Is PC Online Gaming Unwell? 132
Thanks to GameSpy for their 'Spy/CounterSpy' editorial discussing whether the rise of online console gaming will eventually lead to the decline of online PC gaming. On the one hand, it's argued: "Not only do I think that console gaming is not a threat to PC gaming - I think it actually helps the PC gaming scene by introducing new players to the online gaming world", but on the other hand, an alternative point of view is advanced: "My current love for certain online PC titles really reminded me just how annoying online computer gaming is... even though there are PC exclusive online games that I love to play, I'd rather be playing them on Xbox Live."
Here goes... (Score:2)
Every day, it's either "GameSpy says a lack of orignality threatens gaming!" or "GameSpy says console [PC] gaming is going to destroy PC [console] gaming!"
I can't wait until SCO sues EA...
Um. What?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Um. What?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Same with games like Warcraft. I've played RTS games on consoles and they SUCK without a mouse, and playing a game like warcraft with it's sweet graphical nuances would just SUCK on the console.
Online console gaming, sure, will probably eat into the PC a little, but I'm really hoping that
Re:Um. What?! (Score:2)
Any on-line competitive game is going to draw people who are there just to piss you off. You'll get backstabbers, hackers, quitters, racists, homophobes, name-callers.
Basically, I've just decided to stay off-line or only game with my personal friends. For the amount of time I have to give to gaming, and the number of good games out there to play, I find I'd rather spend my time w/o idiotic childish types
Re:Um. What?! (Score:1)
I think ultimately consoles will draw away the fuckwits. Of course, the big problem is the fact the the decent console online networks charge you money. The idiots who get off on ruining games for everyone else won't want to pay for the pleasure.
Another area online gaming on the consoles sucks is cheats. SOCOM for example has been ruined by cheats. On the PC, if a cheat is found, it's usually patc
Re:Um. What?! (Score:3, Insightful)
argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:3, Insightful)
couple that with a 50" inch 'monitor', and the visual 'richness' far surpasses that of PC gaming. and just try to convince me that you don't enjoy a nice comfy couch over an office chair.
as for controls, once you get used to it, it's actually alot nicer than using a mouse and wasd, simply becaus
Re:argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:3, Insightful)
A TV capable of 1080i will cost more than a new computer, and there aren't many games that can take advantage of it. Even the XBox's GeForce3.5 is quite underpowered compared to modern PC graphics cards, and the other consoles are worse. So consoles can't render 1080i (which has a pixel count roughly equivilent to 1600x1200) smoothly in most modern-looking games. My
Re:argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:2)
Plasma HDTV's have beaten moore's law in the last few years, halving in price each year, and showing very little signs of slowing down.
As for the XBOX's GPU, yup, i agree with that to. XBOX is what i would consider the 'transition' console -- it has the support for it, just waiting for those games which have the available power left over to use it. The next generati
Re:argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:1)
Partially, but also the limits of the brain. No human can micromanage 500 units. If all you'd do with an army that size is order them around in larger groups, then it makes very little sense to make a game like that. Simplifying the play by reducing army sizes makes for a much more tactical game.
Also, unit caps help keep players from building indefinately, and nev
Re:argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:2)
Re:argh.. WITH linebreaks: (Score:1)
Oh wait, you seem to like consoles because their limitations. No mouse means people can't aim... you say its good, I say its bad.
There are lots of games that make it harder to aim and not a simple click-and-kill. (Gunwobble, Cone of Fire, etc)
Re:Um. What?! (Score:2)
My only problem with consoles (Score:5, Funny)
On a television? Without a mouse or keyboard? Obviously, more work is put into more games for consoles. The best writers are all probably employed on console games. Perhaps many of the best engineers and designers work on console games. However. You have to play them with mittens and bottle bottom glasses.
I need that like I need a broom shoved up my ass.
Some day, consoles will work with high res displays (for less $ than a PC setup, please) and will have more precise input. I dream of that day.
You only problems with consoles are not even real (Score:3, Interesting)
As for controls, another wash IMHO. You don't need controls as precise when everyone else isn't cheating their arse off. And everyone else is using that controller too, so its an even playing field. Hey, everyone has the
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Well, I disagree. I need much more resolution. And if we're talking about HDTV, we are also talking about a *lot* of money. Apple Cinema Displays are in the competition.
You're right, it's about gameplay. My desire for resolution is because certain types of gameplay are totally impossible without lots of visual information being presented to the player. Imagine Civ 3 at 512x384.
As for controls, I don't care about
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2, Interesting)
The low quality of console games is holding back the entire industry. Console games that are released on the PC are very often exactly the same as the original console versio
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Kinda arbitrary huh?
Ok, how about you name a console game that you think would have made a better PC game IF it had some things that the console version could not possibly provide. This way at least I'll have a chance to know where you are coming from.
I'll give you a hint
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
Ok, how about you name a console game that you think would have made a better PC game IF it had some things that the console version could not possibly provide.
Any console game not optimised for the latest and greatest rendering API's (DX9 or the latest OpenGL features). Reason? It would essentially be the same game but with better graphics. I understand this is a real cop-out answer, so I'll embellish a little. A few people have already mentioned that consoles de
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
You wasted a whole lot of breath replying to arguements I was never going to make.
Now please, once more, specifically, what game would have been better as a PC game, and why?
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
The console cannot provide the same quality as a PC. You have the same gameplay, but with better visual, auditory and tactile attributes. This is why the PC can provide a higher quality than a console game.
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Easy. Deus Ex 2. They took a game that won tons of Game of the Year awards and dumbed it down to the point that it was playable on a console. Then they take the console version and slap it in a PC game box. The interface is horrible and clunky requiring far too many keypresses to do things like equiping a weapon mod or rearranging inventory. On the PC you just drag the mod onto the gun. Done. Then they botched the AI. Maybe because the XBox processor couldn't handle the load of a better AI. Who kno
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
>Pleae provide a specific example
Starcraft:Ghost if you must have an example
>with reasons, so that I can better understand your point of view.
Why? Better control schemes. Better resolution. Better audio. More customisability. More functionality.
Basic comprehension is not always a talent for every person, I suppose.
I'll type this slowly for you, as you don't seem to be a fast reader.
If Starcraft Ghost was developed and optimised for the superior capabilities of the PC, all othe
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
How about ANY first person shooters? Console versions can't provide any form of reliable controls. With PC games, you have (and need) per-pixel accuracy, with console games, you have a pad that can go in one general direction, and a stick that has the range of about an inch (compare to a gamers mousepad, which is often about the size of a laptop if n
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
PCs allow incredible amounts of customizeability. Windows knows what kinds of controllers I have. It shows me little pictures of them. I can program every button to do what I want. Then when I'm playing a game, I tell the game how I want it to work and it remembers that and CAN remind me what button does what if I forget. Many PC games do this.
What if I want to introduce a game feature that only conveys in force feedback? It would be great for multiplayer games on the same display - it can signal pla
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
The problem is that it's so damn complicated to know whether you have a properly equipped PC or not. It used to be just a matter of Processor and Memory. Now you need a graphics card that supports the specific feature set that the game requires. Explaining to users why a GeForce 4 MX won't run Deus Ex 2 while a GeForce 3 will, for example, is a pain in the ass. (The
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
So, yes, I exaggerate, but not really that much...
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
So your argument is that you can't even compare the console to the PC really since they are focused on entirely different experiences. Consoles are meant to be social and casual, and the games reflect that. PCs are meant to be precisely suited to the user, and only the user. They are not social in the same sense as consoles. And since some people don't really get into tv and movies much they don't want to drop thousands of dollars on a home theater. They could by the ultimate computer for that kind of
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
And maybe not too far off it's two cakes for the hometheater crowd and one for the PC.
You do realize why you believe that don't you? Have you noticed that consoles are becoming more and more like PCs with each new generation? Pretty soon it will be just a PC in front of your TV, albeit with crappy controllers. PCs have many other uses besides gaming, so games will always exist for them. People like me who enjoy both console and PC games will demand it. Consoles have their place, but it's for a diffe
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Keyboards have a lot of buttons, but their controls have very few degrees of freedom. Not every game can come with a custome gamepad, and one that has to bow to the lowest common denominator will invariably need to leave things out.
IMO, that's why console games tend to be oversimplified. PC keyboards do have a lot of buttons, and I think that gives me quite a bit of freedom. I can remap them to my flight stick and rudder pedals, or pretty much any of the hundreds of other controllers out there and play
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
I consider that an advantage of the PC since I can use whatever kind of controller best suits the game when I'm playing on my PC.
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:2)
I consider it an advantage that PC games let me control the game the way I want to. Consoles don't.
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
I use my keyboard/mouse frequently while laying on either side, on my stomach (most of time it's like this) or on my back. Gamepad doesn't work as conveniently in all these positions because I lose some control when I'm using my elbows to support my body.
My roommate does it reclined all the time at his computer.
I'm guessing one of the problems a lot of people have is the mouse since they're used to their mousepad/desk surface. Mousepads are so flimsy they can't be used on non-s
Re:You only problems with consoles are not even re (Score:1)
Re:My only problem with PC Gaming (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:3, Interesting)
The PS2 and XBOX both have USB support. Both have third party keyboards available. Adding mouse support would be trivial. I am unfamiliar with the input methods available on the Gamecube, but I assume there is no technical reason why this could not be done there as well.
If lack of keyboard and a mouse is all that is keeping the PC gaming scene alive, then consider it on death's door.
There is nothing stopping console developers from supporting keyboards now. And give
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
This is a really good point, and is pretty well-exhibited by xbox. The addition of a NIC and HD to the console as stock features was a great idea. Every game can count on them to be there, and it means that more developers are likely to use them (and for the HD, I mean beyond the purpose of a memory card - like saving large replays/data sets). Whereas with Sony/Nintendo, comparatively few games do online support, largely only first
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
Good points. The reason that FPS sucks on consoles is that they don't have mouse controls; they don't have mouse controls because the developers can't count on the users having mice, since the consoles don't ship with mice.
I love FPS. However, I also am a Mac-guy, so, frankly, my choices for FPS are limited--I had hoped that a console would give me options that the Mac lacks. While true for many genres of games (RPGs and Fighters), my favorite genre of FPS sucks balls on a console. How people can play
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
And if that is your assumption, then you really don't understand why we're complaining. When people use a joystick for FPSs on PCs (and they do) they don't use it to replace the mouse. They use it to replace the keyboard. The mouse is at least an order of magnitude faster for aiming. You must judge (1) how far to move t
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
The res
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:1)
So, you have a bargain bin video card that doesn't support many of the rendering features of the game that many PCs and the Xbox do support. That would explain your crap graphics.
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
MX. A Geforce 4MX is equivalent to a Geforce 2MX. Mildly better. There are plenty of things that a Geforce 2 GTS can do that beat the hell out of a Geforce 4MX.
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:1)
It's "the successor to the Geforce 2MX" line, but still not as powerful as a Geforce 3.
Upon further reading, I notice that it doesn't even have directX 8 support. Before, I just remembered that the card sucked. Now I know *just how much* it sucks...
Re:My only problem with consoles (Score:2)
PC gaming will stay (Score:5, Insightful)
Consoles used more for games that play better with a controller than with keyboard & mouse. Online racing & fighting games will be a lot better on a console.
As for the online voice chat, I actually think that's a disadvantage. Anyone play WarCraft 3 online? A large part of the chat during games is some guy who sucks cursing out someone else trying to pass the blame for the team losing. You don't want to hear the majority of the chat; most of it is mindless bickering.
Re:PC gaming will stay (Score:2)
Re:PC gaming will stay (Score:1)
If you have ever played a strategy required game such as Americas Army(americasarmy.com, just released 2.0a), with voice chat and a good clan it
Re:PC gaming will stay (Score:1, Funny)
At least it's better than my experiences with XBox Live... 12 year olds talking about thier penises.
The Reality (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The Reality (Score:2)
The advantage PCs have over Xbox Live? (Score:2)
Really...isn't $70 a year for the ability to play games online a bit much? I know that Microsoft runs and maintains the servers, but the price seems high to me. Look at all of the PC servers that are free to use. Hell, millions of people use Battle.Net every day, and it's still free. Maybe I'm just being ignorant, but I don't see where the $70 goes to.
Compare that to PC gaming: with the exception of MMORPGs, very few games require a subscription for online play. Perhaps more importantly, most
Re:The advantage PCs have over Xbox Live? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, it is worth the $50.
Just like cable (or satellite) TV is worth paying for (for a lot of people) even though you can get stuff free over the airwaves.
Re:The advantage PCs have over Xbox Live? (Score:2)
Same goes for the other games we play round the offices (multinational).
PCs advantage over Xbox Live? (Score:1)
A console costs $200 not including TV. Three years of $50 play comes to $150 plus the additional $20 for
Re:PCs advantage over Xbox Live? (Score:2)
What other purpose does the XBox serve than as a gaming machine (and DVD player)? It really doesn't have one.
While I didn't really intend to, I wrote my post ignoring the start-up costs. The XBox is only cheaper when you leave out the initial costs...but odds are if you have an XBob wit
Re:The advantage PCs have over Xbox Live? (Score:2)
XBox for $200, $70 for live = $270 for the ability to play online for a year.
Computer for $1000, $0 for live = $1000 for the ability to play online for a year.
Don't get me wrong, I have a computer and love it very dearly, but when I used to play games on the computer I kept having to spend $200 on a video card here, $100 on RAM there, and it was a pretty pricey hobby. Since getting an XBox, all I need to buy are games; the hardware never needs to be changed. My computer costs have also dropped, becau
Re:The advantage PCs have over Xbox Live? (Score:2)
XBL: $50 a year (no, not $70 a year. $50. Goto Xbox.com if you don't believe me).
Xbox: $179.99
-Decent- Gaming PC: $999 (and this garuntees...maybe a year or two of games before an upgrade. I won't even go into the price of a good gaming PC) Gaming Video Card: ~$250-$300 (not neccesary initially, but it will be in a year or two)
So, let's do the math. If I don't get a good video card right away (and we all know you will need one at some point), I can have abou
Problem is... (Score:2, Interesting)
One of the best online experiences I had was playing PSO on the Dreamcast. Friendly people for the most part (until, I guess, cheating sunk in) and you could always find a group to play with.
$70/year is a bit steep, but so
Re:Problem is... (Score:1)
The other secret, hidden hope for PC gaming is the open source world. Americas Army, although not free as people might like it to be, is quite a good game, and it would be impossible to achieve on a console. I can't see any open source console games surviving very long, either. Linux and OpenGL, and the power of the open source community could well create a utopia of inexpensive onl
Yeah, right! (Score:1, Funny)
And a heard of feral cats might rise up and sieze power in the midwestern states, forcing all men to endure back breaking slave labor cultivating catnip while the spin yarn till their fingers bleed.
Other things that are theoretically possible but not going to happen:
I could spontansiously tunnel to the other side of the universe and find I'm on an alternate Earth where everything is the opp
Re:Problem is... (Score:1)
Now compare that to all the titles that came out in the last couple of years with online play. If not declining, it's massively saturated and is clearly difficult for new games to carve out a niche. Need a sample? Just got XIII. Virt
Re:Problem is... (Score:1)
16 player CS server = $80/mo. Fragism isn't cheap, but they are good.
An average DSL connect is good for about 4-8 players on most games, and naturally is only up temporarily unless people want to sacrfice a box and port.
I love the idea of a lot of people starting servers on their home connections to alleviate the problem, but most people just don't bother.
Niche market? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the reduction of commercial PC game publishers may be a good thing, since hopefully this should provide a better market for quality developers to keep making titles they are passionate about, much in the way the PC game market had developed at one point (id software, the old 3DRealms, old Raven, Westwood Studios, many others).
I don't mind paying higher prices for PC games as long as they have quality and can be customized.
Currently I am enjoying Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic on my expensive laptop. Despite the lack of customization, the game is a quality title, and has so much variety that extra modding or customization isn't necessary.
And I'm able to play a bunch of my old PC games on this laptop thanks to DOSBox and Windows Compatibility mode in XP.
Now, if console makers introduced a mouse and keypad to their PC-like systems then I may be tempted to buy a console, since I will face spending at least $1000 or more to upgrade for Doom3 and Half-Life2.
At least card and PC prices should drop some more while I wait for those titles to be released.
Re:Niche market? (Score:3, Insightful)
Take a look at Final Fantasy Online -- you can be in the same world whether you have a console or PC. However, on a console, to play the game at all you need an optional hard drive, and to play well, you need a keyboard (which basically means you converted your console into a crippled PC at this point). The game works better on a PC (you
Re:Niche market? (Score:1)
Everyone upgrades to a processor that has 10-20% more speed, with 2-3x the cost. Plot out the best speed/$, and buy that. Do the same with the video card. Buy into architectures where you know the roadmaps for the processor/motherboard have room to upgrade.
Example: I got a Nvidia 2 motherboard that goes to *at least* an athlon 3200+, and got a nice 2100+ for $80. I got 1
killer features (Score:4, Insightful)
1 - patches - if you can't patch your online console game, and it gets hacked, you're totally screwed. This is gradually being fixed by putting hard drives on consoles.
2 - expansions - again, something being gradually addressed by consoles adding hard drives. Still, expansions for console games so far rarely stray from the extremes - they're either very very small, or they're so huge that they cost as much as a new game.
3 - mods! User-created mods! The online gaming killer app! This is still the exclusive domain of the PC. Console makers still refuse to give the users this level of power, and if they *did* give us that much power, we'd start writing software for their systems and consoles would become equivalent to PCs.
Mods vastly increase the useful lifespan of a game by keeping the experience from stagnating. They add replay value, sometimes years of replay value (remember good old Teamfortress?).
Re:killer features (Score:2)
2 - Expansions - Ever tried XBL? Well, we got your expansions right there. I've got a new map and plane for Crimson Skies. About 20 new maps/gametypes/mechs for MechAssault (honestly, there's a y ton of additons for MA. I
Re:killer features (Score:2)
Patches, but 100 times easier than on a PC.
Easier than some PC games, but a lot of them either have autoupdate features that work pretty much as you described for the XBox, or you just download and run a single file. Easy.
AND, most of these expansions are free, whereas the majority of PC expansions cost you $19.99.
Actually, most extra content and even expansions are free on the PC too. You tend to only get charged for the really major ones.
The combination of friends lists, voice chat, easy patche
Re:killer features (Score:1)
Remember?
I still play it!
Re:killer features (Score:2)
I would add to your list option #4 - levels. Between new mods and new levels, PC online gaming has everything over console gaming.
My hypothesis is that ancient games like Half-Life continue to do well for one sole reason - there is a constant influx of new material. Most of this material comes not from the company that made the game, but rather from fans and hobbyists. This creates a whole community of builders and developers that adds an enor
Who cares? (Score:2)
PC Gaming will remain forever (Score:1)
Re:PC Gaming will remain forever (Score:1)
Re:PC Gaming will remain forever (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually those cards are pretty useful for 3D modeling. I have a couple friends that are really into that.
Re:PC Gaming will remain forever (Score:1)
When those consoles were new, they were $299, which is the cost of a cutting edge video card - the video card that only the die-hard enthusiast (penis wagger) needs to buy. The fastest processors and video cards simply aren't required to play many video games, unless you're a) a sucker b) need 400 FPS.
Two Forces (Score:5, Interesting)
First, the consumer. Yes, your PC has higher precision in FPS games. Yes, your PC gets higher FPS. Yes, your PC can display games at a higher resolution. Does the 26 year old bachlor who has broadband to have it (that is to say, porn) and PS2 and Madden 2004 give damn about FPS and 1600 pixels and 128mb of gpu ram yadda yadda yadda? Nope. It matters to us because, well, it's always mattered to us. Because we're PC fanatics. But better FPS and higher accuracy doesn't necessarily mean more fun, it just means a higher FPS and accuracy. Whoopie. Personally, I've yet to see anything on PC that eclipses the strinking visuals in titles like Viewtiful Joe, or Zelda, ICO, or Panzeer Dragoon Orta. Additionally, while consoles aren't existing within some kind of non-cheating utopia kingdom, it's a far better situation than the PC, particularly on Xbox Live. You only have so many credit cards for new XBL accounts, whereas IPs come as easy as power cycling your modem. Lag is typically better, as every player on XBL and in most PS2 games are required to have broadband. Most of these same games also require voice (which, granted and thanks to the seemingly shared low IQ on XBL, is sometimes detrimental) and have a built in unified awareness system (I know when my friend is online regardless of what game she's playing). Basically, the mainstream consumer is on the side of console onling gaming if they're on either side at all. It certainly won't be PC, which includes significanlty more hurdles to really play online than the console, even in the relative childhood of online console gaming. Path of less resistance, remember?
Secondly, if they don't already - and many of them do - I think publishers will prefer console online gaming to PC. There's more control there, even if it's through the Microsoft controlled XBL. Particularly with XBL, there's less liability. Some guy sexually harassing little kids? No problem, you have his credit card, not some untracable IP that leads you to a library or wireless hotspot. There's also financial control. It's much harder to charge for a roster update through a PC than it is on a console, when you've stored their credit card number. Whether this is good for the consumer is debatable, but I think the cards, which are predominately in the hands of the publishers, are definitely stacked against PC gaming. If there is any altruism, it's because companies like Valve and id have a certain spot in their heart for PC gaming, not because they see any financial reasoning to do so. If you think this is the norm rather than the exception, you're the only one still getting $15 off coupons to Amazon.com every week in your email box.
Face it: when it comes to at least racing and sports, consoles have quite easily dominated online gameplay (yes, I know how cool Live for Speed is). All that's left is RPG, FPS, and RTS, and I think console devs will be happy to leave RTS firmly in the grip of the PC.
I think what most people who've posted are doing is examing their own habits with regards to online gaming but have largely neglected to truly examine the entirety of the video game market. Sure, PC gaming will always be here and for some ungodly reason people will still be playing dust on CS, and PC online will most certainly for the next year or two to come what with Half Life 2 and Doom III on the horizon. However, I'm as enamored with the net integration in PGR2 as the article writer is, and I think it's a glimpse of what can really be accomplished with online console gaming. PGR2 not only meets PC gaming, but it smacks in the ass, trips it out, and has surpassed what PC gaming should have been doing this whole time. If PC gaming does survive, it'll have been done with the mantra "evolve or die;" and I think in many ways it will begin to resemble console gaming (i.e. Steam significantly resembles XBL).
Re:Two Forces (Score:3, Insightful)
Bottled Water and The Currency of Convenience (Score:2)
Even assuming that this hypothetical person already has a PC, the whole "free" thing is overrated anyway. PC online gaming does cost, although not in a dollar amount but in time units. Get the game installed. Try to play. Crashes. Download new graphics driver
Re:Bottled Water and The Currency of Convenience (Score:3, Insightful)
All this "endless tweaking" is a myth - if you have a properly configured computer (I can go from blank HD to fully up and running incl. office suite and various utils) in about 35 minutes. I haven't had a problem with hardware OR software in years.
And when
Re:Bottled Water and The Currency of Convenience (Score:1)
And those three CDs installed instantly like a console game?
Finally, if you can afford a console, chances are you have a PC too. You're paying twice for basically one appliance. Why bother?
PC and Gaming PC are not the same thing. My PC can run visual studio 2003 and 3ds max at the same time, but I can't play Halo, DX2, or most other new games at a reasonable speed. My xbox can play these same sort of games just fine.
Re:Bottled Water and The Currency of Convenience (Score:2)
And regarding the p
Re:Two Forces (Score:1)
That will be changing now that both me and my roommate are both on Xbox Live and he just got Counterstrike. On Xbox CS, people actually communicate with each other because we all can. I've never had a mic on my PC CS and neither do a lot of people. I find the quality lackluster compared to XBL. Voices are often muffled and people can be just as annoying as people on XBL.
I just miss the chat via keyboard. And the UT 'headshot'.
P
Re:Two Forces (Score:2)
Personally, I've yet to see anything on PC that eclipses the strinking visuals in titles like Viewtiful Joe, or Zelda, ICO, or Panzeer Dragoon Orta.
I've played Viewtiful Joe and Zelda, and seen a trailer for ICO. I don't think Joe or Zelda are anything special in the graphics department. ICO looked pretty nice though. But IMO, games like X2: The Threat, Lock-On Modern Air Combat, and Morrowind are far beyond anything you see on a console.
Lag is typically better, as every player on XBL and in most PS
Not again... (Score:2)
"BSD is dying."
now
"Computer gaming is dying."
Maybe more complicated... (Score:2)
There's a few reasons why...obviously, most ppl don't have more than 1 of the same console at home...many ppl have more than 1 PeeCee at home...or have friends with NoteBooks...then again, you don't have to pay for these online services??? which is a big hurdle for most ppl...why shoud I pay
Piracy and some other considerations (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's face the facts: About everyone has a personal computer at home, and a lot of people play games, but nobody buys them (this is from an European point of view). Compare this to the console market, where piracy is present but much less widespread (it often needs some hardware hacks that all the users aren't willing to do). How are developpers supposed to make money from this ?
But, you will probably say:
"I buy PC games, sometimes"
"Online games that require a cd-key defeat piracy"
You're right, but these facts did not protect the decline of the PC platform, and in a way they contributed to its impoverishment. Nowaydays, the only games which you can expect to be successful on retail are : High profiled games that people will buy because they've been waiting for them for a long time (Half-Life 2, etc...) or online multiplayer games. In a short, RTS or FPS.
PC used to be a wonderful platform for gaming, because the diversity of the games available was formidable. Turn based games, combat flight simulators, adventure games... Sadly, this is becoming less and less true.
Hopefully, some developpers/publishers aren't ignoring the PC platform yet, releasing their games on multiple plaforms including PC (example: Worms3D is available on PS2, NGC, XBOX, PC and Mac) but I wonder for how long...
In a word: No (Score:1)
One benefit of the PC is that it's easi
Re:In a word: No (Score:1)
"There is one company in Korea that has a legal license from 3DO to run a Meridian 59 game server. That license will expire when the current license year term ends.
Currently, there is no other legally running Meridian 59 game server."
I'm not sure one Korean server is evidence that PC Online gaming is alive and well. But good luck all the same.
Re:In a word: No (Score:1)
There are servers in the US and Germany currently. My company, Near Death Studios, Inc. owns worldwide rights (purchased from 3DO) and runs the U.S. version of the game. We also have a German licensee running a German version of the game.
We've been quite busy with the game lately, updating the old software rendering engine to a more modern hardware rendering engine with neat
Re:Besides you dont pay for playing in PC (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, did anyone notice how SOCOM 2 only owrks with an official Sony online adapter? They droppsd support for other network adapters. Why? SOCOM worked with other online adapters. Seems like Sony took a page from the non-Xbox-Microsoft's book for some reason.
And honestly in terms of MMORPG's, who bought Everquest OA? Almost everony I've talked to (PS2 fanboys and haters alike) said it blew, while a greater majority of them lik
Re:Besides you dont pay for playing in PC (Score:2)
That's unpossible!!!
Re:Besides you dont pay for playing in PC (Score:1)
I do like PSO, but I do NOT like the fact that I have to shell out a monthly fee on top of the XBox Live fee in order to play it. If more games start doing that I