Ken Levine: The Future of Gaming Is In the PC
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Haven't the graphics requirements staid the same sine 5 years?dementis said:
Crysis was released in 2007 and new games don't need anywhere near the hardware it needed.
A 200 dollar graphics card for your office pc and your ready to go usually o. O
And since games are alot more expensive you'll save the entire cost of a pc overtime.
But you need the money up front in order to save more.
Didn't have it upfront and hardware was expensive back then so i bought a console.
But nowadays it seems odd to complain about the price.
Anyway i see updating drivers etc as a higher hurdle. Though steam does everything automaticly for ati users.
If the Facebook fad continues most gamers/game players will be on the pc anyway but those aren't the games we like :/
I think the point he was trying to make was nobody's ever gonna say something like, "Hey everyone gander 'round the computer for some Madden!"dududf said:
...punkrocker27 said:
I'm afraid to say this, but yes I've said "Gather around my computer, and check out some Crysis!" (not a sports guy)
To top it off, I even fed a live stream of it directly to the home movie theatre in the next room, and some times the plasma.
...
>.<
One thing that everyone always ignores in this debate is how teaching people to use their PC isn't a bad thing. Sure, consoles are easier to use, but by learning how to game on a PC you will end up learning how to be more tech-savvy and self sufficient. Learning and sticking with something "a monkey can do" isn't helping you or society at all. Games are starting to reflect this as more and more "monkeys" get into gaming. So speakeths the profit margin.
Tangentially, are we arguing two different points in the same thread? Fantastic, I suppose.Xzi said:
I did originally credit the PC with coming up with a few innovations, though, and I won't deny that there are more modes for peripherals to develop. But I'm focused more with the contained, purposed, built-in means of controlling and playing, not the little toys that come out to heighten a singular sensation. Yes, they might be highly advanced, like the Falcon that the guy above posted in the broken Youtube link, but since it's not a primary means of controlling, spread widely across many systems, it's ancillary. Consoles have developed, over time. Controller shapes and sizes and forms, rumbles, digital, analog, dual analog, cartridges, discs, internal memory, external memory, console adapters, cross-device adapters and cables, motion controls, 3D without glasses, handheld gaming, even the way the console can connect to other consoles has changed. The PC, though, still has the same interface. The mouse and keyboard might be the 500 pound gorilla of the industry, but it's a gorilla that won't move, only keep things as they are. Year after year, you can see the exact same setup almost anywhere. And that's not innovation, friend.
True once developers take to the PC.
Market a Franchise-able, easy to use/install Controller.
Developers 'develop for that'/Instead of the Keyboard
We're ready to roll.
All of you who instantly start proclaiming your favorite brand of PC gaming controller. Stop. Do not. That is not what I mean. You need a vaguely 'family friendly' not 'Super Basement dweller Hardgore megatron 2000' brand (exaggeration but you get what I mean) And you need to get the games and draw needed.
Eventually TV/PC/Gaming systems will all intermarry and life will be cool. Some company(ies) somewhere is developing it for sure, it's just a matter of who gets it down and done first, and sellable to the mass public at an affordable price.
Market a Franchise-able, easy to use/install Controller.
Developers 'develop for that'/Instead of the Keyboard
We're ready to roll.
All of you who instantly start proclaiming your favorite brand of PC gaming controller. Stop. Do not. That is not what I mean. You need a vaguely 'family friendly' not 'Super Basement dweller Hardgore megatron 2000' brand (exaggeration but you get what I mean) And you need to get the games and draw needed.
Eventually TV/PC/Gaming systems will all intermarry and life will be cool. Some company(ies) somewhere is developing it for sure, it's just a matter of who gets it down and done first, and sellable to the mass public at an affordable price.
People seem to be mis-interpreting Ken's words. He wasn't saying their isn't innovation on consoles at all, simply that some of the most unique ideas that may actually impact gaming overall, are primarily on the PC. This is true when you consider the open ended nature of the platform. You can easily experiment on PC and get a massive audience for practically anything you do under the right circumstances, this is simply not possible on consoles given how MS, Sony and Nintendo govern their platforms and enforce strict rules on what kind of content can be distributed and in what capacity while shunning and ignoring new ideas primarily for business reasons.
Also he's right about peoples attention being more focussed on the pc too, it is much easier to be distracted when on a couch in front of a tv. I game on both kinds of platforms regularly, owning a gaming PC, ps3 and a 360 so I don't strictly stick to one but even with most of the games I enjoy being on consoles these days my preferences still lie with the PC because I much prefer the keyboard and mouse control scheme and the more personal, more direct experience one has by using a pc for gaming.
Also he's right about peoples attention being more focussed on the pc too, it is much easier to be distracted when on a couch in front of a tv. I game on both kinds of platforms regularly, owning a gaming PC, ps3 and a 360 so I don't strictly stick to one but even with most of the games I enjoy being on consoles these days my preferences still lie with the PC because I much prefer the keyboard and mouse control scheme and the more personal, more direct experience one has by using a pc for gaming.
My computer cost me about £450 to buy. This was around the time the PS3 was close to the same price, and my PC makes games look nicer, so I think I made the right choice.
Let's clear some things up though:
Neither Consoles or PC are the future by themselves. There will always be a place for both and both will contribute to future innovation.
Stop complaining about motion controls when you're using them. That's right, your mouse is a motion controller. You move it to make things in the game move and if you play your Wii right you use about the same amount of physical effort in its games too.
The PS2 had an amazing amount of shovelware too. And the PC is not immune, or do I need to point out train simulator 2 and it's 900 dollars worth of DLC?
Shovelware is a part of the industry. Always has been, always will be. You do not need to buy it, and it does not impact on your enjoyment of games, nor is it to blame for the lack of games on the Wii, lazy developers did that.
The only problem I have is that developers that started on PC seem to have forgotten that. It annoys me that consoles are now their focus and that PC gets the shaft, either through poor porting or just plain not releasing games.
Let's clear some things up though:
Neither Consoles or PC are the future by themselves. There will always be a place for both and both will contribute to future innovation.
Stop complaining about motion controls when you're using them. That's right, your mouse is a motion controller. You move it to make things in the game move and if you play your Wii right you use about the same amount of physical effort in its games too.
The PS2 had an amazing amount of shovelware too. And the PC is not immune, or do I need to point out train simulator 2 and it's 900 dollars worth of DLC?
Shovelware is a part of the industry. Always has been, always will be. You do not need to buy it, and it does not impact on your enjoyment of games, nor is it to blame for the lack of games on the Wii, lazy developers did that.
The only problem I have is that developers that started on PC seem to have forgotten that. It annoys me that consoles are now their focus and that PC gets the shaft, either through poor porting or just plain not releasing games.
The only reason why there are so many console gamers is the price point. Even the extremely expensive PS3 is still scads cheaper than a comparable gaming rig once you (rather unfairly honestly, since no consoles come with one) the monitor.
That's why the gaming market for consoles is so large, not because most people PREFER to play on consoles, but because the consoles themselves have extended gaming into a larger market.
In any case, what Ken Levine is true. The PC will never go away. Ultimately we will probably move to a single bundled platform that covers everything in a single box from work, to school, to gaming (arguably the PC does this already, but the price point and utility will have to change for higher adoption). It might even be decentralized or even purchased as a service streaming to a dumb terminal. What this new platform technically is (PC or Console?) is going to wholly depend on your perspective.
Imagine if you had nothing more than a screen + keyboard/mouse on your desk and all your apps were running off of virtual machines at a service provider, but with no noticible lag. You need more RAM or CPU speed? Then you call them and have them bump up your monthly bill, or you purchase additional resources as you need them for gaming sessions, or work.
Distributed computing is the way things are going in the future. I don't know if it'll be 10 or 20 years from now, but when it hits the argument will be pretty moot because you'll be purchasing all your "virtual" hardware and media from a service provider. Need a "console" to play a game? Not a problem, just a few button clicks and you're remoted to a console server...
Maybe because I'm closer to the industry than most I am more aware of these trends, but I have seen a few articles, maybe even one or two here on this site, that have talked a bit about this. I'm a little shocked that people don't seem to understand what this means to the old "console vs. pc" argument (an argument I think people like to have just to be obtuse anyway...)
That's why the gaming market for consoles is so large, not because most people PREFER to play on consoles, but because the consoles themselves have extended gaming into a larger market.
In any case, what Ken Levine is true. The PC will never go away. Ultimately we will probably move to a single bundled platform that covers everything in a single box from work, to school, to gaming (arguably the PC does this already, but the price point and utility will have to change for higher adoption). It might even be decentralized or even purchased as a service streaming to a dumb terminal. What this new platform technically is (PC or Console?) is going to wholly depend on your perspective.
Imagine if you had nothing more than a screen + keyboard/mouse on your desk and all your apps were running off of virtual machines at a service provider, but with no noticible lag. You need more RAM or CPU speed? Then you call them and have them bump up your monthly bill, or you purchase additional resources as you need them for gaming sessions, or work.
Distributed computing is the way things are going in the future. I don't know if it'll be 10 or 20 years from now, but when it hits the argument will be pretty moot because you'll be purchasing all your "virtual" hardware and media from a service provider. Need a "console" to play a game? Not a problem, just a few button clicks and you're remoted to a console server...
Maybe because I'm closer to the industry than most I am more aware of these trends, but I have seen a few articles, maybe even one or two here on this site, that have talked a bit about this. I'm a little shocked that people don't seem to understand what this means to the old "console vs. pc" argument (an argument I think people like to have just to be obtuse anyway...)