Why so console, son?

[PsykoDragon]

Spoiler

I've always pushed the point that a computer is the way to go, you get gaming capabilities and much more then your usual console for the small taxation of putting the work in to make everything work correctly. IMO computer gamers tend to be a bit more intelligent then console gamers but that has exceptions. and it is true that consoles are easier to play but it's much like getting a radio controlled airplane. you can buy the enthusiast 6-hour assembly for a demon that can fly faster then neo on crack and maneuver like an acrobatic with wings or you can get the kids toy with a user friendly controller, easy-read-instruction manual and family friendly price tag. I love consoles, but I prefer something that I can tinker with. something I can change and modify to suit my needs, and in the end, a console is always just a restricted computer, no matter what angle you view it from.

NOTE: all of this is IMO and I do not need to hear about why you disagree with my two-cents, if you don't like it don't read it if you're offended that easily.

I sense a paradox in that last sentence.

Joke aside, I agree with that. Hardware released for a console is restricted to that console, but name 1 console peripheral that hasn't (or couldn't) be used on a PC. Not to mention that console gamers are missing out on alot of things such as community mods, community patches, community improvements...

hmmm... I just started thinking about backwards compatibility. Not too big a subject to consider, but consoles so far have shown abysmal backwards compatibility, whereas I can still play most PC games that have only "Windows 95/98" in the system requirements. In the event that I can't, I rarely cannot find a solution online.

People will likely say that it's not really backwards compatibility since PC's have been pretty much the same since those times, only improvements & nothing ground-breaking like super multi-processors or somesuch, but that's untrue. it's amazing that current-gen hardware can still run those old games, & that the current-gen software (Operating Systems & DirectX) can handle them too.

 

[Low Key]

Because the vast majority would rather buy one thing that is easy to move around and doesn't cause any hassle. PCs need to have their parts replaced constantly to keep up with it's games, are more expensive, are more complicated to set up, and once you've dealt with those problems, it might not even play the brand new game you just bought because of a small compatability issue.

For all the downsides you just mentioned, consoles keep everything simple, which is what people want.

you are wayyyyyyyy off. You do NOT need to upgrade as much you claim you have to. You can get a decent computer that'll run for a good 5 years before you have to do anything with it.

The 3 main things you need to play a game on the PC are a video card, a processor, and RAM. Just those 3 alone exceed the price of the PS3 if you buy the ones that will actually last. Before the gaming boom, the price difference used to be much, MUCH more, and that was for games with shittier graphics.

Ah, but the trick is that console hardware is very cheap mostly beacuse it's deliberately sold cheaply by console manufacturers to gain market share, and they then make up for the low margins on the hardware by making money off games developers, who then pass that cost on to consumers, which is why console games are noticibly more expensive. So console hardware often only seems much less expensive; you'll make up the difference in cost when you buy games.

True, but then again, there are tons more games made for consoles every year that aren't made for PCs. So you might save money, but you are cutting your gaming experience short because of the platform you chose.

 

[TheCameraman]

-Snip-

True, but then again, there are tons more games made for consoles every year that aren't made for PCs. So you might save money, but you are cutting your gaming experience short because of the platform you chose.

And there are quite a few games that are made for PC each year that aren't made for consoles. And I have to add, the modding of certain games on the PC can extend their life by around 9000%.
Also, a lot of PC games get way more love through updates.

Just my 2 cents.

Anyway, TF2 is my favorite and I like shooters, therefore PC is the better choice for me, there is also no games that are exclusive for consoles that I would like to play (With the exception of the upcoming Brütal Legend.) so I'm not at all worried about my gaming experience.

 

[Abedeus]

PC's are more expensive, require constant software updates, and take more tech savy types of gamers. A casual gamer usually can pick up and figure out Xbox Live for finding friends than anything like Steam or Xfire.

Hohoho. How very wrong.

A PC costing 1700 PLN (the price of a PS3) is a demon, not a PC.

And while the most expensive PC games cost 100-150 PLN, all PS3 or Xbox 360 games cost 230-250PLN. Even two-three years after release. I don't think I've ever seen a console game cheaper than 150 PLN...

Also, we don't have to worry about keeping old parts because the new ones might not have backwards compatibility, you know.

 

[SomeBritishDude]

I think it's down to two things.

1.PC isn't as popular as console gaming.

2.It's so easy to pirate a game these days that they could potentially loose more money than they gain.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Probably has something to do with the local multiplayer avalibility on the console. Unlike the pc wich is 1 player

 

[TheCameraman]

I think it's down to two things.

1.PC isn't as popular as console gaming.

2.It's so easy to pirate a game these days that they could potentially loose more money than they gain.

Dunno about you, but I think about 90% of the people I know prefer to game on the PC. If you want to prove me wrong,feel free to come up with some statistics.

 

[SomeBritishDude]

I think it's down to two things.

1.PC isn't as popular as console gaming.

2.It's so easy to pirate a game these days that they could potentially loose more money than they gain.

Dunno about you, but I think about 90% of the people I know prefer to game on the PC. If you want to prove me wrong,feel free to come up with some statistics.

Honestly, all can say is your in a very odd situation. All the people I know either don't game or have a console. Maybe a few of them play WoW but that pretty much sums it up.

I don't have any statistics, mostly because I can't be bothered to look them up. But I've always thought it was common knowledge that, apart from hardcore gamers, old timers and MMO...ers PC gaming isn't exactly huge when you compare it to the number of people who play consoles, especially since the Wii took the world by storm (though people just seem to own them not play them)

This isn't counting Casual and Pop Cap games, that's a WHOLE other situation.

 

[Dogstile]

reason? i brought my xbox 4 years ago at the same time as my pc

i can still buy games that are made this year and play them on my xbox, but my pc requires updating

 

[jamesworkshop]

still no console comparison to the might of WoW I would say PC gaming is just as big considering that apart from the Wii the console market isn't a huge sucess right now
Blizzard make more money than everyone and haven't made a console title in 14 years
As for the upgrading most people in the PC communities I tend to frequent really start complaining when better hardware isn't being released, a complete inversion, the lack of compelling upgrades is the main concern, constant upgrading is expected and desired because it makes the gaming experience better.

 

[CmdrGoob]

Because the vast majority would rather buy one thing that is easy to move around and doesn't cause any hassle. PCs need to have their parts replaced constantly to keep up with it's games, are more expensive, are more complicated to set up, and once you've dealt with those problems, it might not even play the brand new game you just bought because of a small compatability issue.

For all the downsides you just mentioned, consoles keep everything simple, which is what people want.

you are wayyyyyyyy off. You do NOT need to upgrade as much you claim you have to. You can get a decent computer that'll run for a good 5 years before you have to do anything with it.

The 3 main things you need to play a game on the PC are a video card, a processor, and RAM. Just those 3 alone exceed the price of the PS3 if you buy the ones that will actually last. Before the gaming boom, the price difference used to be much, MUCH more, and that was for games with shittier graphics.

Ah, but the trick is that console hardware is very cheap mostly beacuse it's deliberately sold cheaply by console manufacturers to gain market share, and they then make up for the low margins on the hardware by making money off games developers, who then pass that cost on to consumers, which is why console games are noticibly more expensive. So console hardware often only seems much less expensive; you'll make up the difference in cost when you buy games.

True, but then again, there are tons more games made for consoles every year that aren't made for PCs. So you might save money, but you are cutting your gaming experience short because of the platform you chose.

I'd say console gaming has a more restricted gaming experience - I can plug a console controller into my PC and it works great, but on the other hand trying to get mouse and keyboard support for console games is much more iffy. That choice of controller lets me get the best experience from a wider range of genres while consoles are more restricted, eg console RTSes are terrible because the genre just needs a mouse and keyboard.

 

[TMAN10112]

Just follow the money.

"Hot" games are most often exclusive because Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo pay developers to keep them on one system, thus encouraging people to buy their system over the next.

I would be all over pc if mine werent a piece of crap. One of the major reasons I like consoles is because when you buy a game for tha pc, its always a little gamble. Your never sure the game will perform smoothly if at all. On consoles, its all the same.

Consoles are as simple as it gets (as far as compatability goes), but I've never found it hard to tell weather or not a game will run on my PC.

Even if you're not sure what's in your PC, theres always System Requirment Labs to help figure things out.

 

[wildwind1290]

I think it's because some games only run good with some particular setup of system requirements and the major innovation with consoles is the plug-and-play option. Sure it runs you a bit more, but the resulting content is playable right out of the starting gate.

Besides, PC games can sometimes leave Mac users out in the cold, the lazy bums...

 

[RRilef]

PC's are harder to develop for because of the varying specs people have. It's not the same to say "we're going to develop for Dell PC's" in the same way it is to say "we're going to develop for the 360". PC's are so varied in capability, etc. most developers can't be bothered.

And technically the PC isn't an official gaming platform if you see what I mean, so no company can pay for exclusives in the same way they can for the consoles (maybe Microsoft can because of Windows, I'm not sure).

It does seem to go in waves though, a few years ago I was seriously concerned as PC's were being shunned, now it seems to developers are looking into exploring the more powerful capabilities of PC's and including better graphical options, etc. that the consoles can't offer (ie. they're not porting crappy versions of games to PC for a quick buck as much any more).

Actually, PCs are the easiest platform to develop for. You develop for windows (or macs if you have enough money) and that's it. You don't need to (although many developers do anyway) tinker with everything so it will run on the standard set of hardware. You just have to release it and if people can't run it, well it sucks to be them.

Also this argument isn't over exclusives but games that come out on multiple consoles. If a game comes out on the 360 and PS3, Microsoft has already let it come on to one of its systems, why not just release it for the other even if it is just a shoddy port.

And about the state of the PC, I'm feeling the exact opposite as you are. Crytek engine has been ported (possibly reduced) to console. Alan Wake has become a 360 exclusive. Even Bethsda was lax in getting the GECK out last year.

 

[Daedalus1942]

I would be all over pc if mine werent a piece of crap. One of the major reasons I like consoles is because when you buy a game for tha pc, its always a little gamble. Your never sure the game will perform smoothly if at all. On consoles, its all the same.

That's why you read the requirements on the box of the game, clearly.

 

[WJeff]

I'm a PC fanboy, yes, it's true. I try not to act superior, even though we have the real versions of Valve games--Back on topic, I'd like to correct a common misconception about PC gaming.

The misconception that you constantly have to upgrade your hardware, and that the upgrades are ridiculously expensive.

Most games are multiplatform, and as the hardware in consoles stays the same, the specifications for PC games tend to stay the same. PC graphics tend to be either equal to or a small cut above the XBox versions of games, and as XBox has fixed hardware, the PC essentially has fixed specifications. Now, there are the occasional notably graphically superior PC versions of games that come around (Fallout 3 and Far Cry 2 being the only recent ones I can think of), and even still, a simple 8800GT is usually more than enough to run them.

Also, we have to remember, a developer wants to sell to as many people as they can. Therefore, they want to keep the graphical requirements low, so as not to alienate a large number of people. Most PC games that are coming out today can almost all be run on highest settings on an 8800GT. Maybe in a year or two you'd find it helpful to invest in a 9800GT (Which'll be like $50 by then) to run these more hardware efficient games that are pushing the limits of consoles, but that's about it.

As an example of what I mean, I have spent a grand total of $80 converting my regular computer into a gaming PC. My PC already had a good processor (AMD quad core) and enough RAM (6 gigs), so all I had to shell out for was the graphics card, and I am now more than capable of playing whatever the hell I want on highest settings (As I have no intention of playing Crysis), and I shall be able to do that for a long time to come.

 

[YuheJi]

PC Gaming isn't much more expensive. Sure, it is expensive to buy a computer, but you most likely already have one. And you could easily upgrade it into a gaming computer with a video card, and perhaps a little bit more RAM. For example, I had an old Pentium 4 rig, with an integrated Intel graphics chipset. So it struggled to run Source engine games. I then spent about $100 on an 8800 GT, and my rig was able to play Fallout 3.

My guess of why many games aren't released on PC is probably due to fear of piracy. That is probably one of the reasons that Microsoft promotes the Xbox 360 so much these days, and ignores Games for Windows.

 

[CmdrGoob]

Yeah, the biggest problem with PC gaming is just that the much higher rate of piracy is making it so much less economically viable to make PC exclusives whereas console exclusives don't have as big a problem.

 

[leady129]

Both mediums are pretty much equal in my opinion. PC requires a bit more technical knowledge but this is rewarded by usually being able to modify or customize the game. You need to keep an eye on system requirements but even today most games should run OK on an old PC if you bump down the graphics. Console has the advantage of being plugged up to my 46" plasma with 8.1 surround.

 

[Woodsey]

PC's are harder to develop for because of the varying specs people have. It's not the same to say "we're going to develop for Dell PC's" in the same way it is to say "we're going to develop for the 360". PC's are so varied in capability, etc. most developers can't be bothered.

And technically the PC isn't an official gaming platform if you see what I mean, so no company can pay for exclusives in the same way they can for the consoles (maybe Microsoft can because of Windows, I'm not sure).

It does seem to go in waves though, a few years ago I was seriously concerned as PC's were being shunned, now it seems to developers are looking into exploring the more powerful capabilities of PC's and including better graphical options, etc. that the consoles can't offer (ie. they're not porting crappy versions of games to PC for a quick buck as much any more).

Actually, PCs are the easiest platform to develop for. You develop for windows (or macs if you have enough money) and that's it. You don't need to (although many developers do anyway) tinker with everything so it will run on the standard set of hardware. You just have to release it and if people can't run it, well it sucks to be them.

Also this argument isn't over exclusives but games that come out on multiple consoles. If a game comes out on the 360 and PS3, Microsoft has already let it come on to one of its systems, why not just release it for the other even if it is just a shoddy port.

And about the state of the PC, I'm feeling the exact opposite as you are. Crytek engine has been ported (possibly reduced) to console. Alan Wake has become a 360 exclusive. Even Bethsda was lax in getting the GECK out last year.

Alright well they're harder to develop for developers who actually care about the quality of a game that's getting released. And I still think this is wrong,a 360 or PS3 has a set hardware config, a PC game (ported or exclusive) needs to (or should) be made to cover as much hardware configs as possible so people can play their game.