The RAM increases are actually pretty important. Level design is bounded by it at present, so the increase allows devs to build bigger maps, or just maps with more NPCs in them. The RAM limitations of the consoles were bad even by the standards of 2005, and while 8 gigs is probably not necessary. It should be interesting to see what gets done once multiplatform games are no longer bounded by the current limitations.Anathrax said:I'm wondering how would a console advance in areas other than the graphics department. Going all out on a controller isn't one such area, the Wii and the WiiU both prove that. Whoever answers me that question is a hero.
If you don't like the new console, don't buy it. Also don't buy it later when there are games for it and it starts to become popular. No-one is forcing you to buy it.Spot1990 said:Wait, so what's the point of consoles then? I'm honestly asking, I'm a console gamer myself. PCs just have a constantly growing library of games, but with consoles not having to start from scratch is just an added sweetener? "Buy our new console, there'll be games for it eventually." You're actually going to defend that business model? What is it that consoles offer because I don't use mine as media devices. Music, movies, social networking or internet browsing? My PC does all of that for me.
I can only assume you meant that it's doing a "fairly good" job at nothing right now.Madmanonfire said:...the WiiU is already doing a fairly good job with its gamepad while still young.
So, what is the "Ultimate gaming experience"? Can we even define that?And as long as the multitude of console exclusives exist, sticking to PC (or any one console for that matter) will not give you the ultimate gaming experience.
I know he coined the term, that's why I used it. The quote was from 'The Witcher' review in which he was making fun of PC gamers for preferring unintuitive controls. And no, while yahtzee has shown his appreciation for Steam's low prices, he's never outwardly identified himself as a PC gamer (Unless you count the Commodore 64... shut up).Steve the Pocket said:You do realize that he's the one who coined that term in the first place, right? He doesn't need your damned chair because he's been sitting in his own reserved spot since before you probably even joined. Hell, if it weren't for his obvious long-standing interest in Nintendo games, I'd assume he never even touched a console before the PS2 era. And given that he said he played Super Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker before Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time, that may still be true.El Portero said:Welcome to the glorious PC master race, Yahtzee. We saved a chair for you.
You know, I never understood why they couldn't do what they did in Oblivion. The capital, Imperial City, was set into different sections, separated by the walls. Did people complain too much about that or...? It still felt big (I get lost every goddamn time...) but it was cut up into smaller, more manageable chunks for the hardware.UrinalDook said:As an example, the size of things like cities in Skyrim. The engine simply doesn't have the power to match up what we see in game to what we were lead to believe it was like in the lore. To the point where much of the lore was rewritten in the intervening years to allow the limitations of the hardware. Riften, the massive sprawling mess of a city in the south? Sacked during the war, and only rebuilt as a shadow of its former self within the fortress walls. Winterhold, the huge city that stood on the site of where the first men arrived from Atmora? Fell into the sea. Whiterun, the massive trading hub made of several distinct districts? Yeah, you get the picture.
The point of console gaming was and always will be the exclusive games. That's going off history and current trends.Spot1990 said:I have lived at 4 addresses in the past 2 years. I'll probably live somewhere else next year. I'm young, I'm in college and I rent. Moving is just part of my life It's not feasible to hold onto so many machines. Especially when another market offers the same thing in a more consumer friendly model. So you're not actually going to address the question I asked? "What's the point?" If console gaming offers the same experience but with more baggage, what's the incentive?
Sweet, maybe Atlus will read your comment and put Persona 5 on the PC. And maybe NetherRealm will sell Mortal Kombat 10 on Steam. I might even be persuaded to try Origin when I can buy NCAA and Madden football on my PC.grumpymooselion said:It's of note that there's no reason they COULDN'T supply those games you like to the PC, or Mac or even a Linux operating system. They just don't, or won't. They'll make excuses, of course, but all those excuses fall flat in the face of the success of enough PC titles small to ungodly large that it's pointless to try and say, "we can't/won't because _____" because they've all been disproven by this point.FloodOne said:I have a decent gaming PC, and it's filled with plenty of great titles. But the PC market doesn't supply me with some of my favorite genres, i.e. JRPGs, fighting games, hack and slash and sports titles.
Sure, I can play some great WRPGs and some stellar FPS titles, but that's not enough for me, and I cannot subsist solely on indie titles. These days, you sound like too much of a bitter old man for me to take seriously anymore.
I already have a pretty good gaming rig. I built it last year, it plays Skyrim, The Witcher 2... pretty much everything new will run on it, and I own a lot of PC games. That's not changing the fact that I can't get some of the titles I want on my PC. If I have to buy a new console once every six years, that's fine by me. I would have to upgrade my PC along the same timeline to stay current, and probably drop the same amount of dimes to do it.Spot1990 said:You should still be angry about this, if not moreso. It's basically the industry sayingFloodOne said:I have a decent gaming PC, and it's filled with plenty of great titles. But the PC market doesn't supply me with some of my favorite genres, i.e. JRPGs, fighting games, hack and slash and sports titles.
Sure, I can play some great WRPGs and some stellar FPS titles, but that's not enough for me, and I cannot subsist solely on indie titles. These days, you sound like too much of a bitter old man for me to take seriously anymore.
"if you want to continue playing the games you like give us $500 for this new console."
"Oh what makes it different from the old one?"
"Well for one thing there's no games for it."
I've always been a console gamer. I have a 360, a Wii and a PS3 but I honestly don't see myself buying any new consoles and just putting the money towards a good gaming rig.
The point would be that you don't have to advance the consoles, just keep pinging on developers to give what the majority of players actually want:Anathrax said:I'm wondering how would a console advance in areas other than the graphics department. Going all out on a controller isn't one such area, the Wii and the WiiU both prove that. Whoever answers me that question is a hero.
I can take my computer, right now, hook it up to a bigscreen, run four usb controllers and we can play on a couch. Just because I like my machine in a corner of my room so I can chat on forums naked doesn't mean it HAS to be solitary.Kwil said:Couch co-op.
PCs, phones, tablets -- all solitary gaming devices. Yeah, you can hook up online, but that's not the same as having your friends playing right with you. Or perhaps a couple of you can even play in the same room if you have multiple of these gizmos in the house, but most people don't. For most people, it's one person at each screen, and if anybody else wants in, they basically has to watch over your shoulder until its their turn.
The area where consoles can excel in, however, is in letting a household play together. And oddly, though Nintendo's the only one who's realized this, folks like Yahtzee bash them for.. well.. not being more like PCs. Hell, the Wii-U is specifically designed to enhance couch co-op. To give you something you just can't get on a PC. An asymmetric game with everybody in the same room. And they're the dumb ones?
What history have you been digging through? The history of gaming since the fifth generation? No, no that is wrong. The POINT of the gaming console WAS the ability to just put in a game and play. You didn't have to mess with settings, patch things constantly, or deal with bugs. You could just slot in a cartridge and starting jumping on koopas. NOW it's about exclusivity, but that only started when consoles started using standardized software media (ie. CDs and DvDs).TheAsterite said:The point of console gaming was and always will be the exclusive games. That's going off history and current trends.