Slashdot Mirror
DirectX Architect — Consoles as We Know Them Are Gone
ThinSkin writes "DirectX architect Alex St. John swims against the current and predicts the demise not of PC gaming, but of game consoles, in an exclusive two-part interview at ExtremeTech. In part one, Alex blasts Intel for pushing its inferior onboard graphics technology to OEMs, insists that fighting piracy is the main reason for the existence of gaming consoles, and explains how the convergence of the GPU and the CPU is the next big thing in gaming. Alex continues in part two with more thoughts on retail and 3D games, and discusses in detail why he feels 'Vista blows' and what's to become of DirectX 10."
A DirectX architect says that console games are on the way out, and PC games are coming back. Surprise, surprise.
For gaming, consoles are about as "Just Works" (no Xbox jokes, thanks) as you get. For people who lack computer expertise, but like playing games, how can PCs beat that for the time being?
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I use a console when I want to step away from the computer. Console games have some advantages over computers, one you never have to check for system requirements.
As to the demise, I mean lots of people (me included) are still playing vintage game consoles. Heck I got an Atari Paddle Set that works of AA batteries that I still play. But perhaps that says more about the timelessness of Breakout and Pong than consoles...
There are two kinds of fool. One says, This is old, and therefore good. And one says, This is new, and therefore better.
I think they will tend to stick to consoles especially when consoles don't have all the problems with malware and viruses that PCs do.
That, I suspect, will change as online gaming becomes ever more popular. Furthermore, if the "convergence" that Microsoft is always harping on comes about (with consoles being used for more and more computer-like functions) you'll see consoles becoming targets as well. Hell, even the handhelds have resident Web browsers and WiFi capability, and probably a metric fuckton of security holes just waiting for the right blackhat to take advantage of them. Gaming systems are sophisticated network-aware computers in their own right, are regularly being plugged into home networks which also contain PCs and other IP-based devices. That's a potential risk in and of itself, and I'm sure it will eventually be exploited.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
WildTangent actually gained some attention back in 2001, when the offered a web 3D plugin and a dev-enviroment that didn't cost a bazillion dollars. They let their heels drag, only kept offering their plattform for Windows and basically ignored any opinion-leaders in multimedia or VM-based gaming & 3D. WildTangent today is next to insignificant and their 'Orb' VM console (which afaict only runs on MS OSes) is nothing but a pimped WildTangent Plugin/Player and won't gain any traction beyond some niche group who wants to play a console game on the PC. For whatever reasons there may be.
Bottom line: Nothing to see here, move along.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
OEM video is for gamers in the first place. OEM video is just fine for what it is - people who use computers at work on office documents, presentations, and web browsing.
No matter what GPU is on the on-board video, it won't be enough for gamers.
That worked out well.
Why should they? What I'm saying is PCs for work and consoles for games. I think it's good that there's a specialty computer for games. That'll relieve some of the pressure on PC makers from having to make these boxes "for everybody". I don't know about you, but most of the graphics capability for my PCs goes unused. And the only reason I can think of is that Intel or whomever designs them that way so that these things "fits all". I'd like an even cheaper mother board for just business type of applications - I don't need the sound cards, super duper video, etc... for email, web browsing, word, exel, or any of the server apps when I'm running Linux on the board.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
Console gaming will eventually kill PC gaming. It is cheaper for developers since they don't have to make the game to work on 20 million PC configurations, only 1 console configuration. Plus, consumers have to spend a fortune to upgrade their systems to play the newest games. Even some video cards alone are more pricey then a whole console system.
Consoles are winning and will eventually win. The reason is simple:
Updating your video driver (or other drivers) is not a fun part of gaming. But for PC games, it's usually the first level you have to play.
Now that consoles have comparable graphics and sound to a mid-level PC, there's little advantage to using a PC over a console for games. And there are often large disadvantages.
Change back to PCs, you mean?
I specifically used the term "convergence", which is what Microsoft (and Sony) would like to see happen. That's where the "console" turns into an entertainment center and a home computer. IF (and that's a big 'if') that actually happens, you will see consoles become malware targets. Furthermore, if the convergence between PC and console does happen, you'll find that it won't be so easy or desirable to "reset" your console, for much the same reason that "resetting" a PC is such a pain.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I just recently bought a console. The main reason was because I was tired of needing to buy a new graphics card every year in order to to display the best graphics and have the best performance for the newest games and the only reason I needed to upgrade was for games. I did this when I went from PCI to AGP many yeas ago, thereby needing to buy a new motherboard, new processor, memory, etc. (I have also upgraded the motherboard several times since then in order to have a faster processor and memory.)
I didn't want to do that again in order to upgrade to PCI-E, so I bought a 360 console for less than half the price and I don't intend to upgrade my PC again for at least two or three years. I think a 3.2 GHz processsor and 2 GB of memory will be fine for software development for at least that long.
I also wanted to play games on a large screen and not have to sit in the same chair where I work all day when I'm relaxing.
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
1) He claims to be a 3D expert, but for some reason he only worked on the 2D aspects of DirectX while he was at Microsoft. (DirectDraw, etc)
2) His current software and games are very much NOT 3D, so he is commenting on the 3D market why again?
3) His argument about PCs not being good gaming platforms is that they don't contain enough DRM? Truly, go back and read this again. What the hell does he want, a gun pointing a peoples faces if their mouse gets near the rip or copy button?
4) Throughout the article they keep talking about WildTangent Orb, which is a program that competes DIRECTLY with Windows Vista & Windows Marketplace & Games for Windows, in Rating games based on system performance, and providing a consistent expectation for the gamer.
5) WildTangent huh... Ok, anyone that installed this software or has removed it from a friends computer would shudder to think that this guy has any insight when it comes to programming at all, let alone 3D gaming. (WildTangent is borderline Spyware, and the games are kludges, slow, etc.)
6) He thinks DirectX is bad and Vista is bad, but argue that they the best that can be done with 3D gaming. Hmm..
7) He talks about the DirectX hardware abstraction levels and implies DirectX 10 is further from the hardware than previous versions. This is really really inaccurate, as DirectX even opens a new diret pipeline for shoving calculations and physics to the GPU. The only place DirectX 10 is 'further' from hardware is the removal of DirectSound, but this has been replaced in 10.1 with a new hardware layer that is compatible with the new Vista sound subsystem. This stuff makes me think the guy is insane, has a chip or both.
8) His argues about current 3D technology is tricks, but raytracing is real 3D? Um, raytracing is also freaking tricks, especially if you work to get any performance out of it. (And this is just in studio level rendering we are talking about, let alone gaming). Moving raytracing to games or adding it to current 3D technologies would be great, but it is going to take more 'tricks' for good performance and STILL WILL NOT BE REAL 3D, any more than current gaming technologies. He is an expert and yet doesn't understand this? Holy cow...
9) The only thing I can agree with in the article is the portion about onboard Video being a bane to the gaming industry, and Intel being a horrible proponent of bad entry level 3D chipsets that can't even run Flight Sim 98, let alone a current game with more than 15fps.
Getting great graphics from the next generation of raster engines is going to cost even more. Sure, you can sit there and micromanage every goddamn thing on the screen and get graphics that look good enough that you can't tell them from optically correct rendering at a glance. But that costs you five times as much as building a model and telling the graphics engine to render it, and letting the software figure out where you need shadows and hilights and bloom.
The other side of this is the Myst problem. Remember Myst? Remember how you could only go where they're rendered the scenes? Now in many modern games, guess what, you can only go where they've prepared the scenes. You can't even walk across a flowerbed and around the back of the tavern, because they haven't prepared the back of the tavern. you get puzzles that involve figuring out what rope to grab to climb up a 45 degree slope, and if they haven't decided that you're going to be able to climb that slope you can't... even if you've got elf boots and a magic rope.
Why? Because it's so damned expensive to get them looking good.
Let the computer do the stuff that we know how to make a computer do... simulation... and let the humans worry about making the simulation fun.
How about some improved software? Why do NPCs in supposedly advanced games often just stand around or walk back and forth continuously for the entire game? When are simulated game realities going to become interesting enough that interacting with virtual elements is as interesting as shooting them?
As long as pc's have free online play and user mods and maps that are free Consoles will still be behind.
There are some payed for mods on the consoles but they are not the same as the free stuff on the pc.
Also who would want to pay for LIVE and for the game as well paying a monthly fee for the game for something like WOW?
There are also a lot of cool free and open pc games that will never be a consoles.
Also there are games that work better with a mouse and mouse are not used that much on a consoles.
Games also like to use the web and other stuff on the same system that they game on.
FTA: The first one is that, from many points of view, Microsoft and Intel come from an enterprise background. They're enterprise-centric. So in many respects the consumer market, from their point of view, is an after market for stuff really designed for the enterprise
... Nintendo correctly observes that graphics is no longer a differentiating feature; it's a commodity
This is because enterprise customers have a higher rate of legitimate purchases than home consumers (what is the rate of Windows piracy in China and India?). Furthermore, while enterprise customers may receive deeper discounts on their bulk-OEM licenses than home consumers, they counter that buy purchasing more lucrative packages (how many home users are using XP Server or Advanced Datacenter?).
FTA: So certainly Intel is producing a new generation of chips that have CPU and GPU on the same die which share access to the cache--the L1 cache--coming out in maybe 2009.
You know, Cyrix tried something similar back in the late 1990s with their MediaGX 5x86 processor. Granted, the MediaGX did not have the level of integration that Intel is proposing, but one has to ask: is this really a good thing? Will the video run as a separate core, with a level of autonomy, or will it be more tightly coupled? Will this cause contention between the VPUs and ALUs on die?
Also, how many video cards does the average person have before they toss a system? My current K8/3800+ is on its second video card (upgraded from dual 6600GTs to a single 8600GTS). I'll most likely keep this system for another two years. Although I doubt it'll be my primary system by then, I do bet that it'll have a new video card.
Since the days of Cyrix and AMD keeping "outdated" sockets are over (remember the Am5x86 for Socket3|5, K6-2/500 for Super7?), I suspect that the life cycle of existing sockets will get shorter (I think SocketA's longevity was a fluke). So, if GPU/VPU systems are integrated on-die, how can we keep systems updated when they are 3 or 4 years old? Will Hypertransport direct add-on GPUs be in our future?
FTA: [Nintendo] shipped off the shelf, cheapo, ATI video chips! And they're killing it!
The use of off-the-shelf components for consoles is nothing new. As an example, the Texas Instruments TMS9918 (and variants) were used in an arse-load of consoles during the mid-1980s (including the ColecoVision, Sega Master System, Sega Genesis, Sega Game Gear and others). It did quite well versus Nintendo's semi-custom chipsets at the time.
So, it is the same game, just with higher-end gear and more expensive R&D budgets? As ray-tracing takes over from current 3D technology, will new coprocessors that are designed specifically for that task be utilized? Yes, you could use more generalized processors (such as POWER, Cell or x64), but then, the original Voodoo cards could have been equipped with a MC68020, too. Right?
Whereas the PS3, still a long way from being hacked, doesn't sell as well. Go figure.
First, correlation is not causation.
Second, NPD showed that PS3 has been outselling 360 in Jan '08 and Feb '08.
Now, on the mailing list for this driver, I immediately got access to the lead developers. OK, they knew I was Bruce, but it looked like they were treating all callers the same way. They connected me with Intel BIOS programmers, etc.
Now, imaging having this problem in the Windows world. You would be routed to a call-center employee in India who would go through a script with you.
I am using the same driver with i915 in an old Sony laptop and i965 in a new duo motherboard. Both seem to work fine. I don't know how much lower-level DirectX is than GL.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Brickers. The new consoles have firmware that updates itself over the Internet. A computer vandal could corrupt the firmware so that the console no longer shows its system menu.
But that's not nearly as profitable as spam. Lots and lots of spam. The consoles of the PS3 generation do a lot more on standby than the previous consoles did. Nintendo even advertises its "WiiConnect24" as a feature of its Wii console: games can install channels that update themselves while the console is sleeping. What if all those sleeping consoles were sending unsolicited advertisements?
Vista's multimedia channels are DRM encumbered. This was thought to be a good thing(pro-RIAA) except it slows down all mp3/aac you can play on the system, even in games...
Now even microsoft encourages game developers to use the system libraries, for playing those standard formats(like they did on XP). Except now they make some games all but unplayable.
I'd say that's an example of vista sucks, and it's pretty closely tied to DirectSound, not DirectX.
Alex St. John no longer works for Microsoft. In fact he left there in 1997.
Microsoft didn't come up with the conclusion, Alex St. John did.
I'm not sure how the world's most expensive DVDplayer enters into your argument.
connected up to a television set.
That's the one thing that surprised me about computers and televisions.
Way back in the early 80s, most of us hooked up computers to TV sets. Then we went to monitors.
Now we can hook up our PCs to our HTDV television sets since TVs and monitors have almost merged themselves to one. No more fighting with a screwdriver in back to hook up that RF switch(and reaching back to move that slider switch). We plug in the HDMI connector, select the right channel, and we get a nice, crisp, high res display.
Write-once-run-anywhere is really true for consoles:
No it is not: you don't understand the term. At best you mean "Plug N' Play" or something similar. Write Once means I can write this code and it will run intact on multiple platforms. You can't run software written for a Playstation on an X-Box, the architectures and software tools are entirely incompatible. Sure, the same game may exist across different platforms, but under the hood it's different software.
The economics of a $300 device are wildly different from a $2500 multipurpose tool.
Are they? PCs don't cost $2,500 anymore, don't know where you pulled that number from. A decent low-end PC (sufficient for office work and light gaming) can be had for a few hundred dollars. Spend another $200 for a decent video card and they're comparable, game-wise. The only difference is that the PC vendor is actually turning a profit on that sale, rather than selling at a loss and hoping future software sales will make up the difference. Well, that's true for Sony and Microsoft: Nintendo plays a much straighter hand in that regard. Oddly enough, Nintendo has no interest in converging anything: they just make consoles, even though their business model is the most PC-like (they turn a profit on every console sold.) It's Sony and Microsoft that keep making noises about "convergence" and replacing PCs and disc players and the rest of the home-entertainment center's repertoire.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
What do you get in exchange for that? A PC (complete with hard drive, internet connection, support for usb, etc), excpet you can't use it like a PC.
That's the whole point.
When was the last time your Play station got a virus? How much do you spend on your Play station's anti-virus software every month? How many controllers can you plug into your PC? When was the last time you had to install a game on your XBox? Or install drivers for your newest controller? Or work through compatibility issues between your latest game and your PS3's GPU?
It's also true that for the price of a microwave, I can get a nice laptop, that connects to the internet and all that. But it kinda sucks at heating food, doesn't it?
There's a reason the Wii is selling so well, even though it doesn't even support HD graphics. People don't want something with internet, that can do their taxes, that catches viruses, that they can read their email on, or that has the bestest fastest hardware.
They want something they can play fun games on, with other people, in their living area where the television is, on something that isn't the size of a desktop PC. And they want those games to work when they plug them in, every time. About the limit you can expect from a console consumer is blowing the dust off the cartridge pins.
Are PC's more powerful? Sure. But there is a whole bunch of overhead that comes with the advantages of the PC over a game console that are just not worth it to the majority of console players.
paintball
Well you could hook up 4 controllers to a PC (USB), but most games don't support them.
The other advantage to game consoles is that they hold up better than most regular PCs. That may change with hard drives and other parts to fail. I have a NES, SNES, N64, GameCube, Wii, Genesis, 32x, Sega CD, Dreamcast, and GBA all working. i can play the same games on them now I could play in the past. With Windows, games that ran on Windows 98 no longer run. Many games don't even make it to the next windows release. For instance, LucasArts games have terrible compatibility issues. Some of the win98 era games didn't even make it past a DirectX update! Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic has terrible memory leaks and graphics card bugs. (its' great otherwise) I've got a pile of games I can't play anymore that also won't run in emulators yet due to 3d or opengl requirements. I don't have a PC that will run Windows 98 handy anymore either.
It is very rare that I get rid of a game console, but PCs come and go. (and windows versions) In fact, the only console I've sold in the last 12 years was my xbox.
PC gaming has a place, and some companies like id and blizzard know how to make games run on several os versions (or patch them). I couldn't imagine WoW on a console or QuakeWars. I hate FPS on consoles. They look bad and the controls suck. SImulations tend to be better on PCs and Macs too.
I think there is a market for both. If you look at articles, it seems like cell phone gaming is the hot ticket right now anyway.
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
And so if you see a PC that is not denuded by things interfering with it by Microsoft and Intel, in many cases like an Intel crappy graphics chip, or a bloated Vista operating system, it's a fantastic gaming platform. And the shame is, if the low end of the PC market, the mass market PCs that everybody buys did not come with these crappy graphics chips on them and was not burdened with a fat OS, that the PC would be a larger contiguous gaming platform than all the next-generation consoles combined, probably would be clearly superior;
and then proves how great the PC gaming market is by mentioning the success of a game that does not need much in the way of graphics hardware,
the PC is the home of the most profitable game in history generating more revenue than the top 10 console games combined--that's World of Warcraft generating a 1.2 billion dollars a year in revenue, that's a pure PC game.
I am so tired of the PC gaming industry blaming its demise on Intel giving people cost effective graphics that do exactly what their users want. The whole reason for the demise of PC gaming is because the market split because consumers want different types of computing devices at prices they can afford. The PC has tons of possibilities, but all the industry seems to create are rehashes of the same old ideas; mostly FPS and RTS. Traditional PC gaming is not dead, but it is in a losing battle with the consoles because it is failing to innovate. The real PC gaming growth is in small games that are fun, addictive, and sometimes are the center of online communities. Hell, I had to kid a Yahoo Pool addiction a few years ago and I don't think I will ever see anything like that on a console.
For an analogy to explain better what I mean -- if you have a toaster and a waffle iron, and compare the two, the toaster can only make toast, and the waffle iron may be of a kind that can both make waffles *and* sandwich toast. Let's say that the waffle iron sometimes has a problem in that it burn the waffles a bit. However, this is of course still no disadvantage if comparing just making toast (= playing games). It's a problem in a different area of use that the toaster doesn't even support. So personally, this is slightly in the apples and oranges territory for me. I can much easier swallow the "disadvantage" in risking viruses on a PC, since that is in an area of use that we aren't even talking about on the PlayStation. It's very rarely about catching viruses from having purchased a game in a retail store, or having viruses sneak onto your computer from an open World of Warcraft game port in your router. I would agree that would be more in conflict and a direct disadvantage of a PC as a gaming system. How much do you spend on your Play station's anti-virus software every month? There are free-for-home use antivirus tools (AVG, Avast) that have even performed better than common commercial alternatives like Norton Antivirus in tests.
I'm not sure why people think good antivirus tools have to cost money. I guess I blame aggressive marketing from Symantec etc... They want something they can play fun games on, with other people, in their living area where the television is, on something that isn't the size of a desktop PC. It's simple enough to connect a laptop to your HDTV if you want to though. And they want those games to work when they plug them in, every time. I'm not sure why a game on a PC should only sometimes work? I can't say this has ever been much of a problem on my PC's since the 90's. Maybe if you make major software changes you can break something, but that would also be breaking the console analogy, because you don't make such changes to a console (this is again not even an option). And you don't have to make such changes on a PC to keep playing games. Yes, you need to make upgrades and those can break things, but the equivalent there is purchasing a new console and often having to forget that your old games will even be compatible with your new one.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
When was the last time your Play station got a virus?
PCs may be notorious for viruses. That's if you don't keep them secure.
Besides, a PC game-only PC wouldn't have to worry about viruses if they never downloaded anything from the internet. Granted, even if they download stuff, it takes, what, under 20 seconds to scan a file? I've gotten a couple of game patches with viruses.
How much do you spend on your Play station's anti-virus software every month?
AVG, many FOSS alternatives, etc. are free as in beer.
How many controllers can you plug into your PC?
Lets see: Joystick, keyboard, mouse, gamepad, guitar...
You don't even need some of those. A standard keyboard has over 100 keys and replaces gamepads. Then the mouse replaces joysticks and, again gamepads.
When was the last time you had to install a game on your XBox?
Good point.
Or install drivers for your newest controller?
Never, since all mine are plug and play. When's the last time a wireless controller was standard with your PC and you had to buy extra things to make it so you don't have to use batteries?
PC: Mouse to USB, Keyboard to USB, headphones to headphone jack, microphone to microphone jack
360: Batteries to controller, trial and error making controller work since I didn't read manual, headset which I never use except on Live, batteries to trash after only 12 hours of straight playing then find more batteries. OR: Go to store, try to find a freaking charge pack, plug in controller, then plug in 360.
Or work through compatibility issues between your latest game and your PS3's GPU?
Or had the ability to work through customizing graphics to meet your tastes?
It's also true that for the price of a microwave, I can get a nice laptop, that connects to the internet and all that. But it kinda sucks at heating food, doesn't it?
What? That makes no sense. Okay, it makes sense, but not in context.
There's a reason the Wii is selling so well, even though it doesn't even support HD graphics. People don't want something with internet, that can do their taxes, that catches viruses, that they can read their email on, or that has the bestest fastest hardware.
So I suppose Xbox Live is wasted since people don't want internet? I suppose people don't have PCs, but have Xboxes now?
They want something they can play fun games on, with other people, in their living area where the television is, on something that isn't the size of a desktop PC.
How big is a PC case? You do also realize that there are S-Video hookups, right? There's also other ways to hook up a PC to the TV. No monitor required.
And they want those games to work when they plug them in, every time. About the limit you can expect from a console consumer is blowing the dust off the cartridge pins.
The secret to stable PC gaming: Clean installations of Windows without viruses and other malware.
Are PC's more powerful? Sure. But there is a whole bunch of overhead that comes with the advantages of the PC over a game console that are just not worth it to the majority of console players.
So, customizable graphics, modding, (generally) free internet play, 100+ keys, a mouse, and fully customizable controls are not worth it? Their loss.
As far as I am concerned, they both have their pros and cons. PCs cons are major compatibility issues if you have borderline hardware, a dirty system, or old drivers. Drivers also have to be updated all the freaking time.
Consoles, on the other hand, seem to lose par with PC in terms of graphics after the first year and a half (unless they have super powerful hardware unavailable to the PC market). They also have forced control schemes like FPSs: Maybe I want melee to be 'right trigger'? But, no! It won't let me! It must be 'B', 'ri
http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun
The games on NES scrolled better and more smoothly than Commander Keen. Gran Turismo or Ridge Racer IV felt faster and smoother than Grand Prix Legends or CART Racing from Microsoft. I loved GPL and CART Racing, but there ya go.
I respect Alex St. John, but as Apple and MS proved, the most technically superior solution doesn't always win. For me, the choices are down more to comfort and ease than technology: TVs and couches are more comfortable environments than monitors and desk chairs. Disc --> console --> playing is easier and faster than PC startup --> install --> driver download --> install --> restart --> startup --> run --> crash --> patch --> STEAM ID check --> etc.
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
I just put 4 Gigs of RAM in my laptop, so it heats up food just fine, thank you very much.
I see this debate every so often and laugh at both sides as they tout the demise of the other. A simple fact when dealing with 2 different objects that interject and have pros and cons; is that you need to focus on just that. Consoles are cool because you hook them up straight to the TV and power box and they just work. If you want to game that is what you do and nothing else, this is good for simple people. If you are a computer lover you enjoy the fact that your rig can do that and so much more, thats what you paid for. There will always be those that just want to game and nothing else and those that love computers and want to also use them for cutting edge gaming, these are two markets and they will always exist. I don't see a demise of either one because they exist for different reasons, as the market evolves one will get stronger and the other will get weaker as far as games are concerned, but never will we see one completely dying, it will just adapt. They both serve a purpose and thats how it will always be, end of story. P.S. how many offices are still completely drowned in paper even though digital is everywhere? P.S.S. how many people still have landlines even though cell phones are abundant? P.S.S.S. how many people still use windows even though Linux is free? just kidding It all serves a purpose and each one has its benefits, they're still there for a reason.
Capability for price
Plus for PC, you can run your game faster if you pay more
Minus for PC, compared to a console you may have to pay much more than you'd like for acceptable performance (would you want to do serious gaming on an eMachine? All 360s are even...)
What's on a console can be better optimized (you KNOW what they're running), what's on a PC? Do theey have feature X? How fast does it run? Uh-oh, the feature is only emulated by DirectX on this PC...
"It just works" (tm)
Plus for Console, usually, if it's FOR that console, it works seemlessly with it, always, forever, if not replace or fix the console
PC, is the game bad, is something in your system bad? Will upgrading the OS break it? Upgrading to a different model video care? Do you have enough RAM? (Although there are exceptions, the N64 had an add-on memory card)
Worse, old action games with no good timer that you can't seem to adjust for the proper speed. I've seen it mentioned at one point that Linux played some old PC games better than some version of Windows because with either you needed to emulate these days and the better emulator writers (that this guy knew of) were on Linux. I can't vouce for the accuracy, but not all games were written to scale gracefully on different machines. Neither are NES games, but the NES is a discrete target, the PC is a set of general blurs. You can expect a Win95 game to have capabilities between W and Y, a 98 between X and Z etc...
Will the PC randomly slow from spyware? Will a popup from an anti-virus program or IM kill your game?
How long will the PC take to boot? Consoles don't take nearly as long. (Although with what we've seen on the net with ROM based loading, either Windows or Linux booting can be VERY sped up, I'm sure many people would pay a lot for a USB based Windows install that "just worked" within seconds when you booted from it. We'll probably see something like this coming up.
If something breaks, will your main PC be broken? (Bad memories of DX 3 and 4)
Of course, what if someone was to make... "Game OS". Forget just a virtual machine, a plug-in USB based OS (maybe based on a stripped down version of Linux, Puppy or DSL, perhaps a smaller OS with a published spec that peripheral makers could write to or not, no different than writing / building for DirectX) Guarenteed better speed and reliability from not running ANYTHING extra in the background if the OS can get unloaded from memory by whatever game you choose to run. There's the nasty problem of who will / won't release new hardware / drivers for this OS. (A single driver that all devices could be made to fit would be beautiful, but good luck)
How many PCs do you want?
If you game on your PC, you may or may not be able to use it for other things at the same time. How seemlessly can you swap between your gaming, IM etc? With a PC and console, one right next to the other, best of both worlds. Dedicated machine that no amount of playing on your PC will slow down.
Cheating
There's always been cheating and always will. From Game Genie for infinite lives to patches for PC games for see-through walls in FPSs. If you want a fair online game, the best system is a console front-end (technically hackable, but difficult that not nearly so many will bother as will on PCs where it's much easier) with as much as possible handled on a central server.
In this, the whole virtual machine idea becomes more practical. If we get a fast enough, reliable enough net connection, we can theoretically treat EITHER a console OR a pc as just a tv and controller, a dumb terminal that advertises its capabilities, sends keyboard, mouse, controller info and returns a video feed from the server.
Screen
Computers tend to have monitors instead of TVs
Monitors look better but are usually smaller. HDs look nice. The Dreamcast has a VGA adaptor. Many HD TVs take PC input. This is becoming moot. In the future you'll get a monitor,
Oh good, you made the point I was going to make, I heart Linux on video game consoles. Yeah I said "I heart" on Slashdot.
From my own anecdotal experience, I just helped a friend repair his 360 3 rings of death issue, and even a buddy with his Wii has had random disc reading errors.
Consoles aren't as sturdy as the old NES days. Hell, I have a C64 that still works till this day. I don't think we are ever going to see that kind of reliability again.
ha ha ha ha ha ha, oh you must be joking, or else not old enough to remember the old days.
There was a time when computers were expensive and not everyone was guaranteed to have a joystick. So devs put in keyboard controls...in action games. Which sucked, and even if you could control the game with a keyboard it wasn't optimal, or fun, or comfortable.
Now you might have a mouse for analog aiming, but what about analog movement. console controllers have two analog sticks, plus analog buttons. And these days they also have USB and bluetooth, for things like mice and keyboards.
By the way, most PS1 and PS2 games allow fully configurable controls. Was that an Xbox you were making an example of with that "B button"
1. Use Firefox. .exe/.wmv/(etc) filespam on file sharing networks (if that's your sort of thing). .exe format en masse is legit.
2. Use a firewall (Windows Firewall does the trick).
3. Avoid suspicious
4. For the love of God, use Firefox.
5. Never click on ads.
6. Never install bundled adware or browser toolbars.
7. Nobody offering free screensavers/themes/ringtones/pr0n/minigames in
8. Train yourself to recognize spam in all forms, on all media. Every trendy Internet product, service, feature or meme will have a spam-clone, made either to spread badware or to conduct phishing scams - and you must be ready for both.
9. ???
10. No viruses and no anti-virus! Enjoy your new computer experience. You're welcome.
So that's the list for the PC. Looks like you have 7 legitimate items that you have to do. While they all may be common sense for you or me, they're not common sense for the average consumer.
For comparison, here's the list for the console:
1. Uh.. nothing.
See?
paintball
Computer games are still subjected to DRM, possibly more, on WildTangent's game delivery platform. When compared to consoles, WildTangent's platform is still not optimum solution for users, even though it offers innovative time-base subscription model.
It's interesting how a lot of people here are discussing the hardware.
The reason why consoles succeed is because of the software. So long as the content is there, the hardware really isn't important. I despise the Wii, but that underpowered, overdressed (and less reliable than we are led to be believe) contraption proves the point perfectly. While Sony and Microsoft have gotten into the e-penis war just like the PC community, Nintendo went with... "unusual" software, and is now walking away with billions in revenue. Lesson learned?
The 360 is hailed by many as having the best software lineup of any next-gen console, but sales of the PS3 have been catching up to the 360 very quickly. Why? Wasn't the PS3 a piece of expensive junk with no games just a few months ago? There's a lot of factors involved, but the summary is that Sony is far better at making exclusive games than Microsoft, and their 1st and 2nd-party titles are looking to be much more interesting than all the 3rd-party 360 games that will also be available on the PS3, the PC, and practically every other architecture.
Well, except for the Mac. Maybe Apple would have a shot at those titles, too, if they actually gave a s**t about games.
Does the standard run linux or windows?
Which of the 400 different controllers on the PC market do you use? And which drivers?
ATI or Nvidia graphics? Because picking one locks out the other to a degree.
The reason consoles exist is because once you dictate a standard down to the point where everything always works you can pretty much only have a console.
I realise it would be awesome for me and most of my friends if developers dropped consoles and went PC full time but think of the children (GASP! it's relevant); Little Timmy doesn't want to spend any time fiddling with settings to make his new game work, he just wants to plug it in and go.
His whole argument rests on the assumption that better 3D = better games. Everyone knows that's essentially untrue. UT3 is a case in point. Is it more fun to play that UT2004 simply because the gfx are way better? WoW is another case. Of course it would look nicer with better gfx, but would it be more fun or more popular because of it? Doubt it.
One of my fav games was Beyond Good and Evil. I *liked* the stylised, cartoonish characterisations. Anyone who loves Anime feels some trepidation at the rise of completely 3D-rendered visuals. They have their place, but better 3D doesn't make a better movie or a better game.
I with they'd put more effort into AI and character movement. What we really need for *immersion* (and better 3D is not equivalent to better immersion either) is dynamic character movement and AI. Sod all this 3D stuff, it's just serving the hardware industry and in the meantime real innovation is being sidelined.
Sure the Wii hardware is nothing special. A PC could easily provide the horsepower. The problem is getting Wii software to run as well on that cheap hardware with the hardware abstraction and multi-process environment of a modern OS. I'd rather just have another box to handle my torrents, emails, TV show recording, etc than have to stop all of that every time I want to play a game. If I'm going to need a separate box anyways, might as well be one with a standardized hardware platform and control scheme.
To be sincere, it may seem you just described a mac.
I've also just described my refrigerator, microwave, coffee maker, and vacuum cleaner, but you can't play games on those either.
(duck)
paintball
Sure, backwards compatibility on the windows platform is less than perfect, but at least it's correctable with software. Good luck sticking an NES cart in your Wii, or playing a PS1 game on your late model PS3. Hell, there were a bunch of PS1 games that wouldn't even smoothly on PS2s.
> Little Timmy doesn't want to spend any time fiddling with settings to make
> his new game work, he just wants to plug it in and go.
To hell with Little Timmy. I'm a senior systems developer with roots in the PC repair field, in the early 90s while I was in school. I am perfectly capable of specifying, purchasing, and assembling a hardware platform suitable for whatever I might want to play.
But you know what? I spend about 40 hours a year gaming. It takes 15 minutes to buy a Wii and some controllers and 10 more to ask to the Wii nerd at Walmart what doesn't suck. That's it. 25 minutes invested. When I want to play games, I DON'T want to piss around installing an OS, patches, making sure Direct X version 18.4 is installed, blah ablah ablah abl h.
PC is *shitty* platform for games because it is _general purpose_. NOBODY wants to come home and work to play.
(PS, are there any good FPSs for Wii?)
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?