Ken Levine: The Future of Gaming Is In the PC
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
(1) I didn't say that was Levine's argument, I said I didn't find THAT argument, made by many in this tread, to be solid.Delusibeta said:
(2) Numbers are completely relevant, because we're talking about what drives innovation and where it arises, especially when the ratio of releases on consoles vs. the PC is in the vicinity of 8 to 1. Even if only one eight of console releases ever innovated something and 100% of PC games did, that would put them on EQUAL standing.
(3) THIS is irrelevant. The motivation and origin is not a factor; the fact that it became the template of modern micro-transactions on ALL platforms is. It doesn't matter that it was born as a music store, in fact, I expected someone to point it out. Amazon.com started as an online book store and is the world?s larges online store in the world today and the model all other online retailers follow. The App store is the same, and it was born on a phone.
Bullshit.
Coming from someone who's company seems hell bent on raping beloved PC gaming masterpieces (X-Com) and inflicting ulcer inducingly severe DRM, I'm surprised the hypocrisy of his statement hasn't taken physical form and strangled him to death.
Coming from someone who's company seems hell bent on raping beloved PC gaming masterpieces (X-Com) and inflicting ulcer inducingly severe DRM, I'm surprised the hypocrisy of his statement hasn't taken physical form and strangled him to death.
Of course PC's are better.
I always buy multi-platform games on PC, I only own consoles for the other stuff...
That's the only problem with PC gaming right now, that consoles are less easy to pirate so that's where the focus/support from developers is. I can easily hook my PC up to my 40" screen, plug in a controller and sit back and have the console experience(with vastly improved graphics too), or I can sit at my desk and have better precision controls for games that benefit from it.
The PC is a victim of it's own hardcore/open source nature...too easy to pirate, and the tech scares people off. This doesn't negate from the fact that it kicks console ass in every other regard.
I always buy multi-platform games on PC, I only own consoles for the other stuff...
That's the only problem with PC gaming right now, that consoles are less easy to pirate so that's where the focus/support from developers is. I can easily hook my PC up to my 40" screen, plug in a controller and sit back and have the console experience(with vastly improved graphics too), or I can sit at my desk and have better precision controls for games that benefit from it.
The PC is a victim of it's own hardcore/open source nature...too easy to pirate, and the tech scares people off. This doesn't negate from the fact that it kicks console ass in every other regard.
if a monkey can use it, doesn't that make it even worse ?The Austin said:
you can still connect your PC on your tv and use a PC controller if you play a game.
English isn't my main language. it is true that nowadays with the way Economics goes like some degenerated toyotism, it does suck. but let's hope for the soon release of touchable Holograms.tellmeimaninja said:
"Mods are just a way of making a Good or great game better. But they should already be standing and fun on their own."Tankichi said:
That's where DLC's appear on the scene, and they even make you pay for it! (there are some exceptions on PS3)
but that's how they make you want for more, using your hobby as a vice.
Well again that depends on the game more than the genre. Batman is an action-adventure and in my honest opinion the mouse is better than the thumb-stick. Trine is a PC-exclusive platformer and for the life of me, it's unplayable with a thumbstick. I got Second Sight in a Steam deal and the mouse sucks with it, but not because there is something about the design of Second Sight that doesn't suit it; it's just a lazy port and no one bothered trying to sort the mouse-to-cursor interface out. I wish they had brought out Destroy All Humans on PC because that would be awesome with a mouse.Cocamaster said:
The only genre I can think of where a pad is inarguably superior to keyboard and/or mouse across the board is beat-em ups. But then proper arcade-style joysticks enormous buttons beat every other kind of controller in that genre.
Oh and PC ARE affordable, it's just that a lot of people are put off because they're intimidated.
If you buy a gaming PC, yes it costs more than a console but the games are cheaper and you have access to the cheap as chips indie scene. Console gamers have become too accustomed to managing their costs by using trade-ins and second-hands. Stop it: you fail to value games properly. Either a few smart console players made angry criticism or Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo were sniffing something because the latest consoles have some backward compatibility with the previous generation, making a healthy game collection still worthwhile. But the PC gets this anyway; almost everything is backward compatible and a few bright sparks that saw the demand for even more backward comparability from nostalgic players have rushed to meet it. A PC lasts an extremely long time.
I used to be a Sega guy; that's a Master System, Mega Drive(Genesis), Saturn and Dreamcast between 1986 and 1999, not that I owned them all. Nintendo guys had the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube and Wii between 1986 and 2006. Sony has gone through three Playstations in fifteen-ish years and Microsoft brought the 360 out five minutes after the first Xbox. This is roughly a new console every 4-5 years. A completely new one. Most of them make the software for the previous versions obsolete but console gamers have at least wrangled some backward compatibility for themselves. I've had my current PC for three years, it cost £600 and a few months ago I stuck a new video card in it to keep it up to date and a bit more memory, now it's good for at least three more years. Even then I might have the opportunity of picking up a better processor that fits my socket at a low price and that will add another year or two because since multiple-core processors came along the increase in required specs hasn't jumped much. A slow quad-core can keep up with a fast dual or triple-core simply because it has those extra cores and to really task them means putting more in a game, which means spending more on the game and that isn't rising enough to keep up with Moore's Law.
I have had two PCs in twelve years, I'm up on the generational frequency over consoles by at least one. But I'm also getting cheaper games, £20 less than consoles since the days of Thief 2. Over a decade keeping up with consoles may cost you over £1000(or your currency equivalent), but so will a PC. The main deterrent for most people I think is the initial front-end cost. Getting the most out of a PC requires learning about it and then being pro-active in getting value for money: it's not just good luck that the major PC-native developers Valve, Blizzard and Stardock go way beyond the extra mile in terms of service.
If you buy a gaming PC, yes it costs more than a console but the games are cheaper and you have access to the cheap as chips indie scene. Console gamers have become too accustomed to managing their costs by using trade-ins and second-hands. Stop it: you fail to value games properly. Either a few smart console players made angry criticism or Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo were sniffing something because the latest consoles have some backward compatibility with the previous generation, making a healthy game collection still worthwhile. But the PC gets this anyway; almost everything is backward compatible and a few bright sparks that saw the demand for even more backward comparability from nostalgic players have rushed to meet it. A PC lasts an extremely long time.
I used to be a Sega guy; that's a Master System, Mega Drive(Genesis), Saturn and Dreamcast between 1986 and 1999, not that I owned them all. Nintendo guys had the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube and Wii between 1986 and 2006. Sony has gone through three Playstations in fifteen-ish years and Microsoft brought the 360 out five minutes after the first Xbox. This is roughly a new console every 4-5 years. A completely new one. Most of them make the software for the previous versions obsolete but console gamers have at least wrangled some backward compatibility for themselves. I've had my current PC for three years, it cost £600 and a few months ago I stuck a new video card in it to keep it up to date and a bit more memory, now it's good for at least three more years. Even then I might have the opportunity of picking up a better processor that fits my socket at a low price and that will add another year or two because since multiple-core processors came along the increase in required specs hasn't jumped much. A slow quad-core can keep up with a fast dual or triple-core simply because it has those extra cores and to really task them means putting more in a game, which means spending more on the game and that isn't rising enough to keep up with Moore's Law.
I have had two PCs in twelve years, I'm up on the generational frequency over consoles by at least one. But I'm also getting cheaper games, £20 less than consoles since the days of Thief 2. Over a decade keeping up with consoles may cost you over £1000(or your currency equivalent), but so will a PC. The main deterrent for most people I think is the initial front-end cost. Getting the most out of a PC requires learning about it and then being pro-active in getting value for money: it's not just good luck that the major PC-native developers Valve, Blizzard and Stardock go way beyond the extra mile in terms of service.
Exactly. also, how is a keyboard and mouse, which requires constant movement of the hands and elevation of the hands onto the keyboard, more ergonomic than a controller which fits into your hands and requires no movement of the hands and can be placed flexibly anywhere you want.FloodOne said:
He never said there were no exceptions to the rule. Everything he said up there was a fact. It IS harder to develop for a console, simply because you need the express permission of either Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo, all very large companies, making it difficult for small-time developers to do anything. On the PC, on the other hand, you have things like minecraft, which was developed by ONE PERSON. And for the record, I am a console gamer.FloodOne said: