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."
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.
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?
Many of these companies are probobally scared by computer piracy and think that releasing games onto consoles will make their games sell more. After all it is a bit harder to copy console games.
Despite claims by PC fans of what their $400 accelerator cards can do, most console games look much better than PC games for the simple reason that the console hardware is a known quantity and can therefore be optimized for.
You also don't have to deal with installation issues, device driver conflicts, patches, replacing your $100 soundcard because it causes Neverwinter Nights to crash for no apparent reason, and so forth. Plus all modern consoles have great controllers, whereas PC games can't assume they have access to anything but a keyboard and mouse.
Seriously, what was anyone expecting?
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
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
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.
Somewhere along the way, the number of triangles and polygons determined what kind of game you were going to make. PCs have been gaming lackeys since. Too bad. I really think a creative, resourceful effort could make a buck or two producing games for mid to low end PCs, but then again I'm a hopeless idealist.
... 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.
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.
This will be on PC before any console. Nothing else matters.
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
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?
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!
If the consoles take over the game market from Windows, then there will be no real reason for new users to use Windows over Linux.
Of course there will be. Joe Consumer buys a Playstation instead of a PC because it's less work to configure and because there's more software available for it -- the exact same reason why he'll buy a Windows OS instead of Linux.
Linux would already have a stronghold in the market if all anyone wanted to do with a PC was surf the 'Net, rip MP3s and send e-mail. But eventually, sooner or later, everyone wants to install Quicken or Deer Hunter, or buy a webcam which says right on the box that WinXP drivers are included.
Mod me as a troll, but it's still true. The very things that are moving game developers from PCs to consoles have always kept software and hardware developers from focusing on the Linux market.
Penny Arcade just covered this topic pretty well, in response to the fallout from the announcement that Starcraft: Ghost would be console-only.
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
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
Of course there are more games on consoles than on PCs: the market for console games is much bigger, it's easier to target a game for a console and there's a less piracy going on.
However it doesn't make sense to say that because there are more games being done for consoles therefore the PC as a gaming platform is obsolete.
Console games are more action driven and can be consumed in short sessions: such as racing, fighting, or platform games.
PC games are geared towards longer sessions and complex interaction: such as simulation, strategy or online games.
It's apples and oranges really...
It's going to be interesting to see how consoles perform online, but my guess is that to significantly take online gaming out of the hands of the PC, consoles will have to absorb some of the PC attributes. They've already started with the network adapter and the HD but eventually they'll have to go all the way to the keyboard. Unless some kind of revolutionnary input method comes along first but I don't think that's going to happen.
Anyway, PC games will be there as long as the PC itself.
Let's not forget that from a developper standpoint, the console is to the PC what proprietary software is to Free Software...
But in the end, there's no reason why both plateform couldn't co-exist peacefully.
And you know what? That's exactly what's going to happen...
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.
No kidding. With quotes like this, too: "'There's still plenty of good revenue and good growth in PCs. If anybody wants to quit making PC games, Electronic Arts is more than happy to take the business from them.' So says Jeff Brown, spokesman for Electronic Arts, the world's largest maker of computer games."
/. plummets to the insightfulness of your
And now we get a bunch of fucking posts about how PC gaming isn't dying, the article is all wrong. No, it is dying, and here's why, I can get a console for $200, video cards are $200, console games are better, PC games suck, Donkey Kong sucks, you suck!
I know, I know. I should just pretend this story doesn't exist, and not read any of the horribly inane comments. But it's like watching a fucking train wreck. Come witness, as the level of discourse on
That's not nearly as good as the usual headline switcheroo:
Boston Globe:
"Microsoft faces more court dates amidst a storm of anti-trust suits."
Slashdot:
"Microsoft, the cabal of death itself, took to the courthouse today, flanked by demons and succubi alike as they prepared to defend themselves against the forces of good. We go now to Bill Gates."
Bill: "Your soul is mine!".
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
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.
But how many of the consoles could you buy for the price of that gamer's PC? Pretty well all of them and you would have the assurance that you'll be playing games without upgrades for at least three years after a console's launch and probably five.
It doesn't make economic sense to only play games on a PC. It hardly even makes economic sense to keep your work PC at a standard where you can keep playing current games on it.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
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.
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
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*
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.
There have already been over 400 posts, and still I have not seen ONE reference to Penny Arcade. It's like Slashdot is emulating PA, and nobody has bothered to notice.
e =2002-09 -23
Yesterdays comic:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?dat
And Gabe's rant this weekend:
"Wow, the response to Starcraft: Ghost has been pretty insane. I took some time this morning and visited a few message boards just to get a feel for what people thought of Blizzards latest title. It seems that an overwhelming number of you guys are pretty pissed off. I have seen links to no less than three different petitions asking Blizzard to make a PC version with robust online support. I can understand how all you PC gamers might be upset over Blizzards announcement but I for one couldn't be happier. If you have any questions about why I might be uninterested in a PC version of Ghost Just take a look at this quote from one of the many angry threads out there on this subject:
"if you honestly think 1 game is going to increase console sales you're an idiot. i'm not going to buy a console under any circumstance. if they came out with the game on pc i would've bought it, but oh well. hopefully they'll make up for the loss by becoming a 10 minute fad for teenage console kiddies."
Oh if only Ghost was a PC title with multiplayer support, then I could play it with this fucking winner. You want to know what the worst part about Blizzards past games has been? PC gamers. That's right, it's you petition signing sons of bitches that have ruined every other Blizzard game I have ever played. The thought of enjoying a well designed and masterfully produced Blizzard creation on my favorite console is just shy of erotic. No whiny bitches complaining about a huntress rush. No junior high school kids using hacks to kick my ass while calling me a n00b. No, just me and my console of choice playing through a well thought out single player campaign set in the thrilling Starcraft universe. I'll go a step further and say I hope that Blizzard decides not to include online support for their console versions. If I want to play a tactical shooter on a console while someone relates a wild tale of sexual debauchery with my mother, I'll play SOCOM. If Blizzard simply must include some kind of multiplayer experience I hope they limit it to a split screen mode. At least that way I can choose the assholes I want to play with from my own stable of friends.
-Gabe out"
Getting diabetes AND salmonella would be a bad weekend.
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]
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!