Slashdot Mirror
Is PC Online Gaming Unwell?
Thanks to GameSpy for their 'Spy/CounterSpy' editorial discussing whether the rise of online console gaming will eventually lead to the decline of online PC gaming. On the one hand, it's argued: "Not only do I think that console gaming is not a threat to PC gaming - I think it actually helps the PC gaming scene by introducing new players to the online gaming world", but on the other hand, an alternative point of view is advanced: "My current love for certain online PC titles really reminded me just how annoying online computer gaming is... even though there are PC exclusive online games that I love to play, I'd rather be playing them on Xbox Live."
Dude, I'll take a keyboard and mouse with a high resolution monitor over a stupid xbox or ps2 controller with a standard tvs creen any day.
even though there are PC exclusive online games that I love to play, I'd rather be playing them on Xbox Live.
On a television? Without a mouse or keyboard? Obviously, more work is put into more games for consoles. The best writers are all probably employed on console games. Perhaps many of the best engineers and designers work on console games. However. You have to play them with mittens and bottle bottom glasses.
I need that like I need a broom shoved up my ass.
Some day, consoles will work with high res displays (for less $ than a PC setup, please) and will have more precise input. I dream of that day.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Online console gaming won't hurt online PC gaming. PC gaming is really good for two types of games: FPS and RTS. FPS controls a lot better with a keyboard and mouse than with a controller, and RTS would be practically impossible with a controller (yeah yeah there was StarCraft 64, but it sucked).
Consoles used more for games that play better with a controller than with keyboard & mouse. Online racing & fighting games will be a lot better on a console.
As for the online voice chat, I actually think that's a disadvantage. Anyone play WarCraft 3 online? A large part of the chat during games is some guy who sucks cursing out someone else trying to pass the blame for the team losing. You don't want to hear the majority of the chat; most of it is mindless bickering.
The thing is, although XBox Live may be a great service and very much liked by those who use it.. There are relatively few who actually do use it. I don't have numbers, but it seems to me that online gaming has a very small penetration in the console world so far. I just think it's important to remember things like that when hypothesizing the death of PC gaming.. silly me, right?
I think PC Gaming will become more of a niche market or hobby, as the lure of sales from console games has attracted many publishers, but I don't think PC gaming will die away completely, since consumers like myself don't mind spending money for non-standard systems.
I think the reduction of commercial PC game publishers may be a good thing, since hopefully this should provide a better market for quality developers to keep making titles they are passionate about, much in the way the PC game market had developed at one point (id software, the old 3DRealms, old Raven, Westwood Studios, many others).
I don't mind paying higher prices for PC games as long as they have quality and can be customized.
Currently I am enjoying Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic on my expensive laptop. Despite the lack of customization, the game is a quality title, and has so much variety that extra modding or customization isn't necessary.
And I'm able to play a bunch of my old PC games on this laptop thanks to DOSBox and Windows Compatibility mode in XP.
Now, if console makers introduced a mouse and keypad to their PC-like systems then I may be tempted to buy a console, since I will face spending at least $1000 or more to upgrade for Doom3 and Half-Life2.
At least card and PC prices should drop some more while I wait for those titles to be released.
PC gaming still has something that assures its survival: mods, patches, and expansions.
1 - patches - if you can't patch your online console game, and it gets hacked, you're totally screwed. This is gradually being fixed by putting hard drives on consoles.
2 - expansions - again, something being gradually addressed by consoles adding hard drives. Still, expansions for console games so far rarely stray from the extremes - they're either very very small, or they're so huge that they cost as much as a new game.
3 - mods! User-created mods! The online gaming killer app! This is still the exclusive domain of the PC. Console makers still refuse to give the users this level of power, and if they *did* give us that much power, we'd start writing software for their systems and consoles would become equivalent to PCs.
Mods vastly increase the useful lifespan of a game by keeping the experience from stagnating. They add replay value, sometimes years of replay value (remember good old Teamfortress?).
There are two forces working against PCs and for consoles.
/bow_head for moddown.
First, the consumer. Yes, your PC has higher precision in FPS games. Yes, your PC gets higher FPS. Yes, your PC can display games at a higher resolution. Does the 26 year old bachlor who has broadband to have it (that is to say, porn) and PS2 and Madden 2004 give damn about FPS and 1600 pixels and 128mb of gpu ram yadda yadda yadda? Nope. It matters to us because, well, it's always mattered to us. Because we're PC fanatics. But better FPS and higher accuracy doesn't necessarily mean more fun, it just means a higher FPS and accuracy. Whoopie. Personally, I've yet to see anything on PC that eclipses the strinking visuals in titles like Viewtiful Joe, or Zelda, ICO, or Panzeer Dragoon Orta. Additionally, while consoles aren't existing within some kind of non-cheating utopia kingdom, it's a far better situation than the PC, particularly on Xbox Live. You only have so many credit cards for new XBL accounts, whereas IPs come as easy as power cycling your modem. Lag is typically better, as every player on XBL and in most PS2 games are required to have broadband. Most of these same games also require voice (which, granted and thanks to the seemingly shared low IQ on XBL, is sometimes detrimental) and have a built in unified awareness system (I know when my friend is online regardless of what game she's playing). Basically, the mainstream consumer is on the side of console onling gaming if they're on either side at all. It certainly won't be PC, which includes significanlty more hurdles to really play online than the console, even in the relative childhood of online console gaming. Path of less resistance, remember?
Secondly, if they don't already - and many of them do - I think publishers will prefer console online gaming to PC. There's more control there, even if it's through the Microsoft controlled XBL. Particularly with XBL, there's less liability. Some guy sexually harassing little kids? No problem, you have his credit card, not some untracable IP that leads you to a library or wireless hotspot. There's also financial control. It's much harder to charge for a roster update through a PC than it is on a console, when you've stored their credit card number. Whether this is good for the consumer is debatable, but I think the cards, which are predominately in the hands of the publishers, are definitely stacked against PC gaming. If there is any altruism, it's because companies like Valve and id have a certain spot in their heart for PC gaming, not because they see any financial reasoning to do so. If you think this is the norm rather than the exception, you're the only one still getting $15 off coupons to Amazon.com every week in your email box.
Face it: when it comes to at least racing and sports, consoles have quite easily dominated online gameplay (yes, I know how cool Live for Speed is). All that's left is RPG, FPS, and RTS, and I think console devs will be happy to leave RTS firmly in the grip of the PC.
I think what most people who've posted are doing is examing their own habits with regards to online gaming but have largely neglected to truly examine the entirety of the video game market. Sure, PC gaming will always be here and for some ungodly reason people will still be playing dust on CS, and PC online will most certainly for the next year or two to come what with Half Life 2 and Doom III on the horizon. However, I'm as enamored with the net integration in PGR2 as the article writer is, and I think it's a glimpse of what can really be accomplished with online console gaming. PGR2 not only meets PC gaming, but it smacks in the ass, trips it out, and has surpassed what PC gaming should have been doing this whole time. If PC gaming does survive, it'll have been done with the mantra "evolve or die;" and I think in many ways it will begin to resemble console gaming (i.e. Steam significantly resembles XBL).
A TV capable of 1080i will cost more than a new computer, and there aren't many games that can take advantage of it. Even the XBox's GeForce3.5 is quite underpowered compared to modern PC graphics cards, and the other consoles are worse. So consoles can't render 1080i (which has a pixel count roughly equivilent to 1600x1200) smoothly in most modern-looking games. My Radeon 9700 PRO can barely keep up with Morrowind at 1600x1200. Could the Xbox render Morrowind at 1080i with decent quality settings? I doubt it. (I don't know if Morrowind even supports 1080i on the Xbox, I don't own it).
As for RTS's, yeah, neither PCs nor consoles are perfect at them. However, while you can't efficiently command 500-member armies with a mouse, most RTS's don't allow 500-member armies. The max army you'll see in Starcraft is probably around 90 units, and the cap is much lower in WCIII. Those armies can be managed pretty well.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.