Yahoo News: PC to leapfrog standalone game consoles
- Thread starter Pugnate
- Start date
doesnt this happen every time the consoles start getting "old". besides consoles generally are never ahead of the top end PCs even at release, just the average machine probably is a little behind a console at release.
the only console that was even really cutting edge GPU wise when it came out was the 360 because it had unified shaders and such, like the x1900xt (which is still top of the line sadly).
the ps3 is pretty much running a 7800gtx under the hood.
the only console that was even really cutting edge GPU wise when it came out was the 360 because it had unified shaders and such, like the x1900xt (which is still top of the line sadly).
the ps3 is pretty much running a 7800gtx under the hood.
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
5150Joker
Diamond Member
mooncancook
Platinum Member
- May 28, 2003
- 2,874
- 50
- 91
I'd guess the opposite actually. MS is rolling out Live for Windows in a few months as a Vista exclusive (I think) which will basically unite 360 and PC gamers online. As much as people here hate Bill and MS, he's PC gaming's best chance at a long, healthy future. Creating a stable, uniform pseudo-platform under the "Games for Windows" logo might give PC gaming just what it needs to gain some of the market back from console gaming.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Well the Wii is for kids, the 360 is redundant when you have a PC and the PS3 is too expensive. So PC gaming is a great option. Everyone has a PC and you can play games on it that came out 20 years ago.
PCs offer better graphics, variety, customization and are often times less expensive (Madden is always $10 or so cheaper upon release).
PCs offer better graphics, variety, customization and are often times less expensive (Madden is always $10 or so cheaper upon release).
The problem with this is that PC games will become console ports, and no longer leverage the advantages that PCs currently hold over consoles.
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,756
- 600
- 126
Turning PC gaming into console gaming won't revitalize it, it'll just weaken it further. If it does the same stuff and cost more, why would anyone game on a PC? I come to the PC for games that only the PC can do. PC gaming will never really be simple or one platform like consoles, thats both its strength and weakness I'm afraid.
MS hasn't really done much of anything for PC gaming lately, IMO. The artifical vista only directx10 limitation just further fractures a market thats already been weakened. And I'm not sure if MS even really cares about PC gaming...they say they do, but they have a conflict of interest since they are fighting a console war right now too. Look at Halo...if the PC wasn't treated like the red headed step child in that game, I don't know who was.
mooncancook
Platinum Member
- May 28, 2003
- 2,874
- 50
- 91
Wii is for kids as PC is for geeks.
Anyway, until everyone is hooking up a gaming PC in their home theatre environment, even redundant consoles has its place in everyone's home.
What advantages do PCs currently hold over consoles? Mandatory KB and mouse support? PC games are already becoming console ports. Well actually, they won't be console ports until they're actually ported (See: Call of Duty 3, Halo 2/3, GRAW2, Gears of War etc. etc.) Its only going to get worst until the PC industry self-imposes some type of standards and quality assurance and the only player that really has that kind of clout is MS.
The idea wouldn't be to turn PC gaming into console gaming. It'd be to standardize the industry and emulate the console industry to make the PC a viable development platform once again. Its clearly fallen behind as many leading dev houses and key players have shifted their focus to consoles first and PC 2nd.
I agree with you on the Vista/DX10 requirement, but it shows just how much control MS has in determining the future of PC gaming. Of course they're not going to care as much about PC gaming as XBox360 since they don't directly get a cut of the sales, although by default, most PC games will be running on their software. This might change with DX10 shifting to the forefront, but even then I don't expect MS to peddle PC games ahead of XBox360. Still, I don't think anyone can question MS' influence on the gaming industry. The literal 360 of the XBox brand amongst giants like Nintendo and Sony is impressive.
I just think a more influential player would help bring back some developers. Windows Live is a start, so is the "Games for Windows" logo. WHQL certified drivers and minimum specified requirements clearly isn't the answer, but when you look at the landscape of PC gaming and all that can go wrong, is it any wonder why game developers are putting PC gaming on the back burner?
I've already participated in my PC vs Console flame war for the month, but i will say this:
My Xbox 360 gets the nod for this next generation of games until PC game developers prove to me that the PC can do things that the xbox360 cannot.
I simply cannot justify spending $550 for a DX10 video card and $160 for Vista Home Premium Upgrade. That's $710 and I haven't even bought any damn games yet.
Once PC games surpass this gen's console games, then I may reevaluate my position, but until the PC actually does leap frog the consoles I am staying away from PC games. Especially after wasting $40 on STALKER.
My Xbox 360 gets the nod for this next generation of games until PC game developers prove to me that the PC can do things that the xbox360 cannot.
I simply cannot justify spending $550 for a DX10 video card and $160 for Vista Home Premium Upgrade. That's $710 and I haven't even bought any damn games yet.
Once PC games surpass this gen's console games, then I may reevaluate my position, but until the PC actually does leap frog the consoles I am staying away from PC games. Especially after wasting $40 on STALKER.
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,756
- 600
- 126
I know the idea isn't billed as turning PC gaming into console gaming...but from what I've seen thats exactly what will happen.
Development houses and key players have shifted focus to consoles, they're just following the money. Consoles have gotten good enough that a lot PC style games can at least be attempted on them. The ROI is potentially a lot better. PC sales themselves aren't really what they used to be either. I just don't see how anything microsoft is doing will actually increase interest in the PC arena.
I'm definately not doubting MS's influence on the gaming industry...in fact, thats exactly what I'm afraid of. More standardized system requirements are nice, if they were executed fairly. But all GfW games need to work with an xbox controller? How does that really benefit a strategy game developer? No one wants to use an xbox360 controller to play R:TW but to get that stamp the developer now has to spend time and money creating support for it. And, without checking, I wouldn't be surprised if MS wants to charge a fee for "testing" to gain this certificate. I don't see how arbitrary expenses added from above will strengthen an already struggling market.
I feel like the only companies that can absorb these expenses are the ones that are large...the same ones that are mostly moving towards console gaming anyway. I think little developers aren't going to hang so well.
Also, as a company I just have to question microsoft's motives and direction. How can they be committed to PC gaming when their xbox360 console is positioned to compete against it? Most original xbox exclusives were made by companies MS pulled from the PC development space, going so far as to pull successful franchises built on the PC to the xbox. These sequels to well liked PC classics (Deus Ex: IW, Theif: DS) were generally not that well received by PC players. I don't personally feel MS actually cares about PC gaming. They say they do, but I think thats just because its time to sell a new OS and games for PC are pretty much games for windows anyway.
I know a lot of people are excited about the stuff MS says it has planned...but I think its not really going to amount to much.
There is already a thread about where this thread is going. This whole pissing match is so freaking annoying. There will probably be both types of gaming for the foreseeable future. Why do so many gamers forget that it is about software? We can ooh and aah over memory bandwidth, FPS, instructions per second, fill rate, yadda yadda. Most gamers don't care about that junk. They want to play a game to be entertained. And why does anyone care about DX10.1, when there are no games for DX10?
I know it is getting kind of boring for you flaming trolls with NVidia dominating the GPU market, but these console vs. PC arguments are even weaker than the trash that is spewed about GPUs...
I know it is getting kind of boring for you flaming trolls with NVidia dominating the GPU market, but these console vs. PC arguments are even weaker than the trash that is spewed about GPUs...
If there's things only a PC can do with games that a console can't, that'd never happen but the current generation of consoles have clearly shown there's nothing sacred anymore in terms of PC gaming. I suppose the last bastion PC gamers hold onto is the KB+mouse vs. gamepad debate, but even in that area more and more die hard PC gamers are willing to adjust to a gamepad in exchange for quality titles that hit release dates. The only other major area PCs had the edge over consoles was online gaming and content updates where the last generation made headroom. There's virtually no distinction with the current generation. All that's left is the ability to hack up your game on the PC and create mods, cheats and pirate copies, and I don't think that's exactly a desirable plus in the PC's favor.
They're not just following the money....they're also following the path of least resistance. Developers have always stated programming for a console is easier than the PC because of target hardware. In the past the PC had the edge in terms of pure processing muscle but the last two generations of consoles have greyed those lines and also come at a much cheaper entry-level price tag.
I'm sure game developers would be able to implement KB and mouse support for most games if it made sense to, but having to use a 360 controller or any similar PC controller (I'm sure my Logitech Cordless Rumblepad would work fine if there was game support) might be a necessity if the gameplay dictated it.
But I wouldn't even concern myself about input devices before I straightened out hardware standards. Setting realistic minimum specifications and cutting support for older parts instead of a spray-n-pray mentality hoping for broad market coverage would be a start. Getting hardware players like NV and ATI on the same page and eliminating vendor-specific coding would be the second. DX did a lot in this regards but there's still too many ATI/NV specific problems with cards/games where there should be NONE. People here are going to argue they like the difference in cards and makers, but seriously, its utterly ridiculous you have to not only choose between PC vs. console gaming, but also which card to run which games for.
MS already charges for WHQL certification, they probably charge for that "Games for Windows" logo that's started to pop up on games. They might charge more for games that are supported by Windows Live. In the short-term, dev houses and publishers might not like it. But in the long-run it might pay off if they can release games that actually sell and don't hit bargain basement prices before disappearing off of shelves forever within a few weeks.
Well, the games I've played lately from smaller companies haven't been worth the glass they've been printed on, so I guess I wouldn't be too disappointed to see them go. PC gaming has shifted to smaller dev houses being funded by large publishers similar to console gaming so there's still room for the little guy, as long as they have something to sell. The only games I've played lately have been published by THQ, a company I thought very little of a few years ago, but seem to care about putting out a quality game. If more PC games came out of this quality I wouldn't complain so much but there's just way too much "when is [insert next big hype] coming out?" with PC gaming.
Actually, the GFW logo and certification is free, it's one of MS's strategies to get more people to adopt it. 
Correct me if I misread you, but did you just say that modding isn't a good thing?
Taking Oblivion as the biggest example of a multi-platform failure turned godly due to mods, I don't see how anyone can say this at all. Console gamers got left with the turd that was published as stock.
As a widescreen gamer, I have to say: I :heart: GFW!Originally posted by: Nightmare225
Actually, the GFW logo and certification is free, it's one of MS's strategies to get more people to adopt it.
5150Joker
Diamond Member
I think AMD, nVidia, Intel and Microsoft need to all collaborate and come up with a plan to revitalize PC gaming. If all of them pool resources and make MS's Gaming for Windows initiative take off it's going to help the PC gaming industry a lot. They could take it a step further by ensuring DX10+ hardware trickle down to even the most budget video card so everyone has access to the same features. Another thing they could all do is sponsor devs to support their hardware and even subsidize smaller gaming studios with cost. Right now with the way things are, the only thing that's happening is the possibility of a PC industry collapse. AMD is hemorrhaging money (if they fold ATi goes with them or gets sold off to nVidia for cheap), Intel will become an even bigger monopoly, MS will still have their head up their ass while Vista and subsequent OS's continue to fail and the only market that will be left for PC's is office suites and servers. I bought an 8800 GTX and I've only got 3 games that interest me so far, graw 2 (beta so not even retail yet), r6 vegas and stalker. Conversely, I've got over 15 games on the xbox 360 and haven't even had time to play most of them yet because there's so many to choose from each month.
I spend $2,000 for a tv and I dont even have a console yet! :roll: $2,000 + $400 or (my system) $1200 + monitor price..........
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter