Slashdot Mirror


PCs Losing Out as a Gaming Platform?

Snibor Eoj writes "The Boston Globe Online has an article by Hiawatha Bray discussing the state of gaming on PCs and consoles. He points out that PC users now suffer the same fate as Mac users have for years, that of waiting for a great game that's already out on another platform. Consoles continue to gain market share, and software companies are noticing that and writing more and earlier for consoles than for PCs."

22 of 639 comments (clear)

  1. FPS's... by cornjchob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone here want to sit in front of a T.V. and play Quake III Arena with horrible resolution with a game pade?

    Enough said.

    As long as there are first-person shooters and need for high-resolution, sharp graphics, computers will reign.

    --
    We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    1. Re:FPS's... by tm2b · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mind you, consoles are starting to support higher resolution output via component video to HDTV.

      --
      "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
    2. Re:FPS's... by cornjchob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But how many of those HDTV outputs are utilized? Unfortunately, for the next 3 years or so, most people won't actually know someone with an HDTV. Computers, on the other hand, provide high-resolution, varied inputs, and a lot of upgradable horsepower--now. And affordably, at that. Upgradable, now, multipurpose, high-compatibility rate, and affordable...how many game consoles can say that?

      --
      We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    3. Re:FPS's... by Camulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This used to be a valid argument. However, the X-box is nothing more then a compact computer. Nvidia specifically designed the card for the box. Think about it. A decent video card (for gaming) is going to be around $100-$150, then a good sound card $75 (Audigy), you get the idea. An X-box is $199. Factor in, actually having to install the software, driver conflicts, computer lock ups, and the idea of just putting a disk in a machine and it "just working", as Mac puts it, is very appealing to the average American. The way the market is going, it is leaning towards the cheaply replacable throwaway consoles, esp now because they are going to start having the perks of PC's, broadband multiplayer, VOIP, etc (not to mention they have Suse 8 running on an X-Box now). Yeah, so for Joe Blow it makes a lot more sense to buy a $199 X-Box that he can replace with about $200-$300 hundred dollar unit in 3-4 years rather then a $1500 gaming machine. Don't get me wrong. I am a PC gamer right now. I like PC gaming. I like being able to tweak stuff. I like Mods. Mods are what keep me playing gaming. However, given time most gaming will probably be on consoles. It just makes sense to most people. I just hope there will be mods available.

    4. Re:FPS's... by keep_it_simple_stupi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well.... Do you want to spend $2000 on an uber-cool gaming machine or $2000 on an uber-cool HDTV and XBOX/PS2 hookup? Yeah yeah I know you can get a gaming pc for under $1000 but we're talking about enthusiasts here - those people that spend more on a video card than a whole console costs.

    5. Re:FPS's... by Shagg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By the way, DOA3 on the X-Box with an 80" HDTV is downright glorious.

      I didn't even think anybody made an 80" HDTV, unless you're talking about a front projector on an 80" screen? The largest RPTV I've heard of is in the mid 70's.

      I've only got a puny 65" HDTV set.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    6. Re:FPS's... by Psmylie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "Mature" switch is actually a really good idea. They can just put that in the PS2 firmware and password protect it, with options to keep little kiddies from playing Dad's adult games or surfing for naughty stuff (once the broadband\HDD combo takes off).
      Tie it into the game rating system (ie. this console can only play rated "E" games unless unlocked) and there you have an end to problems like people buying GTA3 for their 8 year old and blaming the manufacturer.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    7. Re:FPS's... by tshak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However, the X-box is nothing more then a compact computer.

      Thank you for explaining to us the definition of a console - a narrow purpose computer.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
  2. Bleh by Wheaty18 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consoles are great for some genres of games (such as FF-style RPG's, Sports games, party games etc), but when it comes to FPS, RTS or MMOG give me a PC any day of the week. How anyone can stand playing an FPS with a controller is beyond me. Consoles are generally a generation BEHIND by the time they are released, whereas you can get the latest and greatest graphics on a PC.

    Also, who wants to pay an internet connection fee PLUS a subscription fee (for XBox Live! or Sony Online) when they can just pay the internet fee and play the game for free over the net on a PC?

  3. Doubt it by Geeyzus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are certain things that consoles currently can not do, or don't do well. MMORPGs like Everquest are much better served with PC controls, like a full size keyboard, and DSL or cable modem. First person shooters... can you say, mouse-look? As well as the use of several keyboard keys for things like strafing, etc. RTS games would be a joke without the use of a keyboard... good RTS players use all of the keyboard shortcuts.

    At the same time, obviously, there are some things consoles do very, very well. Sports titles, platform games, action/fighting games. These will almost always do best on the consoles.

    I suppose the point is that while some games cross over successfully (GTA3), most games are better suited for one location or the other, PC or console. Neither the PCs or consoles will disappear in the gaming world.

    Mark

  4. Blehhh... by Pyrosz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems every 6 months or so someone comes out and says that either PC's or Consoles are losing the battle. Battle of what I'm not sure. I have both consoles and a good gaming PC and I find that the games are different for each system (FPS and Strat games on the computer and fighting and racing games on the consoles (and party type games)). Wish they would give it a break already.

    --

    An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
  5. I resisted consoles for years... by aborchers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... always reckoning that PCs were always ahead of the curve technologically and more flexible. In the end, though, I switched to console gaming (PSX, then PS2, with a GameCube in my future the minute that Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee ships) and despite not always having the state of the art, I have a lot more fun playing games now. Not to mention my couch is a lot friendlier to my @ss than my desk chair (and I have a pretty good desk chair!), the ability for friends to gather round the entertainment center, and the fact that a modern console cost about the same as a top-end video card, something not to be underestimated when you're talking about mass market trends.

    Bottom line: if you're into overclocking and hardware and config geeking, PCs are great for games. If your fun is a little more casual, consoles can't be beat! Just my $0.02...

    --
    Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
  6. Re:well, sure by egomaniac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, consoles currently run in 640x480 (4x the resolution you quote), generally with antialiasing.

    Secondly, go take a look at Star Fox Adventures for the GameCube. Tell me how many PC games look as good. I might be willing to give you Doom 3, but A) it's not out yet, and B) it requires a damn expensive machine to look that good.

    --
    ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
  7. console vs. pc by techstar25 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For the price of a good PC video card, I can get a Playstation 2(w/ cpu, mobo, RAM, video and audio, dvd player, controller, etc.). I'll stick with the consoles.

  8. Astounding... by leshert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its amazing how a Slashdot story about a newspaper article comes to the exact opposite conclusion that the original article does.

    Did the submitter read the article past the headline?

  9. No revolutionary games by Apreche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason pcs are losing out is because of the lack of revolutionary games. As just about every post here has stated the obvious. Different game genres play better on pc and others play better on console.
    Because of the new generation of console there have been recent revolutionary or almost revolutionary games in the genres that play well on consoles. Games like Kingdom Hears, which might as well be Secret of Mana 3D. Eternal Darkness, which is totally Lovecraft. Smash Brothers Meleee, which is a genre in and of itself.
    PC games have been stuck in a rut as of late. The games released for them aren't revolutionary in any way. WarCraft 3 IMO is just another RTS with improved graphics and gameplay. It didn't change the game. WC3 is still build stuff fast while balancing attack and defense. Neverwinter Nights is just Baldur's Gate, only newer and shinier. I'm not saying these are bad games. I'm just saying they don't bring anything new to the genre. They are more of an upgrade than a new game.
    The new console games are bringing in all sorts of new stuff. Pikmin (sorry for all the GC examples, it happens to be the system I own) is a brand new type of puzzle game, there's nothign else like it. Animal Crossing has more to do in it than any other game I've ever seen. You could play it for years and never do everything.
    New PC games like UT2003 (the demo) are just new games. THe UT2003 demo didn't amaze me in any way. There were lots of death animations and new levels, and pretty graphics. But it was the same as all the other first person shooters. It didn't change the game.
    Hopefully Doom 3 will be the revolutionary game we are waiting for. Quake 1 was revolutionary by bringing in true 3D. Quake 2 was also, it perfected the 3D fps. Quake 3 was not, it simply improved the graphics, tweaked some things, and added features. When more "must play" games come out for PC PC gaming will get better. Interest in PC gaming has not dwindled. It is simply that the genres that are played on PCs are in a rut, one that should hopefully end soon.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
  10. Re:Still though... by Deth_Master · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You can purchase many more kinds of game pads for the computer than you can for any console. Most likely, there are more controllers available for the PC than all consoles combined. For example:
    • Joystick (ForceFeedback included)
    • Gamepad (ForceFeedback included)
    • Steering wheel with pedals (ForceFeedback still included)
    • Those nifty uber-controllers with lots of extra buttons (I don't know what they're called and couldn't find one for an example) They're usually used with the non dominant hand and just have lots of buttons for adding to a flight game, I think
    • Mouse (big plus esp. for FPS)
    • Finally, the keyboard

    I think all those available items will more than make up for the lack of only a controller to use. There are certain games that are much easier to play with a controller, so I went out and spent $20 (the average cost of any console controller) and use it. The good thing is, if I upgrade my video card to play those better games, I don't have to purchase a new controller.
    --
    find ~your -name '*base* | xargs chown :us
  11. Best of both worlds? by Dark-One · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why does it have to be an exclusive thing? The author seems to miss a key point that people can and do own both. I am a die hard gamer, I own modern consoles and I just spent a bit too much (possible?) money on upgrading my pc. People are not jumping ship for one or the other. I do not know of a single person who has "left" computer gaming for consoles. They both have their own unique market. A pc will never do fighting games as well as a console, because its just not as easy to get 4 people around a compter screen playing tekken as it is around a tv in a living room. But by the same token who wants to play an RTS with a 8 button joystick?

    It seems to me that there have been only two games of note, halo and Starcraft:Ghost, that seem to have jumped ship for consoles. But lets look at why. Microsoft bought halo to push its console. They purchased it in order to make it their flag ship. Now ghost I am not so sure on as details about the game are still sketchy.

    The other reson PC games will survive is the MOD community. Look at Halflife and the Sims, both have been modded beyond belief. Halflife predates the PS2 and is still played quite a bit. Should I even mention Quake1?

    By the same token Consoles are not going anywhere either. For simple reasons, they are much less expensive than a PC they are a bit more reliable, no drivers etc. But they are static. The Gamecube/Xbox/PS2 you buy today will be the same as the one you buy tomorrow. This is a double edged sword, yes its easier to develop/optimize, but you are stuck with technology that remains static once you have pushed it to the limits you cant get any more.

    But the long and short of it is both platforms are here to stay. And I am personally going to keep playing on both and be happy.

  12. Most pointless talkback ever by phriedom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Poster A: Consoles are better because...

    Poster B: PC's are better because...

    Poster C: I like both. It depends on...

    Poster D: The author is an idiot because...


    90% of these posts should be marked redundant, and that is being generous. If your post falls into one of these categories, spare us and move on to the next topic.

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
  13. Why you're wrong: by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "Competing Platforms: There is nothing quite like getting stuck with a dead console like a Sega Saturn. With a PC, you can be assured the platform won't die."


    With a PC, you can be assured that your platform WILL die unless you buy all the latest and greatest. You get an inferior gaming experience otherwise.

    "Controllers: A typical console controller costs $30. This by itself is not unreasonable. The problem occurs when you play multiplayer games that require 4 controllers. In the PC world, everyone typically plays on their own equipment. In the console world, the owner of the console usually ends up footing the $90 bill for 3 extra controllers."


    For two people to play a game on a PC, they both need a game worthy machine, a reliable internet connection, two copies of the game, and they can't play at the same house without moving computers. That's cheaper than $90? O_o

    "Accessories & Game cost: They are way to frickin expensive. A PC Ethernet card can be purchased for $15. Dreamcast broadband adapters retailed for $70. The X-box is a dvd player but in order to unlock that functionality you need to buy their remote for an extra $30. And let's not forget the ever present annoyance and cost of memory cards. Even console games seem to be more expensive than PC games. Best Buy advertises titles for $50 as if it were some kind of deal."


    Okay, I'll give you that. On the flip side, though: The broadband connector's only necessary IF you want to play multiplayer over the net. Most people who play console games bring their friends over and.. well be social. *hint hint, nudge nudge*

    Incompatibilities: This goes along with competing platforms and expensive accessories. With PC's, for practical purposes, all equipment is compatible and interoperable. With consoles, the opposite is true. A PS2 controller will not work with an xbox, hell, a PS1 controller probably won't work with a PS2. An Xbox broadband adpater won't work with a PS2. People complain about driver/soundcard/video problems in PCs, but on the other hand, my 12 year old joystick still works perfectly in my new pc. I've been using the same keyboard for 5 years. Same with a couple of my network adapters. This stuff will work with any PC.


    Yep, you're right about incompatibilities. These incompatibilities are what make game-consoles WORK. You have the same consistent controller design. PC's, though, it's not the same, is it? Not only do you have to have the right drivers/OS etc for those to work, you also need for the GAME itself to work with it. That's not a plus, it's a minus. You have to configure a PC-Gamepad in order to work right. Sorry, that's not a win for PC's.

    Despite all of your arguments, a console is FAR less expensive to run as a game machine that PC. And that's before you mod up your PC to make it the 'ultimate gaming machine'. Don't forget that the PC has to work in order for the game to work. You have to have the right OS in working order, the right drivers, the right patches and updates, etc etc etc.

    You may not like consoles, but they are lightyears ahead of PCs for gaming.
  14. Bad News for PC & Chip Makers by rlp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is bad news for PC makers, as well as Intel and AMD. I've read numerous articles stating that the market for high-end machines in the home is driven by gaming. With consumers buying game consoles, there will be far less motivation to upgrade. Typically, the high-end systems carry the biggest profit margins for PC & chip makers.

    Console sales will not compensate for this. The big three consoles are sold at a loss. Sony uses a proprietary CPU, Nintendo uses an IBM PowerPC chip. Only Microsoft's Xbox uses an Intel chip - in this case a low end 733 Mhz PIII - a fairly low margin chip.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  15. Re:there is an underlying trend by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, but modding a game is far simpler and yeilds results far superior than writing a game from scratch. It allows people to do much much more than they ever could in the past. That's his point.

    The pros do more, the amatures do more, the users get more. It's good all around.

    I'll tell you what's dead. Arcades. Brand new games look exactly the same as they did 15 years ago when they stopped development on the hardware and the gaming concepts. DDR is the single exception to that rule in the last decade. If you want to talk about something dying, talk about something that is REALLY dying!

    --
    Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!