Progress and Upgrades

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
Progress and Upgrades

As the games become more important and the hardware less so, maybe the simplest path to Rapture really is the best one. If I'd just stop worrying and learn to love the Box, the little big guy could finally be set free and I'd get to see first-hand what all the hullabaloo is about. It certainly makes sense. So why do I, and the PC crowd at large, struggle against it?

Permalink
 

Kemmler0

New member
Sep 10, 2007
41
0
0
The console will never take the place of the PC. In the same way as you can never become your father's father. Consoles were born of PC technology, they are nothing more than specialized PC's with games that are made for specifically for them. PC games on the other hand drive the advancement of technology. Even now computers can be built that make the PS3 look like an antiquated piece of junk, and even if you take price into consideration you can still create more than a match hardware wise. If all PC games become only console ports or disappear all together, who will be left to advance the technologies that advance the consoles.

Will we just sit in a stagnant state with the Xbox, PS3, and Wii as our only options. Sure new and exciting games will come out and new and exciting gimmicks, such as motion sense and reactive optics (both of which are not new technology by a long shot). But eventually this will become superfluous and bland, and the people will want something new.

Therefore i will buy new graphics cards (plural, it's seems to be the norm; it failed with the Voodoo 2 and it will fail now). I will buy a new original copy of Hellgate: London. And i will pay the damned online subscription fee. Because i like the versatility, the precision, the choice, and i sure as hell want to look forward to new future gaming advancements.
 

Chinster

New member
Sep 5, 2007
45
0
0
I've officially given up trying to keep up with PC tech. From now on my PC is going to be a glorified word processor and internet surfing machine. I'll get my gaming fix on my consoles. The rest of you can can keep imagining that you are driving forth the gaming market in some righteous way by being a PC snob.
 

Andrew Armstrong

New member
Aug 21, 2007
67
0
0
PC snobs don't pay as much for their games, admittedly, so there are advantages. Consoles are not PC's, and PC's are not consoles, I don't see why anyone feels the need to argue for one or the other since both can exist at once. If a console ever can "replace" a PC, it is a PC!

As for upgrades, upgrading a PC (or a few bits) every few years is becoming the norm, with mid-range cards being pretty damn cheap, since 5-10 years ago there was a rash of complicated standards and operating systems which crashed often with games, and the dawn of DirectX3/4/5 (Windows 95/98). Today its a lot more stable, and moderate PC's from OEM people usually come with enough umph to play plenty of games.

Games for Windows is a joke though, marketing through and through (or money being paid to publishers through and through), to push Vista, and MS's own delivery services which will apepear, hmmm.

And consoles, yeah, are being outpaced by the power of todays PC cards, I don't think that the 5 year life span of the Microsoft and Sony consoles will be top of the line half way through their life, although standardising to them will mean both the gamers get a game which should run fine, since its only one type of box, but the PC games (especially on cross-releases) would look nicer/are more expansive then the consoles in the consoles later part of the life span. Its how its worked for every other generation.
 

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
A lot of the PC vs console battle is perception, but I don't think you can argue that in pure hardware terms, the PC isn't a more expensive proposition. You can upgrade individual components every year or so to keep things rolling for awhile but sooner or later the crunch comes and you have to make a big (and costly) leap forward. The transition from AGP to PCI-X, for instance: At a bare minimum you're looking at a new motherboard, RAM, CPU, video card and power supply, and while you could probably get all that for the cost of a PS3 (ballpark guessing here, of course) as a gamer, and therefore as someone who needs a little more zing out of his rig than the average Peggle-playing, email-sending, digital-photo-taking grandmother, would you really want to cheap out that way?

Andrew pointed out the games, which are typically cheaper for the PC than for consoles, but where the consoles win out in that particular area is rentals. I have Blockbuster and Rogers both within a half-hour drive, which both offer a metric asston of games for rent. Seen that kind of action for a PC lately?

I don't necessarily think that some future console will "replace" the PC, but the future doesn't look overly friendly to our kind.
 

Tom Edwards

New member
Oct 3, 2006
28
0
0
I've still got a bookmarks folder filled with "PC gaming is dead" posts from 2005. I've been slacking off: there's no 2006, and this is my first entry for 2007!

I disagree with the use of "we" in this article. The author's "we" is only relevant to those obsessed with keeping up with bleeding edge tech - who are in a tiny minority [http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html]. It doesn't reflect my experiences at all, which is of a new PC every six years and never having had a game refuse to run because I was out of date, or needing a ridiculous reduction in quality (but then I'm hardly a graphics whore).

Given that I can also use my machine for everyday PC uses and modding and get games ~£10 cheaper before we even start to factor in online subscription services like Gametap (or for Europeans like me Metaboli) it's a brilliant bargain too. No need for HDTVs and component cables here!

Edit: forgot to mention independent digital distribution that isn't restricted to casual/small games.
 

Nordstrom

New member
Aug 24, 2006
124
0
0
People will continue to game on PC's because they will continue to need computers for work. Many of us make due with the processing power that we have or spring for cheap graphics cards.

That said, I also presume that a niche market for bleeding-edge gaming will continue.

I would like to see more games with lower graphics requirements but, given that I'm a cheapskate, I don't think that I'll be driving the market.
 

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
Of course the "we" is a minority, that was a bit of the point. And while I'm quite impressed that you're able to go six years between major PC upgrades, I don't think I could do it. Just for fun, I cracked open the June 2002 issue of PC Gamer (five years seemed an easier number to work with than six) and checked out a review for what was back then a super-hot rig from Falcon Northwest, the Mach V Exotix. The Intel-based version of the computer included a 2.4 GHz P4, 1 GB of PC2100 DDR, dual 40 GB hard drives, and an AGP GeForce 4 Ti 4600. I'm not even sure if that would qualify as baseline these days, although my old P4 rig (with a Radeon 9700 and two gig-o-ram) ran games like FEAR and HL2 reasonably well. Thing is, if you'd sprung for that piece of iron five years ago, you'd have dropped over 3300 bucks, which is pretty hardcore stuff - basically the equivalent of buying a PS3 every year from then until now. And that's assuming you don't pop for any upgrades along the way.

Which of course illustrates the fallacy of the whole "us vs them" debate when it comes to PC gamers, because it's perfectly valid to say my mom is a PC gamer too and we obviously have just about zero in common when it comes to our electronic entertainment habits. Certainly the group I had in mind tended toward the more serious and demanding PC gamer, who would insist on something beyond just a "minimum system requirements" kind of computer, but there's still a huge gap between a decent gaming rig and the "bleeding edge," and that's where most of us live.
 

Tom Edwards

New member
Oct 3, 2006
28
0
0
Malygris said:
I cracked open the June 2002
Ah. I built my last machine in 2004, based on a purchase from 2000. Make my last post four years. :eek:

My current machine was bought after only three years of the 2004 one, but that was partly because I needed a laptop. Although that did mean I missed the PCI-X upgrade-fest (which still isn't strictly required, AFAIK), I would point out that system changes of that extent don't come along very often at all.

Malygris said:
Certainly the group I had in mind tended toward the more serious and demanding PC gamer, who would insist on something beyond just a "minimum system requirements" kind of computer, but there's still a huge gap between a decent gaming rig and the "bleeding edge," and that's where most of us live.
That's something I thought about after posting. In my mind, it's anyone playing AAA titles in the console-equivalent group.
 

Bongo Bill

New member
Jul 13, 2006
584
0
0
There's really one big difference. A PC really is a personal computer: you can do anything you want on it. This is a general-purpose computing device. All that power adds to it a great layer of complexity, which in turn adds some unreliability and some fuzzy reasoning.

A console, on the other hand, is not a personal device in that sense. It's really an appliance. Your refrigerator keeps things cold, your blender turns food into beverages, your console plays video games. A computer with the right hardware can duplicate any appliance with finer control and greater flexibility, but there's much more complexity involved with having your PC in charge of your washing machine, when all you really want is a clean shirt. The popularity of consoles is based on the realization that giving up control in exchange for dedication is a good trade-off when you know exactly what you want to do with the device.
 

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
0
0
This probably isn't unique (in fact, I know it's not because there's at least one other guy in the world who does exactly the same thing) but one of the bonuses of PC gaming is that you have the ability to simultaneously pursue other activities. For me, it's IRC. For years, since shortly after the release of System Shock 2, I've spent virtually every night talking on IRC with a friend (whom I've never actually met) while I game. I can't imagine any kind of serious gaming without that conversation. At the same time, I can hit GameFAQs, send off pissy emails to developers who drop the ball, type up "stuff," and do pretty much whatever else I want. It's an extremely rare event for me to just game by myself and with nothing else on the go. It's certainly not the main reason I'm hardcore PC, but it's definitely an influential factor in keeping me away from consoles.
Tom Edwards said:
Ah. I built my last machine in 2004, based on a purchase from 2000. Make my last post four years. :eek:
That's still pretty solid. Some systems serve us very well, performing beyond expectations well past the point where we should reasonably expect them to do so. My previous system, a P4/Radeon 9700 rig, was like that. Had it for over three years and it handled everything I threw at it, and I was gaming with it right up to a few days before I unloaded it. Sometimes we get lucky. If you can do that consistently, then you're very lucky. ;)
 

Kemmler0

New member
Sep 10, 2007
41
0
0
Nice one Bill

Unfortunately if you want to play all the games, you have to buy all the platforms. PC's have FPS's, PS3 and 360 have action/RPG and racing, and the Wii has family games.

But the PC is one up on all the consoles, because you can do all your 'personal computing'. A PC can even generate profit for you if you run a business.
So once your PC has payed for itself, you can spring for that new graphics card and enjoy some well deserved leisure time.

Can anyone actually say that their console has generated any kind of profit?
 

Chinster

New member
Sep 5, 2007
45
0
0
What does generating a profit on your PC have to do with the PC as a games machine? Maybe I'm just missing your point entirely?
 

Chinster

New member
Sep 5, 2007
45
0
0
How many gamers realistically make a profit from their PC's though? I'm guessing miniscule amounts.
 

Kemmler0

New member
Sep 10, 2007
41
0
0
Money has everything to do with everything.

Everybody's complaint comes down to the cost of upgrading PC's. But no one takes into account the fact that PC's generate cash.

When i bought my PS3 i just kissed the money goodbye. Ruling it as a luxury purchase. But my PC that just happens to be able to play the latest games payed for itself within months.
 

Kemmler0

New member
Sep 10, 2007
41
0
0
Chinster said:
How many gamers realistically make a profit from their PC's though? I'm guessing miniscule amounts.
Of course most gamers don't, you can tell that by the amount of consoles being bought. but my point is that you can with a bit of initiative. And if you have a gaming PC the facilities are already in place. Graphic design, sound engineering, video editing, high end programming, graphic programming, game design, art. To name a few that actually use the PC's resources. There are thousands of other less technical jobs that require computers.

I guarantee that there are a very high proportion of people that have jobs like these and also play games. Otherwise how do you feed the habit.
 

Kemmler0

New member
Sep 10, 2007
41
0
0
Chinster said:
I quite often can't get my PC to boot up let alone pay for itself ;)
That is another advantage of owning a PC. With a relatively small amount of knowledge you can repair it yourself.

Ever tried to get an Xbox repaired.... Good luck
 

Chinster

New member
Sep 5, 2007
45
0
0
I tend to think the advantages and disadvantages cancel each other out. At the end of the day as you say, if you want to play all the games then you pretty much need all the formats.

My own preference of late is to play console/PC hybrids on the console if at all possible (Bioshock on the 360 and soon to be Colin McCrae on the PS3). A lot of that has to do with the fact that I can lie on my sofa in my comfortable living room and play on a 32" HDTV.

If my PC could play either of those games (upgrades necessary!) as well as my consoles I'd still choose to play from the sofa. That's not to say I don't play games anymore on my PC because I do, but it has often become a second choice to me recently. The last games I played to completion on my PC were Half Life 2 and Episode 1.