The Trials and Perils of Returning to PC
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Hilarious piece. Starts off saying "I'm not subscribing to the whole 'PC Master Race' bit". Then goes on to explain precisely why PCs are objectively better game machines at this juncture.
There comes a point where remaining "unbiased" and "fair" requires sufficient false equivalencies (or outright lies) to completely discredit yourself as a rational human being.
There comes a point where remaining "unbiased" and "fair" requires sufficient false equivalencies (or outright lies) to completely discredit yourself as a rational human being.
Until recently I was gaming on a Intel Core2Duo E6600, 2gb of RAM and a Geforce 8600GTS. The last game I played on that set-up was the Tomb Raider remake. Sure I had to dial down the settings but it was running it as least as well as my 360 copy.Toadfish1 said:
That set-up lasted me around five years and the only upgrade I made was switching from a Pentium-D to the aforementioned E6600, which didn't cost me anything as it was given to me.
I think a lot of people when talking about building a console killer ignore the used hardware market. You can bag some absolute bargains by shopping on eBay or going to a computer fair.
The OS is a necessary one. Most games require a Microsoft OS with the last few years only just now beginning to see more ports to Linux and Apple. Linux, while free, is decidedly not consumer friendly and requires a significant learning curve.Raiyan 1.0 said:
So yeah, the OS should be considered. The disk reader should be considered. The controllers should be considered. Speakers/headsets should be considered. And why not? The PS4 comes with a new Bluray player, an OS, headset and a controller in the $400 package.
Then that's something you have every right to consider as an added cost for yourself. That doesn't contradict my point or make your situation the norm. The TV is still a staple of the American household and you can't even buy non-HDTVs in most retailers now. It'd be like complaining that an internet based phone service doesn't work with a rotary phone which is all you have.
Console manufacturers have a monopoly on their respective consoles' online services. They have no incentive to change. Forget XBL's $50,000 cost for a single patch - isn't Sony adding mandatory subscription costs? They're far from being competitive with the likes of Steam or GOG. While I certainly don't disagree that Steam is much cheaper, it would be horribly flawed to think that these company's sales structures wouldn't adapt if Steam began competing more directly. It happens all the time across nearly all businesses ever. A company gets a monopoly and takes advantage of it. Then newcomers arrive and begin to steal away business. Then the company has to adapt or die but it's not a given that they'll do nothing throughout.
At the end of the day, you're still at the manufacturer's mercy. There's a very real chance they wouldn't pass up the chance of being able to monetize on older games by making people redownload them. Consoles are all about artificial restrictions. If MS tried to pull any of that shit on the PC, everyone would have a chance to boycott it.
True. But now you're operating on guesses. I'm merely stating that it is no longer a given and future backwards compatibility is one of the reasons Sony gave for needing the x86 move.
I resent your presumptuousness. If you look at my first post in this thread, you'll see me mention my friend's PS2. Well, after it's DVD drive went bust, the only way he can play his huge collection is through his PC now. And he uses his own PS2's BIOS he backed up before, so it's not even illegal.
And there are perfectly legal sites like Classic Gaming Network which host hundreds of abandonware games. And if you want proper support, there's GOG.
And honestly, what would you rather have? Games being lost forever because of publisher/developer not bothering to archive them or put them up for sale on sites like GOG(see the state of System Shock), or people sharing games over P2P that have been off the shelf for a decade? I fully agree with playing games you own the license to in any way possible. I apologize for any resentment my comment caused. Hopefully you can appreciate that such reasonable actions aren't the norm by any stretch of the imagination. The people who lean on emulation years later are usually not necessarily license owners.
But, as a Morrowind fan I am certainly not in disagreement regarding the value of community modding in expanding the longevity of games. However, it's also as a gamer that I know my backlog of good games is about 6 months behind of games I haven't played yet but want to. I simply don't have time to look back very often unless I'm playing an old PS1 game on my psp. Heck, I just slapped my original Gameboy Link's Awakening cartridge into a gameboy advanced my wife got me for Christmas (she's the worst at holding onto gifts). But if I'm at home and not traveling, I'm not going to touch it.
By the way, have you ever fired up an ancient game and found your 8 year-old self's saves still on file? It felt like I was time traveling. Those cartridge batteries must be amazing.
Not anymore. Both XBoxOne's OS now require 3GB worth of system memory, while the PS4 OS requires 3.5GB. That's more than Win7. And the fact that XBoxOne and PS4 now have OS taking up 1/4 and 1/5 of HDD space respectively (once again more than my Win7 installation) does speak heaps of how 'lean' their OS are, and that console users will have to 'upgrade' their consoles with HDD extensions very soon. Meanwhile, the PC is hopefully getting the AMD Mantle.
And trying to eke out more power from underpowered consoles means more development time and thus more cost. As far as I know, the PS4's memory is MUCH faster than standard memory and that 3.5GB hasn't been confirmed just yet. Well, actually it has been specifically denied by Sony [http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/07/29/sony-issues-statement-regarding-ps4-ram-5gb-available-to-developers/] but we don't know the OS numbers exactly yet.
See, there is 4.5 RAM that is purely game RAM. Then there is another 1GB of flexible RAM that the OS manages for games (not itself). So right now we're looking at a maximum of 2.5GB alloted to the OS with 5.5GB available for games [http://www.vg247.com/2013/07/26/ps4-has-up-to-5-5gb-of-ram-for-developers-4-5gb-guaranteed-1gb-of-flexible-memory/].
A 64Bit Win 7 environment (which is the only type that could use more than 4GB of RAM anyways) requires 2GBs. 2.5GB, if that's all for the OS wouldn't be that negative. Especially with a second processor handling background downloads and installations.
Even then, the type of RAM pcs use right now isn't the GDDR5 that the ps4 has in it. That 5.5GBs available for gaming is weighed heavier with that in mind. Wouldn't you agree?
Even then, your response does not deal with my comment. My statment
Crysis and it's MP expansion, despite being a new IP, sold 4 million+ copies on the PC. They went multiplatform because that's a more economically sound decision. Oh, and by the way, the sequels each actually sold less than the original PC exclusive. The Sequels weren't nearly as good. So I believe it. Crysis got famous on being cutting edge. When it moved to consoles it severely limited itself once pcs had advanced so much further. So the novelty relied on the game itself which wasn't terribly entertaining.
And you speak as if console games don't get pirated. GoW 3 and Reach leaked into the torrents 2 months before release. It's a lot rarer with proprietary disks and the need to specifically jailbreak the console. It requires a skillset far beyond the average joe's capabilities whereas pirating on the internet is as difficult as clicking the right link and searching for the key code list. You'd can't argue that the console market isn't less prone to piracy. Just like you can't argue that pc games aren't also traded and borrowed. Here's a little secret, my wife uses my steam account *gasp*.
I'll agree that Sony has some really good studios under their belt, but the PS4 lauch lost half it's appeal to me when it became the first Playstation to launch without a Wipeout game (RIP Psygnosis/Liverpool!).
haha.
But, at the end of the day, consoles are losing their exclusives day by day because of rising costs. MGS jumped to the 360 as well last gen, and MGS5 will be on the PC as well (Konami was hiring PC devs for it last year). Same with the Souls series. Capcom and Sega has been doing a lot of ports. I doubt the PS4 will have as many exclusives as the PS1/2 era did. For me, personally, it's not viable to get an entire console for a handful of exclusives. My favorite Sony exclusives are developed by Sony. So they really aren't losing most of them. But yes, it makes no sense to be console exclusive if you're not first or second party.
Thanks for the intelligent discussion.
1 = you can build a ps3 equivalent or better for $400. You cannot build a ps4 or better for that. Even then. Actually following those links get you closer to $500 and include hardware that is no longer available. It also leaves out several components you'd still need for a pc (optical drive, keyboard/mouse, OS, monitor, etc), stuff that is already included in a console's base price or something (TV) that the family most likely already owns.Ed. said:
2 = Consoles are the definition of plug and play. You plug them in and they turn on. If you build a PC from scratch, it's the opposite of plug and play. If you buy a pre-built pc then it may plug and play, will cost much more than $400, and you still have to deal with driver compatibility issues and anything else.
Yes, you can get a decent pc for around $500-600. But that's a decent pc by today's standards, not three years from now. The console is pretty darn cheap with all the components thrown in together. Blu-ray player, controller, all the hardware in one box and utilizing a TV that the household typically already owns.Doug said:
2) Was true, ain't anymore (as Yahtzee pointed out in his OP) Yahtzee isn't necessarily right. Consoles are still plug and play and pcs aren't necessarily (several driver and hardware compatibility issues can come into play with individual games, like my example of my video card driver breaking Skyrim for me recently and only my tech expertise resolved that). If you build a pc from scratch, then that's the definition of not being plug and play. All that means is you buy it and you don't have to manage the hardware and software yourself. Still completely true.
3) Not unique to consoles, and in some cases inferior to PC - games from more than a decade ago can still work (admittedly, you may need to use DosBox or something, but GOG.com does at least do all that for you in its game installers). What I mean is that developers will continue to make games custom made for the console througout its lifespan. PCs, however, can slide out of minimum requirements for AAA games at any time. See my Skyrim example. It works (after some patching support) on both the ps3 and 360 which boast 512Mbs of RAM and 6-7 year old hardware. On the pc the minimum requirements are 2Gbs of RAM and newer hardware.
So what I mean is this. If you buy a console, you know it's going to play games developed for that console. PCs do not carry that promise. There is also a significant boost in pc tech after new consoles are released and software begins to require more juice. So particularly at the start of a console generation is a bad time to buy a pc if longevity is the goal.
4) True; PCs aren't as good as living room gaming machines at the present (I wonder if Valve's Steam box might solve that, but I haven't heard anything about that yet). We'll have to see. I think that track pad controller scheme solves the RTS difficulties consoles have but wouldn't be that good in an FPS game. Even if a steam box exists, this would require a dynamic shift in developers to add in-home multiplayer aspects to PC games which have largely been left out since most people lan computer games using another computer rather than the same machine.
5) Technically true; however, it doesn't seem to help the developers - the number of broken games requiring huge patches to fix/improve performance in the Xbox360/PS3 generation was very large. Developers generally develop for both XBox and PS3 and have to waste extra time optimizing for both, and fixing bugs specific to each platform. This is a problem on the PC too, but frankly, its because developers have a habit of releasing very poor quality PC ports; that said, the community can often fix the issues due to greater control over the machine's operations. Broken games make headlines. Working games don't. Far more games show up functioning properly than broken.
Either way, this is usually a software problem and not hardware. All I mean about the benefits of standard equipment is that you get far more out of it. You can get the most out of the CPU and GPU by pushing them to their limits in a way that would not work on a PC with any combination of RAM/CPU/GPU manufacturer. Perhaps I'm not conveying this message properly as it seems to be misunderstood with everyone I'm talking with here. Known hardware = Optimizing output. So a 1GB console can do more than a 1GB pc can do. To match the ability of an 8GB PS4 you'd have to have a machine that is more powerful than that, even if the hardware is the same. Because developers have to account for a huge range of hardware in pc configurations. It's a tricky thing and sometimes games won't even work with some video cards for example (Nvidia runs into this somewhat frequently) whereas in the console world they have only one video card to worry about.
I agree that the new consoles will keep themselves afloat for at least this generation as there is inertia in the gaming population to stick with your choosen platform, but I think as consoles get worse at being gaming machines for the end user while PC's, phones, and tablets just get better, we'll see the gaming consoles as we know them fall by the wayside. The WiiU though might actually have keep enough of the good qualities of the gaming console to survive though. The WiiU may be dead in the water. We'll have to see how this holiday season really turns out for them. It's not looking good so far through November (they sold less than 500k units in November which is a substantial increase, but even getting that number every month from here on out wouldn't sell more units than the dreamcast did in the same amount of time and this is a holiday month). I think they need to can the Gamepad. That'd drop the prices substantially as the pad costs $140 to replace and will remove something their elderly fans consider too small and confusing. If Nintendo owns their affordable family fun niche they can have their own market outside of Sony's and Microsoft's.
Platforms may continue to succeed the more they integrate with the family living room experience. The truth is, my pc can easily hook into my living room. But I still prefer the really easy console to go there. I just buy it, it's powerful, it works well in the living room without much noise and is cheaper than a comparable pc. I'm not saying I like my console more than my pc, but I do like my console for living room use and my pc more for office use. I game on both and they each have seperate strengths and weaknesses. Enough so that I don't think any are really going to go anywhere.
If Valve succeeds in a Steam Box. It'll just be another console in the market. I think people don't realise that. It'll just be a console catered to pc games rather than one centered around Sony or Microsoft.
Except they're not. They are often, in the long run, more expensive than gaming on PC.Lightknight said:
I can tell you from personal experience that, though I game primarily on PC, I've spent far more on my 360 over the course of its life-cycle than I have on my PC in the same time frame.
With the increased costs of games, online services, inflated DLCs, controllers, etc, the cost just skyrockets.
This is no longer true either. Not entirely. Or, in the very least, no more the case than it is for most PCs.
Admittedly, you will occasionally have issue with a game "bugging out".
Support that will abruptly end at or near the end of a console generation, with (ironically) the only continued support coming through emulation on PC.
The one, big exception to this was the PS2.
This is no longer true either. There are plenty of games on PC that function perfectly as living-room party games.
Just the other weekend I had some friends by for an impromptu get-together. Much fun was had with games like Worms, Left 4 Dead, etc, all played locally, some split-screen, and all on the same machine.
Also: I'm not sure how you can say "PCs still lag behind in multiple controllers". PCs have had the capability to detect and receive input from multiple control devices for years. I routinely have several controllers plugged into mine.
Yet another thing that isn't true anymore.
With persistent firmware updates on consoles, optimizing a game isn't as easy or consistent as it once was.
This is a fallacy that, sadly, a lot of publishers still believe. (or at least claim to believe) Piracy is every bit as strong a factor in "lost sales" on consoles as it is on PCs. A quick Google search can yield a wealth of "how-tos" on modding a console and pirating console games.
Actually, quite a number of developers dislike how closed consoles are. Or rather, how closed they've become.
With every thing they do with their games having to go through lengthy and often expensive verification processes, it leaves little room for experimentation, community input, and persistence.
In one regard this is good for the consumer as it (should) guarantee quality, but it's still something that many devs have grown tired of dealing with.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Now, don't get me wrong. I still love my consoles. Hell, I still crack out the N64, Gamecube, Xbox, etc, when the occasion calls for it or nostalgia wins me over. But, with (most) console makers wanting to broaden their machine's appeal by adding features, many of which are seen on PCs, yet attempting to maintain the same level of content control they've had in the past, they're only dooming themselves to failure. At least, in light of other avenues of content delivery and gaming entertainment from other platforms.
This current generation of consoles will be telling. The initial sales boom may not be as positive a sign of things to come as one might assume.
Time will tell whether consoles, given the direction they're heading and the direction PCs are heading, will remain as relevant as they once were.
Will they disappear entirely? Oh hell no. At least not in the immediate future.
However, if they are replaced, it'll likely be by a second mobile-gaming boom. (which might be a misnomer, as it might be a gradual change) With more and more mobile devices being able to provide more complex and compelling gaming experiences on the cheap, as well as "classic" gaming experiences like those seen on older consoles, we may see consoles slowly relegated to irrelevance.
One thing's for sure: the next few years will be a critical time for the video gaming industry.
About the Alienware thingy, my main argument against it is the price. Building a pc isn't exactly nobel price territory but if you don't want to deal with that there are other companies that will make you a computer for less money and without the tacky design.
But Yahtzee here can write those costs off so the argument doesn't really apply. As for the design, if the thing, be it console or else, can't distract you from its design then it isn't worth keeping around even for people who like the design.
Today's state of games overall is pretty bleak. With consoles i get the constant feel that i have to be on the lookout to prevent being scammed somehow.
With PCs i know i'm being scammed. Can't return games? Well, don't buy games then. Or rather buy games where you're either sure you'll spend months in, i.e. your money's worth or buy games when they're supercheap. Even then you might get ripped off so be careful and read reviews.
But Yahtzee here can write those costs off so the argument doesn't really apply. As for the design, if the thing, be it console or else, can't distract you from its design then it isn't worth keeping around even for people who like the design.
Today's state of games overall is pretty bleak. With consoles i get the constant feel that i have to be on the lookout to prevent being scammed somehow.
With PCs i know i'm being scammed. Can't return games? Well, don't buy games then. Or rather buy games where you're either sure you'll spend months in, i.e. your money's worth or buy games when they're supercheap. Even then you might get ripped off so be careful and read reviews.
That's pretty much why I get every game I can on the PC rather than my consoles. For example, and this pisses me off to no end, but the Xbone and PS4 NBA 2k14 games have a ton more content(ie actual storylines) than the last gen/PC versions of the same game. However, because 2K has thus far been incompetent in making the series more user friendly I will only play it on PC so I can tweak all the little difficulty and skill variables for the solo modes just to where I want them. It's even more infuriating that 2K could easily make this tweaking native for all platforms with a couple lines of code, as I do believe was the case in the past, but they've made it very clear that they don't give a shit and are clamping down on user customization.Undomesticated Equine said:
PC gaming is not dead and it will only grow, consoles will remain huge for another new set of consoles in 2020 that can literally control your life. Once 10k gbps is standard we will probably just stream the games and the consoles will probably hold petabytes of data we will be fine for these newer pc/consoles to arrive.
By then there will be over 10 trillion cat videos, I'll see you there.
Half Life 3 comes out in 2017 with supposed new content every 6 months meaning actually 1.5+ years.
By then there will be over 10 trillion cat videos, I'll see you there.
Half Life 3 comes out in 2017 with supposed new content every 6 months meaning actually 1.5+ years.
The version recently introduced for the Xbox 360, at least so far as I know, allows users to download the "free" games and play at their leisure even if they then choose to cancel their Gold subscription. Honestly it's the only thing that spurred me to renew my subscription this month when it rolled around again; I don't play online much, but I do appreciate being handed a game I've likely never played to have a crack at. So far the good times have been rolling; the Might & Magic puzzler was fun, Halo 3 inspired me and a friend to co-op it, Iron Brigade is awesome and Gears of War...well, Iron Brigade is awesome!Strelok said:
Gold also offers some pretty nice deals, seemingly at random. I picked up Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings for a fiver the other week in a one-day sale, and it's a blast. I played the first on PC, but the whole time I remember thinking "if I could get my Xbox controller to work, I imagine this could be pretty fun".
All that aside, the major reason I have for preferring my console to my PC is that I work in an office. I sit in the same position all day long, fucking about with a mouse and keyboard. When I get home I just want to lie in bed or on the sofa and play a game without having to fuck about removing the wires from my monitor and plugging them into the TV and shifting my speakers around. My Steam library is pretty big, and I have no overt fanboy tendencies towards defending my console, I've just usually had enough of sitting at a PC by the time I go home.
Last Remnant, Blue Dragon, and Xbox releases never made it to PC?[/quote]Darmani said:
Lost Odyssey was fun too, and FFXIII was fun to play even if the characters made me want to gouge my own brain out with a fork.
Alienware boosts the price by something like $500 just for the name. I strongly recommend cyberpowerpc.com for gaming PCs at the moment (got a laptop for my wife from them and got amazing service). Just be sure to look at every section of the PC because they often have free upgrades and freebies that require nothing more than you checking the right box.Madman123456 said:
I'm going to have to edit my original post in this thread due to so many responses like the one below. This is the fifth or sixth response to my original post with almost no followups to my responses. I think I'll update my original post to reflect more detail in areas people seem to miss.
Right now, to build a machine that is more powerful than a ps4 or XBO you'd need to drop well over $1,000 and that machine won't last you for 10 years like a console is supposed to. Those $400 machine builds we see are machines that just beat the ps3/360 generation but can't touch the ps4/XBO one at all. If you even follow the links in most of those videos, the hardware is either closer to $500 or components are no longer for sale. They also exclude everything from keyboard/mouse/monitor/speakers/headset/optical drives (DVD, Bluray, etc) to OS. The console comes with everything and a controller. It uses a TV which most households already have that also solves the speaker problem (though it also has a headset). It even has a bluray player which adds a lot to a pc cost.Vigormortis said:
Even with the 10 years and paying the online subscription the entire time, the ps4 wouldn't breach into 4 digit territory ($900). As for additional controllers, that's to perform a local multiplayer function that most PCs can't serve even if you got additional controllers for them. AND, even if you could perform multiplayer on your pc, you'd have to buy more controllers for that on the few pc anyways. As is, it usually requires entire other machines for a good LAN where the pc is conscerned whereas consoles make it easy.
The games are currently the biggest thing. But the preowned market still makes that a lot lower and new PC games don't cost much cheaper (if any cheaper) from the gate. I love my steam account and have purchased a lot of games that I never would have bought simply because of the price tag. However, for newer games, they don't always outpace preowned sections. I get a buy one get one free deal for any preowned games at my locally owned gamestore and have gotten incredible deals from that which exceeded even Steam's stuff. So yeah, you can get killer deals on old games on the pc. But new and newish are about the same. Old games are where physical copies usually fail and that's only if a steam sale is around. Physical stores have sales too though.
Let's take a look at old games for example. This is honestly the first game I looked at with no foreknowledge. Bioshock 1 [http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000MKA60W/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1386944790&sr=8-1&keywords=bioshock&condition=used]. On Amazon it is less than $10 after shipping ($5 before shipping). New, it is $15 plus shipping, usually comes in at around $19 after shipping. Free with Prime. On steam however, it is currently $20 even. That's for a digital download of a game from 2007. Did I buy it in a steam sale? Yeah. But that's not to say I didn't also get it on console when it was newer.
So, console games are not that different. We all think back to the extreme steam sales as a price reference but even Amazon has a sale on these games during the steam sale and we're only talking twice a year.
Well, that largely depends on what your answer to question 1 was. If you bought the components of a pc to build a cheap and powerful machine, then it is decidedly not plug and play. If you paid for someone else to build the machine and load the drivers/OS/etc then you're looking at a much higher price tag and most likely not everything you wanted had you been able to build it from scratch.
Like I said about my Skyrim experience, my video card's driver screwed up the game. So even with a $1,500 console build there are other forces that can break the plug and play experience. I only knew how to roll it back because I work in the high-end computer tech industry where I explain to giant companies why their servers aren't working when their room of six full-time IT staffers can't figure it out. So my immediate thought was what changes I had made recently and I set about undoing them starting with that driver rollback which worked. What does the average Joe do when an installed driver breaks a game for them? Do they even necessarily know that it's a compatibility issue? Not necessarily.
This will continue to happen because PCs have so many moving parts. Developers can't possibly account for every piece of hardware a pc can have in it nor every possible combination of them or driver version they may have. All they can do is slap a minimum requirement range on the box and hope for the best. Consoles = 1 set of hardware. Completely known and already inside millions of homes. That's the benefit of standard hardware. It is plug and play. You plug it in, it turns on. You don't trouble shoot the hardware or anything like that. An update applies and you're good to go. Can you explain for me why this is not plug and play?
A game "bugging out" on the pc may never be fixed. A game "bugging out" on the console will embarrass the developers into working on fixing it without rest.
What I mean is this, companies will continue to design games for your console for the entirety of its lifespan. Eventually, that will end as all things end. Your PC configuration will be outdated rapidly. I found a budget high-end pc from 2005. 2GB of RAM, decent video card/CPU, etc. When Skyrim came out 6 years later, that machine barely met the minimum requirements and I don't know if the video card would have worked even then. Why do I mention this? That machine was considered a fantastic deal in 2005 at $1,500. Companies aren't designing games to work with that pc.
So yeah, in a full console generation you'll likely have to buy two PCs if the first one is purchased at the same time you would have bought a new console.
Most games do not support local multiplayer from the same machine. Setting them up for split screen on a TV can often require a level of expertise that the average Joe doesn't have. Heck, a lot of people still aren't aware that the HDMI out from a modern pc can even be plugged into a TV for some reason.
Do you feel like PC games are designed with local one-machine gameplay at the same frequency of console gaming? Do you feel like it's particularly easy to do? From what I recall of Left 4 Dead 2, you had to enable the dev console and specifically type in the map and then plug a 360 controller in during the load screen until it showed up as #2.
Left 4 dead requires people to edit the cfg file amongst other things and that's a valve game which should be the
easiest types of games to perform multiplayer on. What about most other games?
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1029890
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=745113
I mean, if you really think this is what people should have to do and that this is somehow equivalent to consoles then... I'm just going to have to disagree. Look, I'm coming at this from the average user's perspective. I understand that I can personally do this thing. I have done this several times. But what good is that to the average gamer who may have no background in pc tech? My friends act like I'm performing magic.
It is ENTIRELY true. Because the hardware of a console is standardized, development studios can test and push the performance of the console in ways it can never hope to push PCs that have unknown configurations. This is why Skyrim is playable on consoles with 512Mb RAM (one even split into two 256Mbs) with 6-7 year old GPU/CPU combos and yet has a minimum requirement of 2Gb RAM, Intel Dual Core 2.0GHz (not even available readily until 2007), and Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512 MB of RAM (which would have been bad ass in 2005 when the 360 was released). That's minimum.
It only works because console's hardware is standard. So the developer can custom fit games on it like a glove.
Piracy on consoles does happen. Yes. However, it requires a significant degree of expertise in a way that piracy on a pc simply doesn't. Piracy on a pc is just clicking your left mouse button on the right link. On consoles, it requires anything from additional hardware to custom software that will likely get you banned from the PSN altogether. If you are a pirate, then PCs are FAR simpler territory. Why even bother with a console if that's what you're going to do? I have no claims that pirates don't have a cheaper run at games anymore than I'd claim a thief doesn't get merchandice cheaper than someone who pays. That would be axiomatically untrue unless the former gets caught.
These are generally indie developers. I don't think the 2005/2006 consoles foresaw how important the smaller dev community would become to gaming by now. From what I understand, the ps4 has really opened the gates there.
None of this really detracts from my point. With tens of millions of consoles sitting in homes around the world, games are still going to get made for them. That was my point. Games specifically being designed to fit in your hardware for a decade is no small benefit when the same certainly can't be said for PCs.
As with all products and services, they will have to adapt. I think a more correct thing to say would be that consoles as they have existed cannot continue to do so. But that's true of nearly any product. We seem to agree here though.
I think Last Remnant is the only one, and it's pretty much the least of the bunch. I'd have some interest in Blue Dragon if it came to Steam, though Lost Odyssey is the one I'd really like to see on PC. Honestly the concept of an 'exclusive' JRPG for the Xbox is kind of silly, they all came pretty early on in the 360's life cycle so I'm guessing the intent was to try and make some inroads in the Japanese market. When that didn't happen they stopped making them, would have been nice if they dropped the exclusivity for the ones they made though.Darmani said:
Ooph. A lot of points to address.Lightknight said:
If I may be blunt, I don't really have the time to sit here and type out my responses to every single one. And, responding to only a select few seems unfair to you and the discussion.[footnote]Perhaps we can pick it up again at some point.[/footnote]
As such, I'll just say this: I think you and I, in the very least, agree on a few things. Most notably, I think we agree that the coming years are going to be critical for the future of the industry and that our definition of "console" may need a bit of tweaking; now and in the not-to-distant future.
I seriously doubt they will ever use it to expand mechanics much or AI. Historically, AI has been a highly neglected investment of effort, because it's quite difficult to make AI that thinks beyond the short term or as rudimentary responses.Clovus said:
Worse, demand for AI has only been on the decline the rise of multiplayer. Human opponents provide a better challenge than bots and require no programming effort, meaning most AI development has been just sitting on the backburner for years.
(usually it's just reserved for scripted boss fights or short term fodder, depending on genre)
So, far more likely, AAA is going to continue upping the definition of textures, or increasing the Degree of whatever Taylor Series they're using in the physics engine because that's comparatively easy to get results in. Results that have demonstrated worse and worse diminishing returns, but you know...results.
Neither of which results in better gameplay mind, but if recent history is any indicator, AAA doesn't give a fuck about pushing the mechanical boundaries of gameplay; just regurgitating it.
lol, alienware
>not building your PC out of bailing wire and the tears of chinese children.
"What are we having for Christmas this year, glorious chairman?"
"Shredded newspaper, epoxy and crunchy bits of integrated circuitry! We call them "Glorio's"!"
"Yay! Taste the revolution!"
>not building your PC out of bailing wire and the tears of chinese children.
"What are we having for Christmas this year, glorious chairman?"
"Shredded newspaper, epoxy and crunchy bits of integrated circuitry! We call them "Glorio's"!"
"Yay! Taste the revolution!"
The better specs all the way was trolling I admit. (Sorry about the long wait busy week). True the keyboard, mouse headset. But I can say the same about the consoles you need a TV and the Xbox Live or PSN subscription. Both cost around $50 lets just give a modest 5 year run. That's $250 of hidden console costs that you will not have on a PC.Lightknight said:
As the OS it was in the Link. Please recheck.
(And if I'm being a prick then if I add the price of 10 AAA titles in comparison that adds another $175-200 in favour of the PC.)
In the end Yes a PC is more expensive to get started but with in the end you'll be cheaper off.
Also people keep throwing the optimization around like it's a magic bullet. With this generation already weak from the start it will not keep up. Also I can't find anyone comparing screen-shots from the PS3 launch to now. So it seems that last generation it wasn't that impressive/important.
So perhaps in a few years the PS4 might actually hit 1080p. That'll put it on par with a $700-800 PC now.
And just to throw in some $400 builds:
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/171158-can-you-build-a-gaming-pc-better-than-the-ps4-for-400
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_uVzEYV5bg "Budget $400 Gaming PC Build Vs. PS4 for November / December 2013"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naO0daBZeRo "U$400 PC beats PS4"
It's not really that true depending on a few things. For example, if you are building your own pc then it couldn't be further from the truth. If you are buying a package then you're talking about several hundreds of dollars above the components part. Likewise, as recent as Skyrim I saw that updating my drivers broke the game. Now, I knew how to roll it back but knowing how to search for those fixes and apply them requires a significant learning curve of gamers that is in no way present in consoles. This really should be a given, it's just that pc's are becoming increasingly more like consoles in this regard thanks to standardized coding and a streamlining of pc manufacturers that left only a few big players.
Consoles do have issues with drivers as I clearly remember the PS3 update that bricked systems until the patched it.
Granted PC's are more likely, but in the past years I have never heard people having an issue unless they downloaded a Beta driver.
As for the streamlining that is mostly the work of Windows, not the hardware.
That games will continue to be designed specifically for that system.
You know I can kick this around to high heavens about backward compatibility right? So lets just leave it here.
FYI, as a heavy user of mods myself, I'll point to another absense of plug and play. Though that's hardly better than no mods at all.
I don't quite understand what angle you're approaching this from so please expand on this.
As for plug and play of mods... Steam Workshop? Nexus Mod Manager? Wow mod installation? (IE drag into addon folder)
It requires a bit more than that. For example, another monitor. Input and output settings. It depends. Most PC games are not made with local same machine lan at all. Would you really disagree with that? The "Can the game suppor it" can be a pretty damn big jump. I stated that most games aren't made for that, so saying "can the game support it" is kind of a laugh. It'd be like me saying most cups can't hold certain types of acid and then you pointing out that certain types of cups can. Yes... both are right.
Ha! Yeah okay points for you I didn't think that one through to the end. But in return this has also diminished on consoles.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.404314-Research-Finds-Fewer-Console-Games-Are-Including-Multiplayer
The only real local multiplayer platforms are the Wii and WiiU.
Perhaps you misunderstand me. Optimizations are derrived from every part of the console being known to the developers. They're able to code in a way that relies on exactly what the machine is capable of. You can't do this with PCs because of the nearly infinite combinations of video card to CPU to RAM to anything else. This is why something like Skyrim has a minimum recommendation of 2GB of RAM and more current video cards/processors while still runnable on consoles that only have 512MBs of RAM and ancient CPUs/GPUs.
This form of optimization will never go away unless PCs become more like consoles where known components are concerned.
As for lagging behind. The average pc is still at 4GB. 64Bit OS are a relatively new thing were adoption rates of it are concerned. What do you think it actually lagging? Yeah, the consoles aren't equivalent to $1,500 machines where pure hardware is concerned. But they aren't meant to be. We saw Sony try to do that a bit with the PS3 and going so high as $600 saw the juggernaut fall in market share immediately.
Yup that was last gen, when the hardware was actually much beter than PC's at the time.
64-bit has been pretty standard for at least 5 years (My dad's pre build Medion from 2008 has a 64bit OS and CPU as does my 2009 laptop.
I just checked and yes the average PC does have 4gb of ram. 4GB of ram and a 500GB ssd or 8gb ram and 1TB HDD. I would link the site but it's in dutch. But I'll link if you want it.
Point is; those PC's aren't for gaming they are just build to do small things fast and provide a lot of storage space.
And I've been looking around and it seems the PS4 HDD wich is just a Laptop HDD. In a PC I can get a 2Tb for about double the price in 3,5 format.
Do you have any numbers to back this up? I don't think anyone really knows how much publishers make from PC overall vs how much they make from consoles. It can't be that good with companies like GTA V's creators with holding the pc version for several months to encourage console purchases instead. I'd say you're misinformed here but I'm willing to be enlightened if you know something I don't.
Numbers: http://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/how-much-profit-do-mssony-make-on-each-game-sold-25614208/
Well they are terrified of Piracy. Rockstar in particular. There are a lot of stories about how Sony and MS are paying developers to keep the titles exclusive but I think that's a lot of tin foiled hats speaking.
Though speaking about rockstar I have the sneaking suspision that before they announce a PC release they will announce a PS4 and Xbone release and increase the sales even more before doing the PC release.
But I will leave you with this though:
www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/04/why-pc-gaming-has-exploded