. That'd be insane.

Well, I've been playing console games since the Intellivision/Atari 2600 days.

Again, I'm not saying the PC is dead. I'm saying it's dying. It's becoming marginalized.

It's simply too expensive to develop solely for the PC anymore. Take a look at who is doing it -- almost all of the companies are riding the success of previous titles -- id, Blizzard, Gas Powered Games. There are VERY few new, upstart developers focusing on the PC.

Pants
11-11-2005, 02:46 PM
Well, I've been playing console games since the Intellivision/Atari 2600 days.

Again, I'm not saying the PC is dead. I'm saying it's dying. It's becoming marginalized.

It's simply too expensive to develop solely for the PC anymore. Take a look at who is doing it -- almost all of the companies are riding the success of previous titles -- id, Blizzard, Gas Powered Games. There are VERY few new, upstart developers focusing on the PC.

There are VERY few new upstart developers PERIOD.

You want me to list all the FAMOUS PC developers that are still working now? There are many...

AeroSquid
11-11-2005, 03:10 PM
Yeah I have eleventy fourty two computer friends...

My point was you can't have 8 people sitting on the couch passing the bong and taking turns at playing each other with a computer.

never been to a LAN party eh?

Pants
11-11-2005, 03:18 PM
never been to a LAN party eh?

Can't say I have. Does it mean you've proved your point? No.

AeroSquid
11-11-2005, 04:06 PM
Can't say I have. Does it mean you've proved your point? No.

But because you're unfamiliar with the pc gaming culture, you think pc gamers are "anti social" :rolleyes:

I think my point is proved just fine thank you.

Pants
11-11-2005, 04:21 PM
But because you're unfamiliar with the pc gaming culture, you think pc gamers are "anti social" :rolleyes:

I think my point is proved just fine thank you.

You're talking to the guy who had rcon to a CS server and spent his whole sophomore year of highscool playing CS in cal-m... didn't do anything else, lol. LAN parties are a rare occasion and don't worry I had a bunch of "internet friends" too, didn't mean to sound negative.

htismaqe
11-11-2005, 08:17 PM
There are VERY few new upstart developers PERIOD.

You want me to list all the FAMOUS PC developers that are still working now? There are many...

Like Peter Molyneux?

Oh, that's right. He's developing for XBox and porting games to the PC...

Saulbadguy
11-11-2005, 08:24 PM
What's a JRPG? Does that mean single player or Just RPG? I'd still take a PC for those over a console by a wide margin. Console RPGs can't come anywhere close to the non-linear wide open areas of a Morrowind. Nor can they come close to touching the extensibility and replayability of something like NWN and the Aurora toolset (literally hundreds of mods available for free). Any decent RPG game from the console world can be played on a PC, but the reverse is not true. However, an arcade action style RPG like Jade Empire is better suited to the strengths of a console.
IMO, the best RPG's have been on consoles. Final Fantasy (just pick one).

Saulbadguy
11-11-2005, 08:27 PM
IMO, they each have a niche. Some games I would just not care to play on a console (FPS games, RTS games). Some games I would not want to play on a PC (Sports games). They each lend themselves to certain genres better than others. I do believe PC has suffered lately due to the gaining popularity of consoles, and this is due to the fierce competition between Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.

Pants
11-12-2005, 12:15 AM
IMO, the best RPG's have been on consoles. Final Fantasy (just pick one).

2 latest games? Black and White 2 and The Movies - both PC.

htismaqe
11-12-2005, 12:13 PM
2 latest games? Black and White 2 and The Movies - both PC.

Those have been in development for years.

His most successful recent game - Fable. And 4 of the 5 projects currently under development (that I know of) are for the console.

Pants
11-12-2005, 05:17 PM
Those have been in development for years.

His most successful recent game - Fable. And 4 of the 5 projects currently under development (that I know of) are for the console.

Oh and Fable wasn't in development for years? It was in development before the Xbox even came out. It was supposed to be huge - the best RPG ever made, whatever. I'd also like to know those 5 titles, 4 of which will be on the consoles.

MavKC
11-12-2005, 07:39 PM
You're dramatically overestimating the motivation for developing PC games that include extensible toolkits.

If you really think it has anything to do with ingenuity or creativity or control, come back from your dream. This isn't the 60's.

It's simple economics.

Developing a game for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

QA and post-sale support for a console with a rigidly defined set of hardware specs is easier and cheaper.

I'm not saying the the PC is not a viable gaming platform. It's just that it's now an afterthought. It simply doesn't generate revenue like it used to.

And again, that wasn't the original argument.

The original argument is the PC platform, in terms of hardware performance, is superior to the consoles. When 90% of the PC titles out there were ported FROM THE CONSOLES, then the original argument is patently false. The PC at that point, is nothing more than a souped-up, $2500 emulator.


Not entirely true, games that are on both a console and PC, the PC port many times has features, if not added content that the consoles doesn't have. Not to metion that if the port of the PC comes later, it gives the devolopers time to enhance the graphics. I didn't say all of the games are done that way, but a good chunk of them are.

It really comes down to what suits you best. A good chunk of gamers already have a rock'n home theater setup, so $300 and the cost of the games and they are good to go.

But for total experience, and flexability the PC tends to win that more often then not.

I'm not a big TV watcher, in fact I don't even have cable hooked up because most of what's on these is total crap. If I like a show, then I wait till the season DVD box of that shows up. My computer is my main form of entertainment, from just cruising my favorite sites, to playing music, to watching DVD's and playing games on it. So I don't mine putting my money into it as it does everything I need, or want.

Because the ability of PC's to be able to get the latest and greatest in terms of technology, it will always have the upper hand on consoles in terms of pure horsepower. The moment that console hits the market the technology inside is at least a year old already. And cosidering the 4-5 year lifespans of these consoles, your looking a system that is working on a decade-old technology by the end of a console's run. Not exactly "cutting edge" in my book.

We are onto the next generation of PC technology, that is actually to a point where you won't need to buy a new video card every 1 or 2 years. Today's video cards have mature technology in them that will still power games down the road. Nvidia's SLI is starting to come around, and ATI has their own SLI'ish in Crossfire, that once these technology matures it will allow you to retain a very powerful gaming system for years to come. You factor in the SATA, PCI-Express, dual core processors, and featured laden MoBo's these days, the next generation of console will be hard pressed to match up against all that.

Does it cost money, yep. But as the adage goes, "you get what you pay for" I'm sorry, but my PC is way more than just an "emulater"

I have nothing against consoles, and in fact they are the reason video games are still made. There is something to be said for a system that allow game production companies to build a game for one platform that never has changing specs. They are easy to set up, and with the online capacity, it starting to match up well against PC's. They do have the upper hand in terms of video game sales.

But seeing how many of the games written for a console is being ported to PC should tell you that the PC is far from being dead as a gaming platform. People have been saying for years that such and such console is going to be the "PC killer" when it comes out. Guess what? It hasn't happen. Not to hard to figure out why either.

Simple economics from a video game standpoint you are correct, but from a overall view you are far off. Most people own a computer for more than just gaming, it's an added bonus that you can play games on them. You don't have to have all the eye candy turned on, and many low to mid-end systems can handle a lot a games just fine. If you are a PC gamer that wants the smooth frame rates, and some eye-candy turned on then yes, they tend to upgrade more than an average person who just plays a game here and there . But the key point is they don't have to if they don't want to. You can build a system today than can play games 5 years from now. People do it all the time these days, check out any game technical forum and you will see that.

PC games are still sold in enough quanity that even without the ports from consoles that ther is still profit to be made. Look at all the MMORPG's nowdays, and the future products to be realeased. Consoles have taken some of the fire away from PC's, but they owe their very exsistance to PC gaming. Why build anything better than an 8-bit console, if there isn't some form of competition to push those companies into making more powerful, and feature laden consoles? I think your understating the importance of what the PC means to video games. Every bit of it's techology and it's programming comes from the PC. PC's aren't an "afterthought" They still make games for the PC that will never see the light of day on a console.

Remember that these console companies lose money on every console sold. They ONLY make money on the licsensing the games written for it. It takes several years of console sales for them to even hope to break even on it.

Not so for computers.

So it comes down to the games. These companies are hoping to be a hit on both consoles and PC. If it's just is a hit and not ported to the PC, then a good chunk of the game developer's profit goes to the console vendor, and the console vendor is relying on game sales to make some kind of profit, because the hardware they sell is costing them money. If a game vendor can be a hit on the PC then that's pure profit for them. That's why if they have a hit on the console they do their best to port it to PC. They don't have to sell as many games on the PC to make the same amount of profit they get on the console version. The numbers can look skewed in that format, but believe me that game designers do not think of the PC version as an afterthought. They are hoping to keep the momentum going on the PC as it's a lot more lucrative for them. This is why many times the PC version can have things the console version does not. That and technical abiltity PC's have over game consoles.

The main reason game developers are interested in consoles is their widespread appeal, and the ability for places to rent both consoles and games out is something you can't do with the PC. Overall it's easier for them to write and market for consoles than PC's. But they will port their game to PC IF they can sell enough of the console version to make a name for it.

How many companies write exclusively for consoles? Think about it, most game desginers write for both consoles and PC.





In the end there is only two questions that you need to ask yourself:

1) Do I want and easy, cheaper and quick way of playing games?
2)Do I want the total experience, and more control over the games I play?

Only the individual can answer that themselves...

htismaqe
11-13-2005, 02:58 PM
Oh and Fable wasn't in development for years? It was in development before the Xbox even came out. It was supposed to be huge - the best RPG ever made, whatever. I'd also like to know those 5 titles, 4 of which will be on the consoles.

I never said Fable wasn't in development for years...Molyneux said that B&W2 was part of an earlier line of development for the PC.

The games they're supposedly focusing on now are BC and Dmitri which are both supposed to be exclusive to the XBox 360.

Of course, Molyneux is probably not the best subject anyway -- the guy loves to overpromise and underdeliver (or never deliver). :D

Pants
11-13-2005, 05:23 PM
I never said Fable wasn't in development for years...Molyneux said that B&W2 was part of an earlier line of development for the PC.

The games they're supposedly focusing on now are BC and Dmitri which are both supposed to be exclusive to the XBox 360.

Of course, Molyneux is probably not the best subject anyway -- the guy loves to overpromise and underdeliver (or never deliver). :D

I'm pretty sure BC got cancelled. Never heard of Dmitri.

I brought up the long development for Fable to show you that it wasn't a new thing Lionhead was switching to... you disregarded both B&W2 and The Movies by saying they've been planned out a long time ago and, thus, don't count anymore. My point was that Fable shouldn't count either since it's been planned since about the same time as B&W2 and TM...

htismaqe
11-13-2005, 05:35 PM
I'm pretty sure BC got cancelled. Never heard of Dmitri.

I brought up the long development for Fable to show you that it wasn't a new thing Lionhead was switching to... you disregarded both B&W2 and The Movies by saying they've been planned out a long time ago and, thus, don't count anymore. My point was that Fable shouldn't count either since it's been planned since about the same time as B&W2 and TM...

According to a BB I read occasionally, BC got cancelled and has since been revived, due to the XBox 360 timeline. They had originally wanted to do it on XBox but because, AS USUAL, development was taking so long, they decided to delay and do an XBox 360 game.

Dmitri is the project name for an as-of-yet unnamed game they're working on.

I'm still looking for the interview. I read somewhere where Molyneux said that B&W2 was the completion of something he's wanted to do since the early days, whereas Fable was the beginning of the new direction of the company.

KC Jones
11-14-2005, 07:32 AM
You're dramatically overestimating the motivation for developing PC games that include extensible toolkits.

If you really think it has anything to do with ingenuity or creativity or control, come back from your dream. This isn't the 60's.


I'm not dreaming because that is a reality. Developers build game engines with modding and re-use in mind now. Easy enough for you to dismiss the creative ingenuity and the incredible game play that comes from mods and extensions to games because it's not possible in the console world. However when it comes to RPGs the most central and basic thing is that you're telling a story and the player gets to play out the role of the protagonist. You release the engine with the game and you get all the stories and games the community can come up with. Bioware broke the fookin bank with NWN and yet there are over 600 ranked community modules available for free download. None of this is off topic because you asked in the context of RPGs what's possible in PCs that's not possible in consoles so I told you. Bioware is going to do the same thing again with NWN2 and Dragon Age and they will make a shitload of money once again.

You can argue revenues all you want but all I care about is gameplay. For FPS, RTS, RPG, and others the PC is the superior platform because it offers the best gameplay. For Sports, racing, fighting, and JRPG consoles offer clearly superior game play.

htismaqe
11-14-2005, 08:03 AM
I'm not dreaming because that is a reality. Developers build game engines with modding and re-use in mind now. Easy enough for you to dismiss the creative ingenuity and the incredible game play that comes from mods and extensions to games because it's not possible in the console world. However when it comes to RPGs the most central and basic thing is that you're telling a story and the player gets to play out the role of the protagonist. You release the engine with the game and you get all the stories and games the community can come up with. Bioware broke the fookin bank with NWN and yet there are over 600 ranked community modules available for free download. None of this is off topic because you asked in the context of RPGs what's possible in PCs that's not possible in consoles so I told you. Bioware is going to do the same thing again with NWN2 and Dragon Age and they will make a shitload of money once again.

You can argue revenues all you want but all I care about is gameplay. For FPS, RTS, RPG, and others the PC is the superior platform because it offers the best gameplay. For Sports, racing, fighting, and JRPG consoles offer clearly superior game play.

What are you talking about?

I'm not dismissing mods and extensions AT ALL. NWN is a great game, and one that happened to make a shitload of money. It's also a sign of things to come -- specialization of games.

You suggested that creativity and community were motivations for producing extensible toolsets.

The world revolves around the almight dollar.