Slashdot Mirror
Game Wars 2 - Battle for the Living Room
securitas writes "The New York Times' John Markoff writes about the fight to own the living room in the next-generation game console wars, with a digital divergence predicted instead of the much-hyped convergence. With games historically being a driving force in consumer PC growth, Intel is pushing PC-based systems as the dominant platform while the videogames industry is looking to the next generation of consoles as media hubs. Sony, Nintendo and IBM are firmly in the console camp. Microsoft has one foot in each of the PC and console camps, cooperating with Intel on the PC front while looking to IBM for the next Xbox. Meanwhile, Apple is taking its own tack, buoyed by the phenomenally successful iPod. Steve Jobs has been highly critical of iPod clones with video and gaming features, and some are looking to Apple for the next home entertainment revolution. Markoff also talks to WildTangent's founder Alex St. John, who predicts the PC makers and Intel have a losing strategy."
The next level of entertainment has always been content. "The medium is the message." If what you deliver on the new medium is content meant for an older one, your device won't survive.
Convenience only goes so far. Specific content that exploits the medium is what drives an entertainment device into mass consciousness.
Film technology spawned the art of film, TV spawned the art of television, consoles and computers spawned the art of video games.
What can any of these new devices offer us in terms of cultural identity? Not much.
Whatever system allows the *freedom* consumers want, will end up being what is adopted. I dont want to be told how/when/where I can watch my media, and thats all these companies want to do.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Apple's entered this arena once, with the Pippin Dont expect them to return anytime soon after the large amount of $$$s lost on that debacle.
drunk chemists
People keep claiming the next big console revolution will be a PC killer, but they keep being wrong. I have an X Box and it's great for sports games with your buddies, or for playing when I can't get my husband off the comp, but games like Battlefield, UT 2004, CS and upcoming titles like Doom3 and HL2 require a keyboard, mouse, a desk to prop it all on, and mad processing. Also, I plan to keep investing in monitors over buying an HDTV. I just don't care about the TV in my household. The computer is my entertainment of choice.
The PC already is a multimedia center...
Can I bum a sig?
I vote the Phantom!!!1111 /sarc>
A google link for a NYTimes article!
Copy and pasting those links into the google search bar myself was just becoming too much of a chore. I couldn't take it anymore. I was just getting ready to sacrifice my first born.
I just recently played this FoxSports online game and had to install some of their crap just to play this stupid game. I then was informed by someone that WT's plug-in is spyware ridden. Well after running AdAware, I found 400 pieces of infestation from these fuckers. Luckily AdAware fixed this shit.
Avoid anything from WildTangent.
Plus, most new games are coming out for the Mac platform when they come out for PC (like UT 2004). Now, people shiver in righteous ph34r when I lug my G5 to LAN parties.
IAALS.
Whatever platform comes out top, will be the first one to support Duke Nukem Forever
http://www.beyourowneviloverlord.tk
http://www.frozenchickenthrowing.tk
http://www.killercamel.tk
1) Fanatical DRM that predates even TCPA.
They have always had copy restrictions for games (like the PC) but now they come with restrictions against fair use of the media that they play, too. They have far more powerful restrictions than PCs do.
2) Lack of modding abilities.
Console games can't be modded. There'd never be any Counterstrike or Capture the Flag if the consoles had exclusive domain over games. Even now, users cannot mod console games that have identical releases on PCs which are modded (see: Morrowind, NWN).
If DRM conquers the PC market, however, consoles may rise up and totally own all their base in gaming and media.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Apple? No.
Apple tried a set-top / gaming console box in 1996 with the "Pippin", which was going to be manufactured by Bandai and run a version of the Mac OS related to System 7. It was going to run a PowerPC 603 (not 603e) because they were cheap, and be a WebTV-style device and, mostly, a gaming console, and of course since everyone knew gaming and computing and multimedia was all converging, it would be the center of as-yet-uninvented miraculous new killer apps. (Sound familiar?)
Mostly it was a disaster because Apple didn't court any of the right game developers except for Bungie (this was before Halo), and the PlayStation with its hardware 3D graphics support just blew it away when it was introduced in Japan at about the same time as the Pippin announcement to the developers. The Pippin was stillborn.
I don't know who are the "some" people mentioned in the headline who look at Apple to compete with the behemoth forces of the console manufacturers, but if some ill-advised group at Apple is looking to compete in this space, I would expect the same hamhanded approach that Apple has always had with gaming.
I am holding out for the Phantom...
I just KNOW it will have Duke Nuk'em Forever bundled.
(it's a joke. laugh)
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Console games outsell PC games 10 to 1, you idiot. It's about a $10 billion industry worldwide, and PC games are maybe $2 billion worldwide.
The fanatical DRM is the reason that all the 3rd party developers are in this business. Without the DRM, the piracy that plagues the PC industry (and keeps it down to this ratio, BTW) would drive everyone out to other more profitable software ventures.
Remember Kevin Mitnick?
The name Markoff taints my impression of the story since he's the one who sensationalized things enough to screw Mitnick.
So now I see Markhoff and I think overhype
But what about when it is easier and cost effective to through away a computer instead of upgrade?
;)
How will that be different then a console?
Right now you can get a console, with HD, keyboard and mouse. How will that be different then a PC?
Most people don't like to fiddle with there machine that runs the applications they want, no more then anybody wants to fiddle with the tuner on there TV...or have to change the chanell with pliers
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You mean this WildTangent? I have no interest in the views of this builder of adware.
As consoles systems move farther and farther away from their original purpose of playing video games, I think the term Entertainment Wars would be a more appropiate title for this report.
cant imagine playing warcraft or quake on a console system.Simply no fun. ;-)
The BIG gamers are still on pc's.
Lord of the Binges.
While yes it can be said that the PC and Console game markets are directly competing, the types of games they excel at are worlds apart. Ever try playing Vice City on a PC, it's a completely different experience from the PS2 due to the excellent aiming but horrible driving. Difficult sniping missions become simple with a mouse, and easy driving missions become difficult with a keyboard.
PCs will most likely continue to dominate the online arena, as well as the cutting edge in terms of graphics. Consoles still excel at what they've always excelled in: sports games, multiplayer on a local scale, and ease of use.
It's much easier for parents to buy their children a $100 Gamecube where every game is guareenteed to work without compatibility hassles, where as enthusiasts have no problem shelling out $400 on a video card and dealing with driver issues for when Half-Life 2 comes outs.
There just completely different worlds, quite frankly, I don't want a console that's a media center, I want a console that just plays games.
ce n'est pas un Sig.
I'm more heartened by motherboard makers' explorations into "instant-on" BIOSes which let you use mail and TV functions of your PC hardware without needed to boot Windows and suffer the onslaught of long boot times, a million virii, bad drivers. Windows XP with DirectX9 on it, has given me the black-screen-of-death lockups on more than one occasion when using the multimedia functions on my graphics card.
I liked the blue screen more... at least that way Windows knew it had a problem.
Instant-on technologies seems to be the way to go. With things like bootable USB flash memories, Magnetic RAM, things look more "solid state" and like a console.
Maybe one day my PC will get it's own kernal ROM and boot as fast as my old Commodore 64 did.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
"Meanwhile, Apple is taking its own tack, buoyed by the phenomenally successful iPod."
Wait, this is a story on the Battle for the Living Room, right? Apple isn't "taking their own tack" in this. They're not even involved! their sole product besides the PC is a piece of portable audio hardware, otherwise known as a walkman, generically speaking. How you can make the jump from walkman to BATTLE FOR THE LIVING ROOM is not only ridiculous, it's absolutely absurd. Ok, people are looking to supposively looking to apple for the next revolution. Fine. But it hasn't happened yet. The iPod isn't it. They have no presence in the living room. What plans do they have??? Tell us that! You just don't have anything substantial to say here, except to mention Apple and iPod in a sentance.
Cripes, just yell "FANBOY!" and get it over with...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
For the amount of money that they cost, does anyone really need a personal video player? How often would the darn thing get used?
I love music, and listen to it all the time, from home, in the car, and at work. I like movies too, but I find rewatching a good much far less enjoyable than listening to a good album. For that, iPods rule.
Overall, I find less time to watch movies than listen to music. I would hardly ever find myself stuck somewhere, wanting to watch a movie on a PVP. I don't go to Grandma's house anymore, and I am not a kid stuck in the back see on the way to the Grand Canyon.
1. Ease of use
a) With consoles all you do is plug it into the tv and power outlet, pop in the game, and you get entertainment.
b) With the PC, you have to plug a bunch of peripherals, login to the OS, install drivers, install the game, install patches, and if this was a perfect world (assuming you also bought the perfect pricey hardware) - you get entertainment. More so than not- you get frustration, even for people intimately familiar with the machine.
oh yeah joe sixpack doesn't mod games let alone know how to installed fan made mods
2. Price
a)A decent PC that plays the latest PC games decently will run around $1000 - $1800 (depending on what is considered decent) (a PC used for just word processing will run about $200).
b)A decent console that plays the latest decent console games will run from $99 - $179.
One more thing while some PCs can now plug into TVs, they still don't consistently look good on Tv's like consoles do....
Based on what the market is saying, consoles are already beating the crap out of the pc for games for the reasons I mentioned above...
I think the battle centers more on the fact that both consoles and PCs have aspired to be catch-alls. Consoles (many of them, anyway), play DVDs and now have multiplayer support. But computers do a lot more besides just gamming...and, with the flexibility PCs provide (not with any real sacrifice in graphics or gamming, IMHO,) they will eventually win out. If only we saw a better market for PC controllers more similar to the ones used in consol gaming.
Every windows user is a sadomasochist.
What is it? To put it simply, there were the good old days when you had
Your washing machine that did the washing
Your toaster that did the toasting
Your VCR/VCD/DVD player that played the respective media
Your Mobile phone, which you used to make calls
Your PDA, you showed off to your friends
Your gaming console, you played games on
Your PC, you used to download porn
But today:
All the devices are more or less PCs. Okay, the washing machine and toaster are not really good examples, but all the devices in the list can be used as a PC.
So then, one must ask the question: Is there any point in trying to make specific devices to do specific things (other than washing machines and toasters), or do we just go for one handheld PC that doubles as your mobile, PDA, game console, DVD player, and whatnot, depending on how you use it?
I envision a future where you just have ONE device to rule them all.
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny
Nothing to see here
Yes, Apple is going to come out with the iPippin!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Pippin
Steve Jobs has been highly critical of iPod clones with video and gaming features
Why has it become such a common conception that any harddrive based mp3 player is an iPod knockoff? Last time I checked Rio "invented" the mp3 player (Oct 1998, 32MB PMP300), and Creative "invented" the harddrive subcategory (Aug 2000, 6GB NOMAD Jukebox). It took over a year after Creative, and 3 years after MP3 players first appeared for Apple to enter the game with the original iPod (Oct 2001, 5GB iPod). By that time Creative was already releasing second generation harddrive players with twice capacity as Apple's best ipod at almost the same price.
So obviously iPod had nothing to do with creating the harddrive player. Maybe everyone is copying the iPod look? A general examination of the market doesn't seem to agree with this. iPod has a unique style of smooth curves and controls that blend into the unit. It's coloration and texture make it look almost ceramic from a distance. Compare that with just about every other player on the market: Rubberized edges and buttons, contrasting colors like sharp blues and reds stripping plastic silver. Where as the iPod look is like a bar of Ivory soap, the rest of the market is flooded with devices that look like tiny boom boxes. The only device that seems to come close to iPods smooth colors is the original Nomad Jukebox, the very product the iPod was copying (even then the Nomad retains more of the mainstream consumer electronics feel with its metallic silver highlights). Even the iPod look and feel is basically confined to the Apple court. The navigation system, an evolution of Sony's jogdial thumb navigation, is patented, and the placement of controls below and screen above is nothing new (the granddaddy of all MP3 players used that arrangement). Everything about the iPod screams different (a good reason for its success).
The logic that just because the iPod has market dominance now means that all products that meet the same need are clones is silly. If that kind of crazy logic where true then every desktop OS would be a "clone" of Microsoft Windows, even Mac OS X.
Just WTF is your obsession with DIEBOLD???
It's all about the games, not the consoles. So a console is faster and has better graphics than everything else. Big deal. Oh wow, it's a different color and pretty... big deal. Without the games, the consoles are just a box. No one wants a box. They want what's inside of it...
And why is JOHN MARKOFF writing an article on gaming? Go back to your flaming hackers stories.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
I agree that some devices are better when they have more functionality. But with the console systems it's more like they're becoming a "Jack of all trades, master of none". Yeah, if you shell out the $40 to get the remote that "enables" DVD playback on the XBOX, you can watch movies on it. But why? My existing DVD player has much more functionality than the XBOX (not to mention more sets of outputs). It only cost $100. So the argument that we should buy a console because "it plays all the hottest games AND movies" falls apart when you can get better results by buying the items seperately at not much more cost. The only company sticking to thier guns on this is Nintendo. I doubt we'll ever see a Nintendo console that plays anything but games. I also believe customers will realize that they're paying an extra $100 for a console that duplicates the functionality of everything already under thier TV set.
You can (with difficulty) mod console games. I admit that it's not an ability of any signifigance, due to its difficulty. However, I know that in Xbox Morrowind, it is possible to use a minor hack to use most mods for that game on the Xbox. It's just that you can't author the mods on the Xbox.
It's kind of scary, but I'm actually going to agree with this all-in-one scum:
Markoff also talks to WildTangent's founder Alex St. John, who predicts the PC makers and Intel have a losing strategy.
Most people don't want (or need) the flexibility of a true computer; they want a media suite, and office suite, and games.
The console people are always complaining about too much PC hardware. Well, everybody has different needs, so you can't suffice with one cookie cutter. Instead, have maybe four or five cookie cutters (standard, economy, deluxe, media, etc...), with a small amount of modularity (just like consoles...).
Software comes preloaded, and can be bought and is updated AOL-style (you sign off, it updates to a new patchlevel). Data is stored on some kind of USB memory drive or remotely. A consequence of these is if your machine breaks at the hardware level, you can trade it for a new one (maybe exaggerating there).
Of course not just anybody can develop for these machines: you'll need to license an SDK. Applications are written in some kind of Java/.NET-kind of environment, so software can be box brand-independent, and only first parties need (or maybe can...) to write an architecture-native VM. Architecture will most likely not be a marketing issue (they may all be different).
Oh, did I mention that the boxes are all locked down, laced with DRM, TCPA, DMCA, and any other good acronyms I missed. Software will automatically try to determine if you're trying to do something illegal/illicit (like scanning money, viewing kiddie pr0n, etc...). They might have a backdoor to make it easier for law enforcement to collect evidence.
And this has degenerated into a tinfoil bonanza.
Frankly, there's 2 main contenders for the living room, namely the traditional console, and the PC.
Console Advantages:
Already based in the living room.
True Plug and Play (negligable installation + setup time, for both hardware and software).
Generally better hardware design.
Generally cheaper costs.
Console Disadvantages:
Usually uses propietry hardware/software.
Lack of standards and customizability (e.g. PS2 hardware would not work with GC hardware).
Generally more troublesome to develop for consoles.
PC Advantages:
Greater customizability.
Better storage options.
Generally more advanced hardware (at a cost).
Ease of development.
Better standards.
Greater compatability.
Technically feasible at present.
PC Disadvantages:
Troublesome and expensive to setup.
Non-negligable startup time.
Public perception.
(if I missed out any points, please add)
The key problem with PC is with it's setup and startup, else PCs would win the race hands down (but then, those are the key advantages of consoles to begin with).
Most game publishers will swiftly replaced a damaged game CD/DVD, so long as you mail the disc to them, and pay $5-10.
My copy of SSX Tricky was replaced that way. Disc got scratched, sent in the game, and they gave me a new copy: case, instructions, and all.
Making backup copies of games and such was definitely important back in the old days, when we kept games on rather fragile floppy discs, and the companies that sold the games to us weren't exactly big-money companies with such nice replacement policies. Today, that's not the case.
Sure, you might bitch abouot spending $5-10, but if you're REALLY making fair use backup copies of everything you play, then you will spend more than that in making those backups. Not ALL of your games are going to break.
He couldn't cut it at Monolith Productions (who are a bunch of fuckups in their own right). Look at the sales of the last game he had design input on for them. Sanity. Haven't heard of it? I didn't think so. That thing was in the bargain bin faster than you can say "first post".
So he went out and started WildTangent which attempts to sell games that run on a platform that wasn't designed for games (web browser / Java). Yeah great business strategy there: is it any wonder they have to make their money through adware?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The author of that article seems to think that since HE has lost interest in the new video games, the whole market will crash. I'm willing to be he doesn't like playing Dance Dance Revolution, so I'm sure it will be a failure. He mentions in the article that advances in technology are the only reason for selling games and this is why your old systems are played any more. Old systems had dated technology that new machines can do better. Look at the emulation scene, tons of old games are being played all the time. He SPECIFICALLY mentions someone was playing Burger Time on their phone yet continues to state that "the video game market is going to crash." He must not think handhelds are part of the "video game market."
Duke Nukem Forever will be avalible exclusivly on the Phantom console.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
I'm sick of it - totally sick of wrestling with drivers and the OS and hardware and whatever just to get games working.
And it has ALWAYS been this way. I remember using debug to free up more EMS memory so Falcon 3.0 would run faster on my 386 sx 20 with 2 megs of RAM. I remember spending hours tweaking autoexec/config.sys to get the most conventional memory possible (i think 622 was about as high as I got)
So then enter Windows - yay its so much better - no its not - I have YET to run my legally purchased copy of Neverwinter Nights on PC without it crashing, I didn't return it out of support for a canadian software development company. And in the end I've nearly given up on gaming and I can't beleive that I'm alone. I see the hoops I have to jump through just to get a game to work on a PC - how many people really have the know how or the time to do this? Not many - will the PC die as a gaming platform - probably not but it will never go mainstream unless there are some serious changes that occur in usability. I long for the day I can put a disc in and load up a game without having to download a patch - without having to update my graphics card/soundcard/chipset drivers. Oh wait its called a Console.
One thing I don't understand is the level of media coverage that Sony/Microsoft get in comparison to Nintendo. Let's not forget that Nintendo is still very much in this race and last time I checked, Nintendo was far ahead (and gaining) compared to Microsoft in World-wide Marketshare. Yet the general media, still acts is if Nintendo is a non-player.
Something intelligent here.
Compaq created the hard drive based mp3 player and licensed the technology to Handango. You could buy a HD based player well over a year before Creative launched their product.
--- I do not moderate.
That's why God invented soldering irons and modchips. What the DRM taketh, the hacker will giveth.
The way that I see it this guy is preaching the same thing we've all known for a year or two now. While I agree that consoles are ideal for "dominating" the media center living room, the adoption of a media center to dominate is reliant on other things. For one thing, piracy. Large central media storage devices are great if you have large amounts of various types of media to store and display at the push of a button. You knock out the piracy, or try and build a legitimate product on piracy and the idea is busted.
Take the Xbox for example. It's great, if you mod it. Why is it great if you mod it? Because it becomes a media center. What do you do with that? Store large amounts of pirated material. But what if it wasn't modded? What if you could buy the media to store on a media center on demand? Well super duper, that sounds great. If it's affordable (which it won't be), and it's better than the alternative (why is it better/cheaper than DVD's and CD's?).
Isn't this what people with on demand cable and a dvd player already have? What sort of content distribution would support this model? There is a lot of competition here, and emerging technology, and dubious security. The profitability in such a media center will undoubtably be in the content (similar to video game systems) and thus if you can't secure the content distribution or it's storage the business plan falls apart. The opposite is true if you can sell the machine at a profit with the consumer knowing he/she will make up the cost in convienience and free media.
What happens when these models don't follow through? Bust. What will probably happen?
I for one, predict a bust. These machines will not be as profitable as these big wig coorporate chairs anticipate.
Not that you'll change the truth bending editorial slant of every damned story that gets posted here.
The key problem with PC is with it's setup and startup, else PCs would win the race hands down
..I disagree, set up on a pc is a one time event, after the game is installed the first time, setting it up is as fast as a console.
..While start-up takes a good minute or two, a gamming session above 30 minutes and those two boot up minutes are soon forgotten.
I think that that computer gamming will pick up as laptop computers get faster and have more compacity. As for why I believe that consoles are winning right now, it is becasue of the huge variety available. A quick trip up to blockbuster and you have a new game for the week. That and the fact that a game can't "out-do" your machine place consoles running a lap up.
WoW: Scheod 70 orc warlock on Shadowmoon
Microsoft aughta just pump out a quick piece of crap for version two and move onto their next system. Everyone knows they always take three versions before they win the war.
I'm not going to comment on how G5s run games since I haven't seen them in action. But I can comment that Quake3 is an ancient game engine. Running Quake3 will not be a good indicator of gaming ability by the end of this year.
I r0X0rz and u sUX0rz u fUX0rz!!!
I sm311 l1k3 sh1+ kuz th4ts wut 1 34tz s0 l1k my righteous mak's 4ss fUX0rz!!!
this was only posted because of the author, not because of the content. Perhaps a bit like Katz HMMM? Now, if ever there was a need for being behind a restrictive content filter, it would be to add the two words "John Markoff" to the prostitution category.
[/tin foil hat theory]
XBox2 wont have a hard drive this time around. Neither with the PS3, nor Nintendos next machine. They know the only way to make money in this business is to sell what the buyers really want: Games.
Doesn't Wild Tangent not only contain spyware, but make itself difficult to uninstall?
If I remember correctly it once did if it doesn't still. For that reason, I refused to allow Wild Tangent's crap on my system. They might have changed since then, but I've not been impressed enough to care.
I guess Alex St. John knows all about losing strategies, huh?
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Not Creative. And as to people stealing the iPod look, take a look at the Odyssey 1000, or the Dell DJ, or the Samsung Yepp. Do they look like Creative's player? No, they look like iPods. Display up top, controls (often round) below.
Now look at the user interfaces, except for Rio, they all stole the iPod UI. Look at the Dell DJ, the Samsung Yepp, the Odyssey 1000.
Look at the picture below. See the layout at the top, see the round controls? See the UI? Please try to tell me this is anything but an iPod knockoff?
Odyssey 1000
OK, your numbers are horribly wrong, but console games do not outsell PC games 10 to 1 at least. Your 5 to 1 estimate was probably pretty close.
In 2003, the total retail revenue for console games, hardware, and accessories in the US was $10 billion.
In 2003, the total retail revenue for PC games in the US was $1.2 billion.
Notice that the figure for consoles includes hardware and accessories. So considering that the hardware probably had an average unit price of about $250, and a given console might have more spent in games, that knocks at least a few billion off of the revenue if one wants to adjust it to just be the games.
Piracy is really not all that big a deal because of multiplayer gaming. Most games nowadays fight key generators by having a stricter check when a user logs on to the multiplayer server. This prevents people from just copying the game and logging in, because they'll need a unique and legal cd-key to play.
PC games are still a very profitable industry, and one that will continue to be profitable. Would there be two large competitors in the video card market releasing new hardware every 6-12 months if there weren't a big market? People doing professional 3D graphics are not their key market, you know. Those figures were only for the US, think of the worldwide market.
Console games have the advantage of ease of use and low cost. While computers can never be easier than a console, one can actually buy a reasonable gaming computer without going too far over console prices, however. What a computer gives though are multitudes of possibilities. Not only is it a general-purpose appliance, but even inside the realm of gaming it gives much more freedom. There are far more input devices available for PCs than for consoles. (I mean different types of input devices, not necessarily how many kinds of gamepads there are) PCs are generally more powerful, though consoles can be optimized for. PCs generally have much better resolution displays. PCs allow easier multiplayer play that doesn't require a fee for most games. PCs allow a company to update their games. Sure, some might take advantage of this and release a lousy product to start with, but usually it's value added. PCs allow game mods to flourish.
There's also the issue that some games work on PCs but not on consoles, but the reverse isn't true. RTS games are a good example of this... It's a genre that really benefits from mouse and keyboard. But all console games can be played on a PC, because a PC supports those input devices.
Anyway, the reason why the ratio is so skewed towards consoles is because of the cost and ease of use. This is especially true for small children, they get more out of a console until they learn how to use a PC. The other issue is that many households that have a PC also have a console anyway. I know that we had a few consoles when I was growing up, while having a PC at the same time. So this helps increase that ratio as well. It doesn't mean that the PC gaming market is dying, since I doubt it's been the leader for a couple of decades if it even has been.
ApeXtreme (Apex Extreme) winner of the Best New Home A/V product at last January's CES. Also previously slashdotted.
DirectX drivers, which we depend on, are frequently broken or unstable. Support problems associated with DirectX drivers are typically 3-7% for most video game developers. . . In order to make it practical to enable web developers to author leading edge multimedia content and deliver it online WildTangent must try to cope with the support problems associated with DirectX.
Guess who was one of the three people who designed and managed the first few versions of DirectX (which were even buggier than the current one)? Alex St. John, according to Renegades of the Empire.
deus does not exist but if he does
I have a very different view of the future. I think we are on the cusp of seeing some innovative fresh new content. Sony, MS, and game developers have barely begun to tap the potential of game networks. There is so much territory yet to be covered and the key I believe is to view the gaming networks as interactive media networks and the games themselves as interactive media platforms.
Or stated another way, imagine Sony/MS becoming more and more like TV broadcasters, but instead of video content they broadcast interactive gaming content, complete with channels and a variety of daily programming. Take the broadcast TV paradigm and merge it with online gaming. Imagine combining Everquest with Millionare or perhaps Jeopardy with Counterstrike. There is so much ground that has yet to be covered.
It's like getting water to run upwards, but they keep trying.
-I am an elective eunuch.
I want to be able to run everything off hard disks, which can easily handle it now. But I can't because of "intellectual property"/artificial scarcity..
-I am an elective eunuch.
I've had a few consoles over the years. Starting with the early 8 bit ones that most "gamers" are too young to remember. I've had fun with them but as time as wore on and my desire for games has grown more sophisticated I have moved firmly away from the console camp.
And so it gets me a little upset when some pundent starts go on about how PC games are doomed and consoles will eventually take over. Smacks of the "Apple is dying!" nonsence we have been hearing for how many years now?
PC games, while they can be as simple and mindless as a generic FPS, also can be mindnumbingly complicated as the latest Simulation or RTS type game. I personally would give up video gaming if I was forced to try and play a RTS on a console. The video mode for one would be totally unacceptable, trying to play with a standard console controler vs a keyboard and mouse would also be an excersise in futility, and finally while MP is finally coming to consoles it has no where near the polish or community that you have with the PC.
One of the main complaints I hear from the console camp about PC games is often how PC games don't work right. How sometimes it takes a patch and some tweaking to get PC games to work vs the console where it works right out of the box every time. And it's a valid complaint but a double edged sword as I see it. Traditionally console games are sold as is. If there is a bug or balance issue you pretty much have to live with it as there is no real update system in place. However with a PC games, patches are common. Not only to fix bugs but to often time add new features and fix balance issues.
Basicly I see consoles as a type of gaming system for those who don't really know enough about computers to understand how to make one a true gaming system, and there is nothing wrong with that. I've done enough troubleshooting on common issues to know that some people should just get a console and use it rather than trying to figure out how to setup their box such that it will run the dozen (or more) games that they wish to play. But for some of us, and we are not all that small, computer games are what we want and play.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Last time I checked Rio "invented" the mp3 player (Oct 1998, 32MB PMP300)
Well, you should have checked more accurately... The Eiger Labs MPMan was the first portable MP3 player.
I don't have a clue who made the first hard-drive based MP3 player because until Apple came out with the iPod, hard drive players were massive barely-portable beasties.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
- The max resolution of computer technology matched the max resolution of television.
- Because of the high cost of manufacturing electronics, families had fewer TVs/monitors.
- Houses were smaller (page 14)
- Videogames were more family friendly than today.
- We didn't each carry e-mail around on our cell phones.
The big thing I see reconverging is #1 above -- resolution. HDTV and PC resolution coincide. But I don't think it's going to be enough to counteract the other four forces.Wheres our virtual reality games at? Then we'll really be battling for the living room. Thats where red's flag is at!
Assuming that horsepower simply makes prettier 'graphics' is the shortcoming of this logic.
/maybe/ an attempt at some fuzzy logic. With more horsepower you can maintain the visual status quo but move forward with opponents that can 'think' without having to 'know' the entire gamestate just to path toward the player.
/outside/ the building.
More horsepower is required to expand gaming. Adding horsepower for the next few upgrade generations will allow developers to increase the gamespace.
Consider interactivity: making the environment something you can break, manipulate, or build. How many items in the average 3d game scene are interactive? maybe 1%? walls aren't, windows aren't, 90% of doors aren't. You're lucky if one of the chairs is.
Right now machines aren't capable of tracking many interactive objects and maintaining the graphics that everyone seems to think are 'good enough'. Half-life2 is going to try, but thumb through the specs they've passed out to would-be licensees and mod makers: there are hard (and relatively low) limits on numbers of interactive objects. Slower systems severely limit the number of interactive objects one can use before the engine bogs down.
This is not to slam Valve, they are at the cutting edge of interactive environments, but rather to show how the cutting edge is still pretty limited.
Then there's AI.
Right now AI are most often straight scripts with
The fact that (nearly) everyone is still using a hacked A* algorithm to get a computer opponent where he needs to be is telling enough by itself. Algorithms more complicated than A* need more processor time. Heck, more processor time for pathing can yield improvements even without changing the algorithms. If you ever played Baldur's Gate, you'll remember that people complaining about pathing could edit their config files to 'up' the number of nodes used to calculate paths. The faster your machine, the more nodes you could add, the better the path-finding.
Even today this problem persists. Much moreso since the problem is now 3 dimensional, rather than 2 dimensional. This problem is at its worst in games with large numbers of units and dynamic maps (RTS games with their placeable buildings). To go back to a Bioware example - their Neverwinter engine doesn't even have a true Z-axis as far as its pathing is concerned. Their engine cannot model a footbridge that a model can walk across and under. They made a good number of concessions to make their game as interactive as possible, and run well.
Then there's lighting.
With as many textures as we have precalculated (lightmaps, bumpmaps, reflection maps) things like truly dynamic lighting are still out of reach. Games like Doom3 and Splinter Cell attempt to mask this by making their scenes predominantly dark and showing off how great dynamic lighting looks with a handful of light sources.
Yet they both limit the number of light sources and also the number of models you'll see on-screen at one time, so the horsepower needed to calculate those few dynamic lights isn't bogging down the machine when the action happens.
Then there's my favorite issue: overdraw.
When's the last time you played a 3d game that modeled, say, an office building that ended up looking like any office building you've ever been inside? I'm betting never. If you had, it'd have been in a 'portal' style-engine, in which case that game will never render the open spaces of the office park
Level designers work within the constraints of the engines. Modern bsp-derived engines overdraw polygons so much that you never see an actual downtown street with buildings you can enter without a load time.
Why isn't there a broad thoroughfare in an Everquest town? Why are the hallways in a counterstrike map so twisty? Why haven't you seen a large office building where you could enter each room?
It isn't for gameplay - though designers do a great
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
I have to agree with the parent poster. My PC is my multimedia center. I watch more DVDs on my computer and laptop than I do on my TV. I listen to more MP3/OGGs on them than other audio devices. I game on them. The only thing my TV has over my computers is that I don't have a capture card and PVR software on one of them (yet) and the laptop is more portable.
My only complaint about gaming on the PC is I haven't found a controller I like as much as the Nintendo or Sega controllers. (all the PC control pads I can find are modeled after the blasted PS2 controller.)
?
uh, i could possibly see how you could join Mllionaire with Everquest, but Jeopardy with Counter-strike? "and remember all answers need to be in the form of OMFG d00d l337 sp34k!!"
I'll say it again, teh more advanced consoles get, the more they will look like pcs. You connect consoles to the net and your end up with the same patch system of pcs. You'll want keyboards and mice for fps's so you'll need to add them to consoles. And you'll want your console to do just about everything your pc currently does. End result: you wind up with a machine that looks supiciously like a pc.
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
FPS and RTS games are fun to a point, but there is so much more out there, including many consoles games that simply destroy PC equivalents in the area of gameplay depth. This 'console game = must be shallow' nonsense hasn't been true for a very, very long time, and only the most ignorant PC gamers still parrot it like it was some holy law.
Please list some examples. Beacuse I'm quite sure that overall PC games still have quite the overall edge when it comes to game sophistication. (Mind you that I am aware that 'console game == must be shallow' is nonsence but from the titles that are available for consoles the 'shallow console games > non-shallow console games' does seem to be the rule.)
(And various consoles have had internet play for well more than 3+ years, so please spare us that complaint until PC games start reliably also supporting 2-4 players on the same system.)
Not sure what rock you have been living under but PC games have been doing a little more than 2-4 players for a while now. (Hint hint, ever hear of MMORPGs?)
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
..the text file is true, but you could go to the WildTangent Control Panel, which had buttons to access the agreements/info. I guess everybody was more interested in frothing off at the mouth when AdAware added it. However, a lot of the problem seems to have come from HP shipping WT stealthily installed on their Windows builds--maybe they removed the panel. This has some more info.
.NET. I talked to some of their guys a year ago..they seemed to be going strong, but I've no idea how they're making money these days.
AFAIK, it does phone home with a unique GUID, but only because they wanted to see which WT apps you're using. They make their money from commercially licensing the technologies out, so they want to see who's a student playing around with the SDK, and who's trying to make commercial games without paying them.
I stopped using it awhile ago..they indicated that they had no interest in getting it to work with other JVMs outside of MS(which pretty much locked it to IE), and were eventually going to switch to
--
Nice thread ... lots of good thoughts on the many issues. For me, it is driving me nuts ... each device in succession does MOST of what the past one did, but not enough to convert totally. So devices are accumulating. Cost is a factor, therefore, but just pain in the butt-ness. Basically, I try everything but so far have only kept the plain radio/TV, VCR, DVD (movies only), cable, and a plain PC ... and abandoned gaming because a) too repetitive within and across games and b) too much time investment. I abandoned pager, cell, palm, pocketpc, entertainment PC, pvr, DVD writing, CD burning except for backup, mp3 player, digital camera, wireless, BlackBerry, others that I forgot.