Poll: Console Cults

[WeedWorm]

I dont worship any (current gen) console, each has its own advantage and disadvantages. The only console I have any irregular feelings for is the wii.

 

[bjj hero]

One off the cuff remark and its all about the pope.

Firstly many a pope throughout the ages has not managed to remain celibate. If the current Pope wasnt do you really think theyd advertise it? Front page news of the world spreads dont get the people through the door. The difference between a cult and a religion is subjective. It comes down to are your mystical beliefs supported accepted by the mainstream. Its about judgement and opinion, which differ depending on who you talk to. Check Scientology on Wiki as the first example I can think of.

Hence In Waco Texas the gouvernment went in because David Koresh may have had illegal weapons: cult
The pope has his own state and a private army: hunky dorrie.

As far as the Catholic church being powerful from its age, I agree but whats your point? In 1000 years time which cults will be considered religions? Church of Elvis anyone? Id hope we will have moved past the need for superstition by that time but I dont have that much faith in people.

 

[bjj hero]

Now I can get back on topic...

Im backing Chickenlittle. Games ARE generally better for the platform they were initially designed for. Its about the interface more than anything. Did you design it around having all the options of a mouse/keyboard or the precision and intuition of a control pad. Dont believe me? Go and play a game meant for a console that got a Wii port. Precise inputs replaced with waving in a circle.

For the record I started playing FPS with Quake 2/Action Quake using MnK and now play more on my 360. I can use both and dont have a favourite, it depends on how well the game works.

I also cant believe people play FPS (or any game really) for the story. Play games for GAMEPLAY, enjoyment and challenge. If you want story read a book, if thats too challenging watch a movie or (shudder) watch tv. There are millions of better options for story than Videogames.

Struggling to pick? To get started read A picture of Dorian Grey (Oscar Wilde), Watch the Godfather 2, and I cant think of any quality TV. I do watch Heroes but Id be lying to myself if I put it on the list.

To conclude Story in video games is at its best average quality and is only used as a quick break between shooting/jumpin/fighting/racing/etc. and is good to stick in advertisements (how many FF ads have you seen with gameplay involved?)

 

[joystickjunki3]

Dreamcast. All others are secondary.

 

[Chickenlittle]

As Half Life was created for the PC, Halo was turned to be released for the X-Box console. Far as I can tell, the majority of games are better on the platform they are released for.

Umm... I don't see how this can be, frankly. The main difference is the controllers. The rest is just window dressing. Yes, they had to do a lot of work in porting Halo to PC in order to increase the textures to something acceptable - but that's the only difference.

Perhaps you are just used to inaccurate weapons on a console and expect that, and thus accept it?

Besides, the point of Half-Life is that it provided a far richer world, better environment, and a more interesting story. It had far more twists and turns than Halo, and the characters were more compelling. It was also far longer than Halo, if I am not mistaken - by 1/3rd to 1/2. None of these things would be affected in any way by transfer to a different platform.

Far as I can tell, PC games usually have deeper stories and plots than console games, with the exception of the Metal Gear series, and a few more. However, the controls were a big task with Halo. It started out as an RTS for the Mac, and they had to adapt to TPS, then FPS, and then to the X-Box controller.

A mouse is not guaranteed to give you better aim. The player does that, not the mouse. I'm not saying controller < mouse or vice versa, but it all depends on what the player wants. Many of us don't need to be able to grab ledges or perform small actions to improve our performance. Hence, simpler controls are sometimes preferable.

What Halo did was take most features in FPS, and do them right on a console. On top of that, the controls were simple and intuitive, which is what consoles need for FPS. In Half-life and other PC games, but you may have many more abilities because of a keyboard, but why do you really need them in many shooters? You have aiming with a thumb, you have moving in any direction with a thumb, you have all the necessary actions with your fingers. Like I said, I still confuse myself with keyboard FPS controls, even for Halo PC, because I need to set and remember them.

I disagree. FPS is just a way of telling a story. A perspective on the world and the game. It is not the game itself. If it was, then Serious Sam would be considered the best game ever, since it was an excellent shooter, although with minimal level design and possibilities.

Consider this - Doom, Quake, Halo, Half-Life, Far Cry, Far Cry 2, Crysis, Fallout 3, etc. - they are all shooters. And yet they are different. What separates them is not just the graphics and controls. That is secondary at best. The story and gameplay are what is important. These are the things that so many console games seem to lack.

Different games. Mostly from different game eras. Don't compare Far Cry 2 to Doom or Half-Life 2. That's not even compatible. If you'll recall, you couldn't jump in Doom, and it was a PC game. Many PC games also lack a good story or decent gameplay. The story may be deep, but not necessarily good. Most Star Wars games for instance. Sure, you can completely customize controls. But when you call on for gameplay, many just don't deliver. Half-Life is a definite exception. This problem plagues all platforms, not just PC. And as I don't have the time to do research, I'm guessing that X-Box Live has more players than most PC FPS/RTS games for online play.

What you call intuitive I think of as far too simplified. For example, in some console FPS games you can't even jump! You can't fall off a cliff! And when you can, you have to work at it - you are protected from yourself. No pure PC game would be able to get away with that.

Different games have different controls. I agree that not being able to jump is annoying. But in cases of RPG, oftentimes you cannot save, as their are Savepoints; why would you want to be able to fall off a cliff? Some of those decisions are made to improve gameplayer, not necessarily just for protecting the player.

Personally, I think that control intuitiveness is a big part of why it was successful. but like I've also said, most games are more enjoyable on the platform they are released on.

Are you sure that what you perceive as intuitive controls is not simply a standardized control scheme that you are used to? To a person that is used to the Dvorak keyboard, a Querty would also seem unintuitive.

OK, just this argument appears to be acting against itself. Do I really need to provide a counter for it?

 

[Dudemeister]

PS3, also the 360, mainly the PS3 though.

 

[Elim Garak]

Besides, the point of Half-Life is that it provided a far richer world, better environment, and a more interesting story. It had far more twists and turns than Halo, and the characters were more compelling. It was also far longer than Halo, if I am not mistaken - by 1/3rd to 1/2. None of these things would be affected in any way by transfer to a different platform.

Far as I can tell, PC games usually have deeper stories and plots than console games, with the exception of the Metal Gear series, and a few more.

Exactly. That's like half of my point. Which IMHO makes PCs a superior platform.

However, the controls were a big task with Halo. It started out as an RTS for the Mac, and they had to adapt to TPS, then FPS, and then to the X-Box controller.

A mouse is not guaranteed to give you better aim. The player does that, not the mouse. I'm not saying controller < mouse or vice versa, but it all depends on what the player wants. Many of us don't need to be able to grab ledges or perform small actions to improve our performance. Hence, simpler controls are sometimes preferable.

I do want to have accuracy. A targeting circle with a diameter 1/8 of a screen on a normal rifle is just ridiculous. And it is required because of the accuracy problems with the joysticks. A mouse does not guarantee accurate aim - it just makes it possible.

Consider this - Doom, Quake, Halo, Half-Life, Far Cry, Far Cry 2, Crysis, Fallout 3, etc. - they are all shooters. And yet they are different. What separates them is not just the graphics and controls. That is secondary at best. The story and gameplay are what is important. These are the things that so many console games seem to lack.

Different games. Mostly from different game eras. Don't compare Far Cry 2 to Doom or Half-Life 2. That's not even compatible.

Exactly - but you classify them as shooters and claimed that this defined all that you need to have in the control scheme. You said "In Half-life and other PC games, but you may have many more abilities because of a keyboard, but why do you really need them in many shooters?"

The class "shooter" encompasses a lot of very different games in different geanres. Many of which require different abilities and functionality - often more advanced abilities than those usually present on most console games.

If you'll recall, you couldn't jump in Doom, and it was a PC game. Many PC games also lack a good story or decent gameplay. The story may be deep, but not necessarily good.

Doom is an example of the variety of "shooter" class games. I know it had very few features - that's because it is virtually the first really popular shooter. Well, second, after Wolferstein.

Most Star Wars games for instance. Sure, you can completely customize controls. But when you call on for gameplay, many just don't deliver. Half-Life is a definite exception.

You just said yourself that PC games have deeper plots and stories than console games. That doesn't mean that every game out there has a deep story. And HL is not that much of an exception.

And as I don't have the time to do research, I'm guessing that X-Box Live has more players than most PC FPS/RTS games for online play.

LOL, with many of the newest games you can play on PC and console. PC multiplayer games are far more popular - even if we exclude WOW. RTS doesn't really work on a console, so that leaves FPS. And Counterstrike kills everybody in this category. In 2003 there were 100,000 players on-line playing this game at any given moment. Not sure what the numbers are for xbox, though.

Besides, this is where PCs shine - on a PC you can actually extend the game. There are dozens of versions of MP levels for each game, which makes things richer and more varied. I played Desert Conflict far longer than BF 1942 - and certainly than BF 2. The mods alone make PCs far superior in this area.

Are you sure that what you perceive as intuitive controls is not simply a standardized control scheme that you are used to? To a person that is used to the Dvorak keyboard, a Querty would also seem unintuitive.

OK, just this argument appears to be acting against itself. Do I really need to provide a counter for it?

LOL, yup. Because I think I proved my point. You are the one that considers PC controls unintuitive. I am claiming that consoles are just hugely inaccurate - intuition depends on what you are used to.

Bottom line:
- Half-Life >> Halo, despite being three years older and capable of running on weaker hardware. PC.
- Expansion packs - PC.
- Game stories and plots on PC >> console. PC.
- Console simplicity (if you like that sort of thing) > PC (and even here you can hook up an x-box controller if you want). Console, barely.

That's 3 for PC, 1 (maybe) for console.

 

[Joeshie]

Ahhh, the one thing I can always depend on the Escapist for is similar PC-oriented gamers such as myself.

Such a rarity to find PC gamers outnumber console gamers on a forum.

 

[Chickenlittle]

Besides, the point of Half-Life is that it provided a far richer world, better environment, and a more interesting story. It had far more twists and turns than Halo, and the characters were more compelling. It was also far longer than Halo, if I am not mistaken - by 1/3rd to 1/2. None of these things would be affected in any way by transfer to a different platform.

Far as I can tell, PC games usually have deeper stories and plots than console games, with the exception of the Metal Gear series, and a few more.

Exactly. That's like half of my point. Which IMHO makes PCs a superior platform.

However, the controls were a big task with Halo. It started out as an RTS for the Mac, and they had to adapt to TPS, then FPS, and then to the X-Box controller.

A mouse is not guaranteed to give you better aim. The player does that, not the mouse. I'm not saying controller < mouse or vice versa, but it all depends on what the player wants. Many of us don't need to be able to grab ledges or perform small actions to improve our performance. Hence, simpler controls are sometimes preferable.

I do want to have accuracy. A targeting circle with a diameter 1/8 of a screen on a normal rifle is just ridiculous. And it is required because of the accuracy problems with the joysticks. A mouse does not guarantee accurate aim - it just makes it possible.

Consider this - Doom, Quake, Halo, Half-Life, Far Cry, Far Cry 2, Crysis, Fallout 3, etc. - they are all shooters. And yet they are different. What separates them is not just the graphics and controls. That is secondary at best. The story and gameplay are what is important. These are the things that so many console games seem to lack.

Different games. Mostly from different game eras. Don't compare Far Cry 2 to Doom or Half-Life 2. That's not even compatible.

Exactly - but you classify them as shooters and claimed that this defined all that you need to have in the control scheme. You said "In Half-life and other PC games, but you may have many more abilities because of a keyboard, but why do you really need them in many shooters?"

The class "shooter" encompasses a lot of very different games in different geanres. Many of which require different abilities and functionality - often more advanced abilities than those usually present on most console games.

If you'll recall, you couldn't jump in Doom, and it was a PC game. Many PC games also lack a good story or decent gameplay. The story may be deep, but not necessarily good.

Doom is an example of the variety of "shooter" class games. I know it had very few features - that's because it is virtually the first really popular shooter. Well, second, after Wolferstein.

Most Star Wars games for instance. Sure, you can completely customize controls. But when you call on for gameplay, many just don't deliver. Half-Life is a definite exception.

You just said yourself that PC games have deeper plots and stories than console games. That doesn't mean that every game out there has a deep story. And HL is not that much of an exception.

And as I don't have the time to do research, I'm guessing that X-Box Live has more players than most PC FPS/RTS games for online play.

LOL, with many of the newest games you can play on PC and console. PC multiplayer games are far more popular - even if we exclude WOW. RTS doesn't really work on a console, so that leaves FPS. And Counterstrike kills everybody in this category. In 2003 there were 100,000 players on-line playing this game at any given moment. Not sure what the numbers are for xbox, though.

Besides, this is where PCs shine - on a PC you can actually extend the game. There are dozens of versions of MP levels for each game, which makes things richer and more varied. I played Desert Conflict far longer than BF 1942 - and certainly than BF 2. The mods alone make PCs far superior in this area.

Are you sure that what you perceive as intuitive controls is not simply a standardized control scheme that you are used to? To a person that is used to the Dvorak keyboard, a Querty would also seem unintuitive.

OK, just this argument appears to be acting against itself. Do I really need to provide a counter for it?

LOL, yup. Because I think I proved my point. You are the one that considers PC controls unintuitive. I am claiming that consoles are just hugely inaccurate - intuition depends on what you are used to.

Bottom line:
- Half-Life >> Halo, despite being three years older and capable of running on weaker hardware. PC.
- Expansion packs - PC.
- Game stories and plots on PC >> console. PC.
- Console simplicity (if you like that sort of thing) > PC (and even here you can hook up an x-box controller if you want). Console, barely.

That's 3 for PC, 1 (maybe) for console.

Ok, I'm just going to stop arguing now and save what little dignity I have left. It's obvious even to me that most of my assumptions are wrong. Still, in the end, it all depends on preference.

Thanks for the debate, maybe we can do this again sometime.

 

[bjj hero]

Id like to add that I dont care about targetting recticles on halo or half life. They are so 90s. Cod4/5 have it right (at least on hardcore) where there is minimal hud and no onscreen targetting. Use the scope or the iron sights.

And for the record On the 360 Im bagging tonnes of head shots. Dont aregue the thumb stick is inacurate just because you cant use it.

More buttons (keyboard) doesnt make for a better game, neither does better plot/story. Its about feel, physics, level design, connectivity (for online MP) and AI (for solo only). SCREW story. Read a fucking book.

PC nut hugging...

 

[Elim Garak]

Ok, I'm just going to stop arguing now and save what little dignity I have left. It's obvious even to me that most of my assumptions are wrong. Still, in the end, it all depends on preference.

Thanks for the debate, maybe we can do this again sometime.

Heh, no worries. I think you are right - a lot of it is just preference. BTW, I doubt that I would be able to stop arguing this easily. I am really stubborn. Probably comes from my years at alt.startrek.vs.starwars.

 

[Art Axiv]

Id like to add that I dont care about targetting recticles on halo or half life. They are so 90s. Cod4/5 have it right (at least on hardcore) where there is minimal hud and no onscreen targetting. Use the scope or the iron sights.

And for the record On the 360 Im bagging tonnes of head shots. Dont aregue the thumb stick is inacurate just because you cant use it.

More buttons (keyboard) doesnt make for a better game, neither does better plot/story. Its about feel, physics, level design, connectivity (for online MP) and AI (for solo only). SCREW story. Read a fucking book.

PC nut hugging...

Wow, actually there ARE people like you in the world! Another learning experience.

 

[bjj hero]

It takes different strokes to move the world

 

[mhitman]

I would have picked pc and 360. I generally like the 360 alot more than the other consoles

 

[Hed_Kansa]

I'm really suprised that this poll was narrowed down to current generation formats.

I'm also keeping PC's out of this due to this thread being called Console cults not Format cults.

I own all 3 of the current home consoles but frankly I don't think they the right to be cult worthy yet. Sure there's been a few good exclusive games on all 3 consoles, MGS4 on PS3, the GOW series on 360 and the wii's main franchise games.

But in a few years sequels to games those will be published and if they improve on certian aspects of the games - I.E: MGS removes its head from its arse, GOW grows a story and stops priding in being a haven for hollering dickholes and Nintendo make something original for the first time since Smash Bros on the N64, then these 3 consoles respectivly should be able to stand as legends with the likes of the consoles of the 16 bit genre, the N64 and the Dreamcast.

 

[Howlingwolf214]

<3 PC.

 

[Elim Garak]

More buttons (keyboard) doesnt make for a better game, neither does better plot/story. Its about feel, physics, level design, connectivity (for online MP) and AI (for solo only). SCREW story. Read a fucking book.

LOL, that's like saying that all types of movies are dumb and you only want to watch amateur porn. Screw story, screw plot, dialog, acting, set design, etc. If you want character development read a fucking book! Thus lets shut down Hollywood, and all other types of movies besides porn.

 

[karpiel]

Sega Dreamcast. it was the last video game machine that played proper video games. Everything else these days is a watered down PC.

 

[bjj hero]

More buttons (keyboard) doesnt make for a better game, neither does better plot/story. Its about feel, physics, level design, connectivity (for online MP) and AI (for solo only). SCREW story. Read a fucking book.

LOL, that's like saying that all types of movies are dumb and you only want to watch amateur porn. Screw story, screw plot, dialog, acting, set design, etc. If you want character development read a fucking book! Thus lets shut down Hollywood, and all other types of movies besides porn.

Youll see in an earlier post I recommended the Godfather 2 as a good example of storytelling. Games are abour entertinment, challenge and fun. Ive not seen storytelling pass average in a videogame yet. The story is secondary to the in game experience. Most cut scenes are just talking to seperate the shooting.

Charecter development is when I get a new weapon/attack/spell.

 

[bjj hero]

Elim Garak posted there were 100000 CS players on the PC.

Yesterday there were 213500 playing COD WAW on the 360 on a week night.

Numbers dont really mean quality though...