Truth about why theres a debate about gaming on PC and consoles
This topic is locked from further discussion.
PC is the primary gaming machine. Consoles are actually turning into PC's. Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001?
CPL - the cyber pro league focuses on PC tournies. thats where the big money is. Like Quake 4, 1.6, etc... although with halo 3 coming out consoles might be more acceptable
You couldn't be more wrong. PC is the primary gaming machine. Consoles are turning into PC's. Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001.
pxr242
I have no clue on what side you think I am, pc or console. But i'll tell you right now that I'm on the PC side. I was just explaining how theres a debate between consoles and PC. Whether or not multiplayer has been around, which is more popular in the gaming industry? PC or the new next-gen gaming consoles?
[QUOTE="pxr242"]You couldn't be more wrong. PC is the primary gaming machine. Consoles are turning into PC's. Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001.
MtTheNothingtM
I have no clue on what side you think I am, pc or console. But i'll tell you right now that I'm on the PC side. I was just explaining how theres a debate between consoles and PC. Whether or not multiplayer has been around, which is more popular in the gaming industry? PC or the new next-gen gaming consoles?
Consoles obviously, not because they're superior gaming machines, but because they appeal to the masses. It's alot simpler to go out and buy a $200-$400 "gaming only" system than it is to make an investment of $1000+ with a machine you know next to nothing about - which is indeed the case for "casual gamers"..which probably describes over 75% of the console gamer population. PC gaming has a smaller total population, but you have alot more of moderate to hardcore gamers.
Consoles are heavily influenced by PC gaming, though. Look at the online services coming to the consoles, look at the hardware which is made up basically of modified PC components. Look at the controls - Both Microsoft and Sony are bringing keyboard/mouse support for many games. Magnetic storage devices (HDDs) are also being seen in consoles - something previously only found in personal computers. Microsoft is also taking advantage of this and distributing downloadable content via XBL, including things such as new maps and possibly in the future, mods..something that has been done on PC for many years. Games like Huxley - a MMO, a parent genre only established on the PC are being ported (or under parallel development) to the console platforms (while maintaining the PC version.) It works the other way, too..just to a much, much lesser degree. If the consoles become *too* PC-like, it could be their downfall.
There few reasons I think that matters the most.
1) installation of computer.
2) installtion of games.
3) installtion of controllers that does not comes with the PC. Also inconsistent controller layout.
4) hardware incompetibility because too many brands.
5) hardware requirements. Most people don't understand hardware requriements at all.
6) If the game fails, you don't know it is the game, or the machine, or you have something running like Anti-virus or spy ware, or your PC got hacked or not.
7) Always need to upgrade the patchs to fix real bugs or minor hardware competibility issues.
8) You can't trust the quality of a game because it is not regulated by console maker.
Most kids want a PC not for working, it is for gamming. Working is just an excuse, and it works on parents.
magicalclick
Let me answer
1) It's not that hard
2) Watch TV for 30 minutes
3) Controllers, wtf? use mouse and keyboard
4) what?
5) Click properties on your desktop and your there
6) same thing can happen with consoles
7) thats actually good, the quality of the game can actually increase
8) thats why we have gamespot reviews... and blizzard...????
Pc gaming is the way to go
consoles just dont deliver for me
pc better graphics sound controls ect
but of course it takes money time and all
but i say its worth it
Gaming on the PC is not dead and will never be dead. However, there is a problem with PC gaming whether the PC community chooses to acknowledge it or not. The problem can be fixed and within time it will be. The problem is PCs are not steered in the economy of the world to be gaming machines. To break it down for ya, America, uses computers mainly for business and digital growth for storage of data, numerical data & etc. The way of the country implies that if you want to have a machine that its main pupose for exist is strictly for gaming, buy a gaming console. Now lately, with technology booming the way its been for the past decade, you have businesses like alienware and third-party computer companies who can make computers be well worth superior to any gaming console that you can buy today. Even you, if smart enough to know how a motherboard works, can practically build a top-of-the-line computer that can kill any kind of gaming console out today. But if computers are so better than console, then why are consoles more popular? I'll tell you why, history. The world has been nursed and raised up on consoles. Classic games from the beginning of video game history has been Mario Bros, PacMan, SuperTechmoBowl, etc. And consoles have gone from the atari to the current Xbox360. Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console. But at the expense of upgrading vital computer hardware components at the every turn-around when a game becomes more power hungry than your already computer hungry money budget. Some people cannot afford these computer upgrades so instead they buy a gaming console because not only does it have a successful history, but its cheaper and it does excactly what it was meant to do. Be a gaming machine. If computers are going to make a place in society as being more than just ipods, word processors, and data collectors; then prices of top end computers and their accessories need to come down in price dramatically, they need to be advertised more on the gaming side of preference, and the truth about a top-end computer power needs to be shown comparison to the top-end console of current date. A computer top-end will always be more powerful than a consoles top-end. And why? Because a computer is the what a console is. So there for if a computer always updates its video cards but a console can't....well you figure it out.MtTheNothingtMOne of the most significant reasons why console gaming is as popular as it is, has to do with marketing by huge corporate giants such as Sony and Microsoft. For example, no other company would of been able to penetrate the console market the way Microsoft has in such a short time. They have spent billions subsidizing and marketing the Xbox. Many people blindly believe the marketingj, and take seller pitches as truth. In a similar situation, this is how GW got into the White House. Carl Rove was a master marketer, peddling an inferior product.
[QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"]Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console.Herrick
This remark makes you sound like you have just discovered PC Games, mang.
What you said might of been true only if that was the only line in the whole forum. But please believe that if I say " Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console" then I have to have been around long enough to know and compare recent and past videogames to say such a statement. And if you really think about, am I wrong? Current videogames actually do pose a challenge to next gen consoles. Without going into the mobo jumbo such as specs, controllers, resolution, blah blah blah; if you truly run a game like Call of Duty2 or FEAR at its highest settings without any failure then you are ahead of the xbox360 hardware.
Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001?pxr242
I believe the DC was the first console to incorporate online multiplayer, so it was attempted before 2001, but the death of the DC just didn't make it a standard for consoles until Xbox in 2001.
-K
[QUOTE="Herrick"][QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"]Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console.MtTheNothingtM
This remark makes you sound like you have just discovered PC Games, mang.
What you said might of been true only if that was the only line in the whole forum. But please believe that if I say " Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console" then I have to have been around long enough to know and compare recent and past videogames to say such a statement. And if you really think about, am I wrong? Current videogames actually do pose a challenge to next gen consoles. Without going into the mobo jumbo such as specs, controllers, resolution, blah blah blah; if you truly run a game like Call of Duty2 or FEAR at its highest settings without any failure then you are ahead of the xbox360 hardware.
First FPS on console.. was on SNES.. Jurassic Park had a FPS part in it.. this was pre-doom and Wolf 3d looked a ton better.. so PCs were superior then to.. Of course people had to know DOS, had to buy a Sound Card, had to buy a CD-Rom drive, had to buy a Vid Card.. had to buy all the software including the OS.. no master CDs or restore CDs... pre-built was bare bones.. my IBM PS/1 had only the pre-installed OS (Windows 3.1) and nothing else.. no office product of any sort and of course MS-DOS 5 If I remember correctly.. Even my Apple IIc looked better than the Atari console.. lol PC always have been ahead of the game.. and the cost has remained roughly the same... Pick up an old PC Magazine and look at how much a top notch system cost you then.. 5K a few years ago.. its the same price now.. Falcon Northwest can build you a Mach V for 5K with high end items.. Now.. has the cost really gone up? 1 TB was 9,999 back in 93' now its no where near that price.. Its gone down hasn't it? You may think gaming has gone up in price.. but in reality it hasn't..
I think gaming is cheaper than street racing.. moding your car can cost you a small fortune.. every hobbie, if you spend the time in it will cost you major.. Baseball card trading? lots of cash there. Stamp collecting.. lots of cash thrown around there as well.. hobbies cost money.. if your a moderate hobbiest your collection will pale in comparison to someone who has invested more time in it.. The same goes for anything..
Most PC gamers. (I think) are hobbiests .. meaning they are willing to spend the money for a good comp, because that is their thing..
PS.. If I spelled some stuff wrong, I'm sorry. I wrote this in a rush..
Peace
For me..i play PC games more than my ps2 such as BF2,Quake4,Sof2 and Counter Strike Condition Zero....So for me i go for PC..Althought is expensive..i like it..Good things never come cheap...
[QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"]Gaming on the PC is not dead and will never be dead. However, there is a problem with PC gaming whether the PC community chooses to acknowledge it or not. The problem can be fixed and within time it will be. The problem is PCs are not steered in the economy of the world to be gaming machines. To break it down for ya, America, uses computers mainly for business and digital growth for storage of data, numerical data & etc. The way of the country implies that if you want to have a machine that its main pupose for exist is strictly for gaming, buy a gaming console. Now lately, with technology booming the way its been for the past decade, you have businesses like alienware and third-party computer companies who can make computers be well worth superior to any gaming console that you can buy today. Even you, if smart enough to know how a motherboard works, can practically build a top-of-the-line computer that can kill any kind of gaming console out today. But if computers are so better than console, then why are consoles more popular? I'll tell you why, history. The world has been nursed and raised up on consoles. Classic games from the beginning of video game history has been Mario Bros, PacMan, SuperTechmoBowl, etc. And consoles have gone from the atari to the current Xbox360. Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console. But at the expense of upgrading vital computer hardware components at the every turn-around when a game becomes more power hungry than your already computer hungry money budget. Some people cannot afford these computer upgrades so instead they buy a gaming console because not only does it have a successful history, but its cheaper and it does excactly what it was meant to do. Be a gaming machine. If computers are going to make a place in society as being more than just ipods, word processors, and data collectors; then prices of top end computers and their accessories need to come down in price dramatically, they need to be advertised more on the gaming side of preference, and the truth about a top-end computer power needs to be shown comparison to the top-end console of current date. A computer top-end will always be more powerful than a consoles top-end. And why? Because a computer is the what a console is. So there for if a computer always updates its video cards but a console can't....well you figure it out.SubcriticalOne of the most significant reasons why console gaming is as popular as it is, has to do with marketing by huge corporate giants such as Sony and Microsoft. For example, no other company would of been able to penetrate the console market the way Microsoft has in such a short time. They have spent billions subsidizing and marketing the Xbox. Many people blindly believe the marketingj, and take seller pitches as truth. In a similar situation, this is how GW got into the White House. Carl Rove was a master marketer, peddling an inferior product.
GWB got in the White House fair and Sqaure through the Electoral vote which is full of "free thinking" Democrats. All the PR presidential candidates do is just for show and the primary vote (citizens) which does not elect the President by law!
Even if PC gaiming were to advertise with as much if not more then MS it still wouldn't make that much of a difference. The only real leg up PC gaming has had for the last 2 years is FPS's which is by an Nvidia statment of what has driven their Highend GFX cards with all other genres in the PC world setteling for the mid to low range cards for more traditional Pc games. Now coupled with Pc's the average 7-40 year old male doesn't know the difference in PC tech. And if they did they would'nt even bother with PC gaiming.
Here's an example: A male buy's a PC for what the retailers claim plays games and does business stuff. Now he see's the Leapfrog 2d 1994 ish games but decides to pickup a DVD version of BF2. Well when he gets home his lowend Pc he just shelled out $700-1000 bucks on doesn't play BF2 let alone install it. So he ask around and decides to upgrade with a DVD Burner only to find out he doesn't have enough Ram, CPU speed, and His GFX are integrated. Now he's left with a bad taste in his mouth about PC gaiming then shifts to the cheaper alternative which is consoles.
Or say he knows his stuff and upgrades a few things but the game still runs like crap because he needs to shell out more money (as do many PC gamers who run BF2 with 512mb ram with no slowdowns while others report needing 2 gigs). This is why Pc gaming is for the extreme enthusiaste. In order for consoles to steal or sway many Pc gamers they had to come up with things like HDD and mods. And it's allready been stated that the RSX won't be overtaken until at least 3-4 years if even by all that much. I trade stocks and have done Nvidia many times. In the last 4 years since the shipping of the Xbox Nvidia has only sold 1 million GPU's while their NV bades GPU's of the Xbox have sold 40+ million (later i'll state how 40 million at a "dollar" is better then 1 million at "twenty"). So you can easily see how the benefits of user survey's show a down trend as well as the market for High end GFX cards have all but dissapeared. The last 2 Christmas holiday seasons for Nvidia have been stellar only for their 6600 cards.
Even though ATI and NV make the GPU they only get like 1/5th to 1/10th the sales price, because the 3rd party board makers (BFG, EVGA, ect.) make all the other componets and set the sell's price. (this is why Nvidia doesn't sell their cards directly from their site like a Dell printer or Monitor would) Nvidia only supply's the GPU chip which on average for their Low, Med, & Highend cards is really only $37-$40 bucks per chip. That is why this Next Gen for consoles have had so much Money and effort put into them mainly their CPU & GPU's which is what determines the main selling point of games which is their graphics. Gamespot once before had some guy talking about how ent. mediums will begin to merge and he doesn't see a real growing market for Pc's because they don't appeal to the average person where the money's at and naturally thats where the devs are going to go! Sure COD 2 sucked on 360 but that was a Quick port directly from the PC. Had the game taken it's time it's performance would've been much better just as all of the 360's launch games could've been.
There are many things that are great for Pc's ,mainly in the GPU department only things now have reached it's paramount in that Nvidia predicts that their 6600 line is meant to last 2-3 years with virtually no slowdown in games. They assure that with the on coming DX10 not much performance is going to be lost because now Devs are trying to utilize what tech we allready got. If 3 out of 5 PC games in 2006 require an upgrade for steady framrates many more people will leave in droves to consoles which in business terms can't be beat in performance over their lifespan.
There was even an Intel article about multi core multi thread Pc's and the PC market isn't expected to even have 4 cores until 2009 and they projected that AMD may be the one to do it. While the PS3 will still have it's 7 and up to 16 Cell's on rackmounted Blade Servers. From trading stock IBM & Nvidia is the clear winner in tech for next few years. We've seen how much better a console's games become after each year and to what lengths they can be pushed. It' sonly going to get worse for Pc gamers this next gen cycle because Console gamers are now in HD and more and more Americans are buying HDTV's. The Pc is now only going to be known for it's RTS, RPG's, and startegy games for now on unless of course Sony and MS provide incentive for devs like Blizzard to come out with Mouse & Keyboard support!
What you said might of been true only if that was the only line in the whole forum. But please believe that if I say " Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console" then I have to have been around long enough to know and compare recent and past videogames to say such a statement. And if you really think about, am I wrong?MtTheNothingtM
Well, you are not really "wrong" because its your own opinion. But yes I do think you are "wrong" because there have been many excellent PC Games in the past that have made me stop playing console games. And by "the past" I mean way before 2005.
Current videogames actually do pose a challenge to next gen consoles. Without going into the mobo jumbo such as specs, controllers, resolution, blah blah blah; if you truly run a game like Call of Duty2 or FEAR at its highest settings without any failure then you are ahead of the xbox360 hardware.MtTheNothingtM
Ok, so when you said "putting a console down" were you talking about the technical aspects? If you are, then that would not make much sense because PCs have been out-performing consoles for years. But that matters not to me. I am not at all concerned with technicality, but with which platform has the greatest games. I am a gaming whore in that sense. Herrick has no loyalties to any one platform.
NP: At The Gates- The Break of Autumn
ND: Heineken
This is an old thread but I thought I should bring it up again. Even as today, the same point is true. Next-gen consoles still fall short of computers. The graphics of the 360 and PS3 are really impressive but compared to the upcoming pc title of Crysis, Pc's still win. Remember, as I said before, pc's are what make consoles exists. If computers were never invented, consoles wouldn't be either. Right now, I'm running a 1998 Gateway Pentium II computer that I've experimented with ever since I've received it back in 1998. When I first got it, I didn't know anything about computers. Back then, I was still in middle school. Now with all the lessons I've learned from just playing around with the settings and wanting to max the potential of this pc, I'm a pc guru. Now I actually build pc rigs without stepping 1 inch into a technical school. What I can do with computers, companies actually pay professionals to do paying good money. If you want to learn these same skills, understand its not hard to learn. You just have to learn the basics and go from there. You'll see, compared to consoles, it'll pay off. I will accept any/all criticism anybody has to dash out. This is my opinion but if you share my ideas, please post to maybe influence the people that will disagree with me. Thank you
I agree with you there...by just playing around with a PC you can learn a lot, although you probably won't make too much cash from that because you wouldn't have any actual qualifications. I could list a number of reasons why people tend to sway to console rather than PC gaming. The first is the price. A PC which has the gaming power of an xbox 360 would cost you around 3-4 times the price. Most people wouldn't want to dish out thousands just to have a game which is slightly prettier and runs a little more smoothly. The second point I have to bring up is the simplicity of using a gaming console. You know that if you buy a game it's going to work, if it's faulty you can get your money - this is not always the case with PC games as some people like to copy games and return them. Even after looking at the spec on the back of the PC game box you don't always know 100% that the game would work. For example the spec says you need a 256 MB graphics card but when you try to run the game you receive a graphics error because your particular graphics card is not supported. The third point is thinking outside the power of each system; the actual games. Unfortunately the PC gaming industry is dominated mainly by FPSs and MMORPGs. It's rare to see any platformers or racing games. Consoles on the other hand have more exclusive titles including action/adventure games, wacky racing games but still have the FPS games PC gamers love so much. The final point is probably the most important. Hardly any PC game has split screen multiplayer. If a friend or two come over are you really going to let them watch you play WoW or Counterstrike? That is heart of gaming; playing with other people, not that online trash they throw at us (that's basically playing against a slightly harder AI character). There is nothing like murdering your best mate with a shotgun and then laughing at their face.This is an old thread but I thought I should bring it up again. Even as today, the same point is true. Next-gen consoles still fall short of computers. The graphics of the 360 and PS3 are really impressive but compared to the upcoming pc title of Crysis, Pc's still win. Remember, as I said before, pc's are what make consoles exists. If computers were never invented, consoles wouldn't be either. Right now, I'm running a 1998 Gateway Pentium II computer that I've experimented with ever since I've received it back in 1998. When I first got it, I didn't know anything about computers. Back then, I was still in middle school. Now with all the lessons I've learned from just playing around with the settings and wanting to max the potential of this pc, I'm a pc guru. Now I actually build pc rigs without stepping 1 inch into a technical school. What I can do with computers, companies actually pay professionals to do paying good money. If you want to learn these same skills, understand its not hard to learn. You just have to learn the basics and go from there. You'll see, compared to consoles, it'll pay off. I will accept any/all criticism anybody has to dash out. This is my opinion but if you share my ideas, please post to maybe influence the people that will disagree with me. Thank you
MtTheNothingtM
[QUOTE="pxr242"]You couldn't be more wrong. PC is the primary gaming machine. Consoles are turning into PC's. Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001.
MtTheNothingtM
I have no clue on what side you think I am, pc or console. But i'll tell you right now that I'm on the PC side. I was just explaining how theres a debate between consoles and PC. Whether or not multiplayer has been around, which is more popular in the gaming industry? PC or the new next-gen gaming consoles?
Reason? Because consoles are more accessible and easier to use to casuals and advertised to kingdom come. That's why. Simple.
[QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"][QUOTE="pxr242"]You couldn't be more wrong. PC is the primary gaming machine. Consoles are turning into PC's. Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001.
trix5817
I have no clue on what side you think I am, pc or console. But i'll tell you right now that I'm on the PC side. I was just explaining how theres a debate between consoles and PC. Whether or not multiplayer has been around, which is more popular in the gaming industry? PC or the new next-gen gaming consoles?
Reason? Because consoles are more accessible and easier to use to casuals and advertised to kingdom come. That's why. Simple.
I have no clue what you're trying to say. I was asking for no reason to any question you are trying to answer. I'm still trying to figure out what the question is. But if I had anything to say to your reply, your point goes without saying.
[QUOTE="pxr242"]Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001?Kravyn81
I believe the DC was the first console to incorporate online multiplayer, so it was attempted before 2001, but the death of the DC just didn't make it a standard for consoles until Xbox in 2001.
-K
Was it not the Sega Genesis back in '89? I believe it had a modem play for it's games, though never really incorporated it, plus back then it was unheard of. The thing is, who cares who made the first attempt at online gaming, but who has the best experience. I haven't tried any console online, since PC does it for me.
most pc gamers are hardcore gamers...they dont want those gay controllers...they dont want those kiddy game like those adventure crap...pc gamers mostly play fps,rts,mmo....and theres more people using pc for gaming than consoles..consoles sucks!pcs are more powerfull and the game bugs can be fixed unlike console games...
[QUOTE="bonejester"]losers who debate about it are the only ones who can't see the truth. consoles sell more games. period. which is why so many devs port their games to consoles, re: they know the pc market can't move enough units. sure, pc gaming isn't dead, but it also isn't thriving quite as much as the console market. there is a reason for it, and it isn't because you have a sweet machine and think all console players are inferior to you. it's because devs can see outside of their little corner of the world, unlike many. [/QUOTE
This is not about what sells more or what is cheaper for the average consumer, its about what is BETTER. Thats the debate. Pc's whoops consoles hands down whether the games are there or not. Its about technology and moving forward and consoles can't do that unless you buy a Whole new one. Pc's are upgradable and even at this present time, consoles can't beat a pc with graphics and sound. Game developers do make more games for consoles because yes thats where the money is. But ask yourself, "Do I want something that can stay with technology as new technology comes out or just settle for what They want you to play"? Look at this from a technological point of view instead of saying "I'm satisfied with what I got". With the attitude you're potraying, thats the same reason why America is behind the times compared to China. While we're over here saying we're satisfied with what we have, they're constantly upgrading everything in their society. Don't settle for less, Bill Gates didn't. Thats why he is where he's at. Strive for better if you can but like I said, its my opinion. Its just gaming. To bad we have to settle for less just because of finances.
Too say PC games don't move units is simply wrong, it is the popularity of the game, not so much the media it is on. Case in point World of Warcraft, 8.5 million units world wide and annual profits in the mid billions per year. That is the future of all gaming if you can't see that then simply look at how many gaming services are moving to "subscription" style purchases (i.e. X-live, MMO's, hell even Gamespot has subscribable content).
PC's and consoles fill different niches in the same market, PC's are for the hardcore, those who want the best performance, the best looks, the most personable gameing experience they can afford and they want it first. Consoles are for those who game but want the work done for them, they are second movers in the industry. Why? Because a PC is intimidating. A big humming machine that costs upto 3 times what the console cost. It takes alot of consumer confidence in a machine/media to fork over teh kind of cash needed to support a PC gamers habits and hardware, Consoles offer a much cheaper, much more inviting alternative for much less cost.
The PC as an gaming exclusive rig is impractical. However, it easily has the capacity to outperform consoles. And where it lacks simplicity, it has depth. Some people just like to tweak things and make them better. Games on both PC and console have their respective advantages and disadvantages, and neither is best.
Normally at this point, I'd make an argument for PC gaming being avant-garde, but this would only be true for the technical aspect of the games. At heart, I still think consoles are lousy for games.
[QUOTE="Herrick"][QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"]Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console.MtTheNothingtM
This remark makes you sound like you have just discovered PC Games, mang.
What you said might of been true only if that was the only line in the whole forum. But please believe that if I say " Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console" then I have to have been around long enough to know and compare recent and past videogames to say such a statement. And if you really think about, am I wrong? Current videogames actually do pose a challenge to next gen consoles. Without going into the mobo jumbo such as specs, controllers, resolution, blah blah blah; if you truly run a game like Call of Duty2 or FEAR at its highest settings without any failure then you are ahead of the xbox360 hardware.
Actually I found Wolf 3D more "next gen" than the Super NES.. released around the same period. When SNES tried to make a quasi-FPS game (Jurassic Park) they failed... in fact I had an entire fight with one school mate who thought that Jurassic Park was better than any PC game UNTIL he played Wolf 3D then he changed his tune..
[QUOTE="Kravyn81"][QUOTE="pxr242"]Online multiplayer has been around since what, 1994, and consoles just got it in 2001?Arcadius
I believe the DC was the first console to incorporate online multiplayer, so it was attempted before 2001, but the death of the DC just didn't make it a standard for consoles until Xbox in 2001.
-K
Was it not the Sega Genesis back in '89? I believe it had a modem play for it's games, though never really incorporated it, plus back then it was unheard of. The thing is, who cares who made the first attempt at online gaming, but who has the best experience. I haven't tried any console online, since PC does it for me.
Wow Arcadius, I didn't know that.. course my Genesis didn't have the modem hook-up. I primarily bought it to play MK (with blood) and Streets of Rage 2, and of course Sonic. ;) But at that time on-line gaming was unheard of.. Doom 1 you had to dial up using a phone number while the other player was waiting for you to join. That was pretty much the first deathmatch game.. this in turn made developers like Valve create a internet deathmatch game.. ergo: Half-Life.... I DO know the first computers networked and called "the internet" back in the late 1970s. Possibly there were games that worked on a LAN but as for the "internet" at large.. not until the early 90s.. with the dawn of ISPs like Prodigy, AOL, etc.
The fact of the matter is that they both have their strengths and weaknesses. The PC can outdo a console graphically but to do so a mid to high range PC will cost you 2-3 thousand dollars. To play a game on a PC you need to check your system specs, make sure your software is updated, and install the game before you can play it. With a console you know it will work and can just pop it in and play. They both have their place and will be around for a long time.
[QUOTE="MtTheNothingtM"]Gaming on the PC is not dead and will never be dead. However, there is a problem with PC gaming whether the PC community chooses to acknowledge it or not. The problem can be fixed and within time it will be. The problem is PCs are not steered in the economy of the world to be gaming machines. To break it down for ya, America, uses computers mainly for business and digital growth for storage of data, numerical data & etc. The way of the country implies that if you want to have a machine that its main pupose for exist is strictly for gaming, buy a gaming console. Now lately, with technology booming the way its been for the past decade, you have businesses like alienware and third-party computer companies who can make computers be well worth superior to any gaming console that you can buy today. Even you, if smart enough to know how a motherboard works, can practically build a top-of-the-line computer that can kill any kind of gaming console out today. But if computers are so better than console, then why are consoles more popular? I'll tell you why, history. The world has been nursed and raised up on consoles. Classic games from the beginning of video game history has been Mario Bros, PacMan, SuperTechmoBowl, etc. And consoles have gone from the atari to the current Xbox360. Pc gaming have just now hit its mark on now having games that actually can look, sound, and feel as though its worth the time to put down a gaming console. But at the expense of upgrading vital computer hardware components at the every turn-around when a game becomes more power hungry than your already computer hungry money budget. Some people cannot afford these computer upgrades so instead they buy a gaming console because not only does it have a successful history, but its cheaper and it does excactly what it was meant to do. Be a gaming machine. If computers are going to make a place in society as being more than just ipods, word processors, and data collectors; then prices of top end computers and their accessories need to come down in price dramatically, they need to be advertised more on the gaming side of preference, and the truth about a top-end computer power needs to be shown comparison to the top-end console of current date. A computer top-end will always be more powerful than a consoles top-end. And why? Because a computer is the what a console is. So there for if a computer always updates its video cards but a console can't....well you figure it out.SubcriticalOne of the most significant reasons why console gaming is as popular as it is, has to do with marketing by huge corporate giants such as Sony and Microsoft. For example, no other company would of been able to penetrate the console market the way Microsoft has in such a short time. They have spent billions subsidizing and marketing the Xbox. Many people blindly believe the marketingj, and take seller pitches as truth. In a similar situation, this is how GW got into the White House. Carl Rove was a master marketer, peddling an inferior product.
I love how people claim Microsoft is strictly "console oriented". Just out of curiousity, what OS are you running on your PC?
And FWIW, MS put very little focus on advertising for the 360 until around summer of last year (8 months after release).
Well Not to get into a nasty Argument I will just say this. Online Gaming in my life got big When -----
1992 I was in the Marine Corps at Camp Pendelton CA, ( Just got back from Desert Storm) I was playing on AoHell (AOL) playing a Online RPG called NWN. 250 people in game at a time max and it costed most of us at the time 2.95$ an Hour, I remember hearing people having $800 plus phone bills. back then Graphics were not on many peoples mind, just the thought of playing with other people all over the US and Canada ( not sure if over the pond or not ).
As to say which is better is everyones own opinion, and to say one is better than the other is once again your own opinion.
My Opinion is - I played Consoles back in the Atari through NES days, I also Built and played on my own Heathkit Computer in the late 80's. I prefer computers now because it has the games I like. To Each their Own..
Peace
The final point is probably the most important. Hardly any PC game has split screen multiplayer. If a friend or two come over are you really going to let them watch you play WoW or Counterstrike? That is heart of gaming; playing with other people, not that online trash they throw at us (that's basically playing against a slightly harder AI character). There is nothing like murdering your best mate with a shotgun and then laughing at their face.SonicsomethingEver hear of LAN parties, they're fairly common with my friends and you don't have to share a small portion of a screen
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment