Game Wars 2 - Battle for the Living Room

securitas writes "The New York Times' John Markoff writes about the fight to own the living room in the next-generation game console wars, with a digital divergence predicted instead of the much-hyped convergence. With games historically being a driving force in consumer PC growth, Intel is pushing PC-based systems as the dominant platform while the videogames industry is looking to the next generation of consoles as media hubs. Sony, Nintendo and IBM are firmly in the console camp. Microsoft has one foot in each of the PC and console camps, cooperating with Intel on the PC front while looking to IBM for the next Xbox. Meanwhile, Apple is taking its own tack, buoyed by the phenomenally successful iPod. Steve Jobs has been highly critical of iPod clones with video and gaming features, and some are looking to Apple for the next home entertainment revolution. Markoff also talks to WildTangent's founder Alex St. John, who predicts the PC makers and Intel have a losing strategy."

Game over.

[monstroyer]

The next level of entertainment has always been content. "The medium is the message." If what you deliver on the new medium is content meant for an older one, your device won't survive.

Convenience only goes so far. Specific content that exploits the medium is what drives an entertainment device into mass consciousness.

Film technology spawned the art of film, TV spawned the art of television, consoles and computers spawned the art of video games.

What can any of these new devices offer us in terms of cultural identity? Not much [pointlesswasteoftime.com].

Re:Game over.

[Animats]

The next level of entertainment has always been content.

Then how come all the "content" Internet startups tanked? The survivors are useful service and infrastructure companies.

Remember "contentville.com"? The domain is for sale.

Re:Game over.

[AntiOrganic]

Internet startups

Seems you've answered your own question already.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Game over.

[DerekLyons]

The next level of entertainment has always been content.

Then how come all the "content" Internet startups tanked? The survivors are useful service and infrastructure companies.

Because none of the "content" 'net startups were entertainment driven.

Re:Article is biased

[Free_Meson]

You failed to grasp the argument in the article. His argument is not that people will stop playing games, but that people will stop shelling out huge amounts of money to play new games. The fact that someone was entertaining themselves by playing burgertime supports his point that the entertainment people gain by playing games is not directly related to the technology being used to display the game. He is making the argument that the video game (or, rather, console game) industry will collapse because subsequent console generations will offer only slight, barely perceptible improvements in graphics rather than breakthroughs allowing radically different game types.

He certainly did not say that people will stop playing games -- he's saying people will stop buying new consoles because the coming generation of consoles has so little to offer over the current generation. Sure, a few mindless boobs will continue to shell out $500/year to play the latest, greatest console games, but that number will shrink rapidly as the core market that has sustained the industry for 20 years ages and the budget-limited portion of the market catches in. As a result, their margins will thin and as a result their research budget will thin, leading to an even smaller advance for the next generation console, creating a downward spiral of ROI.

If you don't believe that this is at the very least a worry of the 3 current contestants in the battle for the living room, then explain why all three outsourced both their core processor and their graphics processor to the same two companies (IBM and ATI). Once IBM and ATI got the first console contracts, they could offer better deals to the remaining two. If either of the remaining two thought there was a lot of growth left, they would have invested heavily in R&D to come out ahead with a superior product to win market share. They both went with the cheaper alternative, though, which would lead a logical person to the conclusion that the console manufacturers, or at least the second two, already see their industry as one of diminishing returns rather than growth.

more horsepower != only graphical improvements

[*weasel]

Assuming that horsepower simply makes prettier 'graphics' is the shortcoming of this logic.

More horsepower is required to expand gaming. Adding horsepower for the next few upgrade generations will allow developers to increase the gamespace.

Consider interactivity: making the environment something you can break, manipulate, or build. How many items in the average 3d game scene are interactive? maybe 1%? walls aren't, windows aren't, 90% of doors aren't. You're lucky if one of the chairs is.

Right now machines aren't capable of tracking many interactive objects and maintaining the graphics that everyone seems to think are 'good enough'. Half-life2 is going to try, but thumb through the specs they've passed out to would-be licensees and mod makers: there are hard (and relatively low) limits on numbers of interactive objects. Slower systems severely limit the number of interactive objects one can use before the engine bogs down.

This is not to slam Valve, they are at the cutting edge of interactive environments, but rather to show how the cutting edge is still pretty limited.

Then there's AI.
Right now AI are most often straight scripts with /maybe/ an attempt at some fuzzy logic. With more horsepower you can maintain the visual status quo but move forward with opponents that can 'think' without having to 'know' the entire gamestate just to path toward the player.

The fact that (nearly) everyone is still using a hacked A* algorithm to get a computer opponent where he needs to be is telling enough by itself. Algorithms more complicated than A* need more processor time. Heck, more processor time for pathing can yield improvements even without changing the algorithms. If you ever played Baldur's Gate, you'll remember that people complaining about pathing could edit their config files to 'up' the number of nodes used to calculate paths. The faster your machine, the more nodes you could add, the better the path-finding.

Even today this problem persists. Much moreso since the problem is now 3 dimensional, rather than 2 dimensional. This problem is at its worst in games with large numbers of units and dynamic maps (RTS games with their placeable buildings). To go back to a Bioware example - their Neverwinter engine doesn't even have a true Z-axis as far as its pathing is concerned. Their engine cannot model a footbridge that a model can walk across and under. They made a good number of concessions to make their game as interactive as possible, and run well.

Then there's lighting.
With as many textures as we have precalculated (lightmaps, bumpmaps, reflection maps) things like truly dynamic lighting are still out of reach. Games like Doom3 and Splinter Cell attempt to mask this by making their scenes predominantly dark and showing off how great dynamic lighting looks with a handful of light sources.

Yet they both limit the number of light sources and also the number of models you'll see on-screen at one time, so the horsepower needed to calculate those few dynamic lights isn't bogging down the machine when the action happens.

Then there's my favorite issue: overdraw.
When's the last time you played a 3d game that modeled, say, an office building that ended up looking like any office building you've ever been inside? I'm betting never. If you had, it'd have been in a 'portal' style-engine, in which case that game will never render the open spaces of the office park /outside/ the building.

Level designers work within the constraints of the engines. Modern bsp-derived engines overdraw polygons so much that you never see an actual downtown street with buildings you can enter without a load time.

Why isn't there a broad thoroughfare in an Everquest town? Why are the hallways in a counterstrike map so twisty? Why haven't you seen a large office building where you could enter each room?

It isn't for gameplay - though designers do a great

Freedom

[Monkelectric]

Whatever system allows the *freedom* consumers want, will end up being what is adopted. I dont want to be told how/when/where I can watch my media, and thats all these companies want to do.

Re:Freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

I already gave up on video games (except for Xmame) and went back to boardgames and Dungeons & Dragons.
Pass the cheetos, will ya? And where's the Mountain Dew?

Re:Freedom

[mbourgon]

You haven't played Neverwinter, have you? Granted, it's not totally openended, but there are several thousand modules. And even bad modules can be saved if you have a (good) DM. Our group plays every week for 3-4 hours a week. And IMHO we do more "gaming" than a full day of Pen & Paper. There's so much time spent rolling dice instead of telling a story. We once spent (in Shadowrun, so you already get some idea) 6 hours on a firefight. When we were all done, it turned out to have taken 21 seconds

Re:Freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree taht freedom is a key, but value is also LARGE key. Cost is big on the minds of consumers in this industry, sometimes even at the expense of freedom.

Also, there are cases where freedom is a negative. In the PC world freedom gives developers the ability to push out games with mucho bugs/little playtesting for balance, then patch it later. Also cheating is much more prevalent on the PC.

On the other hand the less free Xbox has neither of these problems, because you have to be using an unmodded Xbox and title to play online and developers don't have a chance to patch a botched release. These are freedoms that have been removed on the Xbox, but are definite plusses in the minds of some.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Freedom

[westlake]

Personally, if the PC market split from the consumer content market, I would be very happy. This would allow me, a developer to buy the OS and hardware I want...

But your friends are shelling out serious money, billions of dollars, for content and technology, whether it be for their PC, console, or STB. Development of both hardware and software moves in their direction.

Re:Freedom

[HisMother]

> Personally, if the PC market split from the consumer content market, I would be very happy. This would allow me, a developer to buy the OS and hardware I want while my less technologically inclined friends can just buy a tv-box and worry about which games it will play.
A-bloody-men, brother! The whole idea of DRM leading to TCPA and a machine that won't let me tell it what to do being an end result of the whole misguided "digital convergence" mantra makes my blood boil. Wanna make copy-protected CDs?

Re:Freedom

[LostCluster]

That's a +5 on Slashdot... but a troll elsewhere. It's not about freedom, it's about content. If little Jimmy wants the Spongebob Squarepants game, and that's only on one platform, that's the one that mom and dad will feel required to buy...

Re:Freedom

[Slothy]

s/allows the *freedom* consumers want/plays GTA4 first/

You think the general public cares about freedom? How 1998 of you :)

The console that wins will be the console with the best games. People buy a console to play a game - you bought your NES to play Mario, Gameboy to play Tetris on the bus, PS2 to play GTA3, etc. The general public could give a crap about openness or freedom on their console.

Jon/Slothy
(Game Programmer)

Re:Freedom

[Sentry21]

People buy a console to play a game

Usually, yes. But a lot people buy consoles because they want to play games in general, not to play a particular game. I get a lot of people coming in and asking which console is the best, which has better graphics, and this and that, and what I often struggle to explain to them is that what they need to do is go to the walls, browse through the games, read through the magazines, and make lists of games they want to play. Once they have them, figure out which system has

Apple's already been there

[detritus`]

Apple's entered this arena once, with the Pippin [psxfanatics.com] Dont expect them to return anytime soon after the large amount of $$$s lost on that debacle.

Re:Apple's already been there

[geekoid]

So?
That was a long time ago, and there was almost no momentum or reason for people to want one.

Now that TiVo has should the masses what can be, and made TV more then it was, people are getting interested in a central home media center.

If the largest technical companies in the world are looking at it, Apple would be foolhardy not to reconsider it.

Re:Apple's already been there

[MoneyT]

Apple will only get into it if there is something new and better they can offer. That's why they got into the MP3 market when there was already a decent market, because there wasn't a small (as in deck of cards small) fast and simple HDD based MP3 player out there.

But what really is there to add to the console market? Expandability? Tried and failed (see N64) people don't like having to pay to keep their consoles current. Hard drives and mice? PS2 and Xbox. Portability? Gameboy owns all. The only thing app

Re:Apple's already been there

[drinkypoo]

There are already three players in the market, and one of them must necessarily drop out or be almost dead before there will be room for another player to come in. As neither Sony, Nintendo nor M$ looks likely to stop making console game systems in the near future, Apple really would have no chance to make it.

Re:Apple's already been there

[squaretorus]

Now that TiVo has should the masses what can be
Did you post that with some speech recog? Or are you a bizzarro speller?

Re:Apple's already been there

[Valar]

Yeah, there's totally no market for consoles that are pcs at heart [xbox.com].

Re:Apple's already been there

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool! So we must now officially call the X-Box and PS-2 a Pippin clone. Apple's never first, but boy, any product that comes after they copy someone else is a clone of the Apple product.

Like anything with a video screen is an iPod clone. GMAMFB.

Re:Apple's already been there

[andy55]

...but that was under the previous leadership...

Multimedia Center Already Here

[YanceyAI]

"This kind of thing drives me crazy,'' said Alex St. John, the founder of a game software publisher, WildTangent Inc. He challenged Intel at a recent industry forum on the digital home, arguing that personal computer makers are about to lose out to the video game industry, which is waiting on a new generation of game consoles that also aspire to be home digital media hubs.

People keep claiming the next big console revolution will be a PC killer, but they keep being wrong. I have an X Box and it's great for sports games with your buddies, or for playing when I can't get my husband off the comp, but games like Battlefield, UT 2004, CS and upcoming titles like Doom3 and HL2 require a keyboard, mouse, a desk to prop it all on, and mad processing. Also, I plan to keep investing in monitors over buying an HDTV. I just don't care about the TV in my household. The computer is my entertainment of choice.

The PC already is a multimedia center...

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[BlueCodeWarrior]

Don't forget, it's not just the keyboard and mouse.

Half of the fun is playing on the net with your friends. While that is (slowly) coming to consoles, it still isn't quite like on PCs. Consoles need to catch up there. It's just too hard sometimes to play a four player game on a small TV. The net is too essential to multiplayer to be ignored.

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[bigman2003]

Playing on the net with friends might be half the fun...

But having your friends sitting in your living room while playing, is like the other three quarters.

I'm a convert- click my link to find out why.

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[Rallion]

Oh, come now. There's nothing like being able to smack your friends around and jump up and do a victory dance when you kick their asses.

Sure, it's stupid, but isn't everything that's truly fun?

Re:Local Area Network

[Rallion]

LANs ARE the greatest gaming experiences, but I smack my friends and do my victory dance every day! No need to get more than 2-4 people together.

Gotta agree on the controllers...There just isn't anything I've ever found that has good analog sticks. That's important, dammit. My old MS Sidewinder pad would be great if it wasn't for the terrible directional pad, which is analog, but without the stick. And...I don't like the PS2 controller either. Bleh.

maybe

[geekoid]

But what about when it is easier and cost effective to through away a computer instead of upgrade?
How will that be different then a console?

Right now you can get a console, with HD, keyboard and mouse. How will that be different then a PC?

Most people don't like to fiddle with there machine that runs the applications they want, no more then anybody wants to fiddle with the tuner on there TV...or have to change the chanell with pliers ;)

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

People don't just use their computers to entertain themselves. Are we going to have the entire family stop watching television while Junior does his homework or Mom checks email? People want to play on their televisions and work on their computers--any attempt to build a single device for both of those purposes is somewhat silly.

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[Queer Boy]

games like Battlefield, UT 2004, CS and upcoming titles like Doom3 and HL2 require a keyboard, mouse, a desk to prop it all on

That's such a bunch of crap that any game does/should require a keyboard. It's poor game development to require a device that is not, has not, nor will ever be designed around anything other than typing.

Playstation is Sony's most successful product today, surpassing the walkman. PC gaming is a sad state, there's been nothing original since Wolfenstein 3D, Sim City, and Little C

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[PainKilleR-CE]

That's such a bunch of crap that any game does/should require a keyboard. It's poor game development to require a device that is not, has not, nor will ever be designed around anything other than typing.

The keyboard is a 100+ button device that works quite well for games, and has for decades. The mouse/trackball is a very variable thing, but is one most people find more precise simply because they have used it more and for tasks that have to be precise.

Playstation is Sony's most successful product today

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares if it's a girl gamer? Don't you know there are ugly girls out there? Girl is not necessarily good!

Re:Multimedia Center Already Here

[Razor Blades are Not]

I think that is exactly his point.
The technologically challenged masses are the people who are buying things. They are the consumers. They are the market.
They are the majority.

D'uh.

WildTangent == spyware.

[Anonymous Coward]

I just recently played this FoxSports online game and had to install some of their crap just to play this stupid game. I then was informed by someone that WT's plug-in is spyware ridden. Well after running AdAware, I found 400 pieces of infestation from these fuckers. Luckily AdAware fixed this shit.

Avoid anything from WildTangent.

Re:WildTangent == spyware.

[Evergreen98]

Hose it. My first submission, and I ruin it. :( Unmangled text from _privacy.txt:

THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT A CONTRACT, LICENSE AGREEMENT OR LEGALLY BINDING
IN ANY WAY.

Hello, this is an open letter from Alex St. John, CEO of WildTangent
Inc. This file is for the benefit of folks out there who may have
missed the WildTangent privacy statement when they installed our
product, and later discovered that our Web Driver updates itself
automatically. If you are worried about what kind of information our
product is collect

G5

[Lane.exe]

The G5 should mark the entry of Apple into the computer game market. I absolutely love my G5 for gaming quality -- dual processors and rock-solid stability are very nice things when playing games.

Plus, most new games are coming out for the Mac platform when they come out for PC (like UT 2004). Now, people shiver in righteous ph34r when I lug my G5 to LAN parties.

Re:G5

[Quarters]

They're not shivering. They're just trying valiantly to stiffle their laughter.

Re:G5

[Maserati]

Really ? They'll change their tune after playing against a system where the video card is the bottleneck - and that a 9600. G5s run Quake3 engine games very well, it's optimised for the dual processors and very fast system bus only helps.

Nobody agrees about any of the benchmarks, so Google 'em yourself.

And the guy with the Mac gets to laugh at everyone with driver problems :-)

Quake 3 is out of date

[GunFodder]

I'm not going to comment on how G5s run games since I haven't seen them in action. But I can comment that Quake3 is an ancient game engine. Running Quake3 will not be a good indicator of gaming ability by the end of this year.

The deciding factor...

[HappyCitizen]

Whatever platform comes out top, will be the first one to support Duke Nukem Forever

No no no...

[Cyno01]

Duke Nukem Forever will be avalible exclusivly on the Phantom [phantom.net] console.

Consoles will never win because of 2 things

[Travoltus]

1) Fanatical DRM that predates even TCPA.
They have always had copy restrictions for games (like the PC) but now they come with restrictions against fair use of the media that they play, too. They have far more powerful restrictions than PCs do.

2) Lack of modding abilities.
Console games can't be modded. There'd never be any Counterstrike or Capture the Flag if the consoles had exclusive domain over games. Even now, users cannot mod console games that have identical releases on PCs which are modded (see: Morrowind, NWN).

If DRM conquers the PC market, however, consoles may rise up and totally own all their base in gaming and media.

Console games outsell PC games 5 to 1. Idiot.

[Anonymous Coward]

Console games outsell PC games 10 to 1, you idiot. It's about a $10 billion industry worldwide, and PC games are maybe $2 billion worldwide.

The fanatical DRM is the reason that all the 3rd party developers are in this business. Without the DRM, the piracy that plagues the PC industry (and keeps it down to this ratio, BTW) would drive everyone out to other more profitable software ventures.

Re:Console games outsell PC games 5 to 1. Idiot.

[brucmack]

OK, your numbers are horribly wrong, but console games do not outsell PC games 10 to 1 at least. Your 5 to 1 estimate was probably pretty close.

In 2003, the total retail revenue for console games, hardware, and accessories in the US was $10 billion.

In 2003, the total retail revenue for PC games in the US was $1.2 billion.

Notice that the figure for consoles includes hardware and accessories. So considering that the hardware probably had an average unit price of about $250, and a given console might have m

Computers will never win because of 2 things

[gtshafted]

(for the record I prefer the PC)
1. Ease of use
a) With consoles all you do is plug it into the tv and power outlet, pop in the game, and you get entertainment.
b) With the PC, you have to plug a bunch of peripherals, login to the OS, install drivers, install the game, install patches, and if this was a perfect world (assuming you also bought the perfect pricey hardware) - you get entertainment. More so than not- you get frustration, even for people intimately familiar with the machine.
oh yeah joe sixpack doesn't mod games let alone know how to installed fan made mods

2. Price
a)A decent PC that plays the latest PC games decently will run around $1000 - $1800 (depending on what is considered decent) (a PC used for just word processing will run about $200).
b)A decent console that plays the latest decent console games will run from $99 - $179.

One more thing while some PCs can now plug into TVs, they still don't consistently look good on Tv's like consoles do....
Based on what the market is saying, consoles are already beating the crap out of the pc for games for the reasons I mentioned above...

Re:Computers will never win because of 2 things

[bigman2003]

With a PC, you'll be upgrading all the time too. I finally got off that track...read my link for a much longer explanation.

Re:Computers will never win because of 2 things

[gtshafted]

Well if we're not including pirating (of which beyond burning a cdr - if even - avg joe doesn't know how to do) - the majority of free games suck compared to the console games joe sixpack is used to (Madden, GTA, Gran Turismo, etc... - no, they're not as into balder's gate, or civilization).

You're also still overlooking the high initial monetary investment - not to mention the high cost of time with pirating for an individual (the time it takes to make contacts to get access to nice servers - not includin

Re:Consoles will never win because of 2 things

[Sentry21]

Console games can't be modded.

This is fascinatingly wrong. The ability is there, but game developers don't take advantage of it. Morrowind could be modded, if the developers had enabled Live support and provided a way to upload your mod to your XBox. Sony itself has stated that the HDD will open the PS2 up to the mod community - a vague and cryptic message, but I think it's interesting to think about the potential. Perhaps they plan on releasing editing tools and APIs for their games (SOCOM 2 for example)

Re:Consoles will never win because of 2 things

[Travoltus]

I didn't say lack of modding abilities killed the XBox or PS2. I said PC users will never convert to them without it.

The existence of tons of mods for PC games is proof that modding is extremely popular and is a highly desired part of gaming.

The thing that makes DRM a major issue is that PC users do a lot of fair use stuff (as well as piracy) with their videos and music. This is utterly impossible on a console. This is important because console makers are trying to own the living room via convergence, and

The (lack of) need for fair use backups

[AvantLegion]

>> Console DRM is a non-issue. Maybe 0.5 of 1 percent of console consumers care about making a fair-use backup.

Most game publishers will swiftly replaced a damaged game CD/DVD, so long as you mail the disc to them, and pay $5-10.

My copy of SSX Tricky was replaced that way. Disc got scratched, sent in the game, and they gave me a new copy: case, instructions, and all.

Making backup copies of games and such was definitely important back in the old days, when we kept games on rather fragile floppy

Re:The (lack of) need for fair use backups

[deinol]

My copy of SSX Tricky was replaced that way. Disc got scratched, sent in the game, and they gave me a new copy: case, instructions, and all.

Making backup copies of games and such was definitely important back in the old days, when we kept games on rather fragile floppy discs, and the companies that sold the games to us weren't exactly big-money companies with such nice replacement policies. Today, that's not the case.

I'm sorry, but maybe I like to pull out old games much more often than you do. How many

Re:The (lack of) need for fair use backups

[drinkypoo]

A blank CD costs about $0.05 in quantity or $0.07 on sale, or $0.10 not on sale, or $0.25 for a 'reputable' brand.

A blank DVD costs about $1 in quantity, $1.50 on sale, or $2.00 not on sale, with a jewelcase, for a reputable brand.

How does this cost more than $5-10 plus postage? You have to send in the disc, so it's going to cost you at least another buck for media mail, and you're going to need a mailer so the disc doesn't become shrapnel in the mail.

Your assertions are incorrect.

Apple tried this before with disastrous results

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple? No.

Apple tried a set-top / gaming console box in 1996 with the "Pippin", which was going to be manufactured by Bandai and run a version of the Mac OS related to System 7. It was going to run a PowerPC 603 (not 603e) because they were cheap, and be a WebTV-style device and, mostly, a gaming console, and of course since everyone knew gaming and computing and multimedia was all converging, it would be the center of as-yet-uninvented miraculous new killer apps. (Sound familiar?)

Mostly it was a disaster because Apple didn't court any of the right game developers except for Bungie (this was before Halo), and the PlayStation with its hardware 3D graphics support just blew it away when it was introduced in Japan at about the same time as the Pippin announcement to the developers. The Pippin was stillborn.

I don't know who are the "some" people mentioned in the headline who look at Apple to compete with the behemoth forces of the console manufacturers, but if some ill-advised group at Apple is looking to compete in this space, I would expect the same hamhanded approach that Apple has always had with gaming.

Re:Apple tried this before with disastrous results

[Queer Boy]

Apple never did anything but create a reference platform. At the time everyone was trying to make a set-top box for everything. Internet, multimedia, you name it. It was the era of CDi, 3DO Interactive multiplayer, Commodore's CDTV, WebTV...

Apple played the whole thing very smart, they just altered a version of Mac OS 7.5.5 to work on a read-only disc. The basic problem was for the things they were pushing, there needed to be some sort of storage, and they tried too hard to tie it with the development

As for me

[lingqi]

I am holding out for the Phantom...

I just KNOW it will have Duke Nuk'em Forever bundled.

(it's a joke. laugh)

WildTangent?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean this [pestpatrol.com] WildTangent? I have no interest in the views of this builder of adware.

i like my pc based games

[xot]

cant imagine playing warcraft or quake on a console system.Simply no fun.
The BIG gamers are still on pc's. ;-)

Re:i like my pc based games

[thatguywhoiam]

cant imagine playing warcraft or quake on a console system.Simply no fun.

I agree... but that's about it, isn't it?

The consoles have 2 achilles' heels in regards to superior controller hardware: RTS and FPS. Every other kind of game is superior with something like a console controller: racing, action, platform, flying, adventure... all of 'em.

So while I agree with you in your particular point regarding RTS games, how long do you think it'll take the console makers to come up with something that works

PCs and Consoles are two different markets

[newdamage]

While yes it can be said that the PC and Console game markets are directly competing, the types of games they excel at are worlds apart. Ever try playing Vice City on a PC, it's a completely different experience from the PS2 due to the excellent aiming but horrible driving. Difficult sniping missions become simple with a mouse, and easy driving missions become difficult with a keyboard.

PCs will most likely continue to dominate the online arena, as well as the cutting edge in terms of graphics. Consoles still excel at what they've always excelled in: sports games, multiplayer on a local scale, and ease of use.

It's much easier for parents to buy their children a $100 Gamecube where every game is guareenteed to work without compatibility hassles, where as enthusiasts have no problem shelling out $400 on a video card and dealing with driver issues for when Half-Life 2 comes outs.

There just completely different worlds, quite frankly, I don't want a console that's a media center, I want a console that just plays games.

Re:PCs and Consoles are two different markets

[Dragoon412]

PCs will most likely continue to dominate the online arena, as well as the cutting edge in terms of graphics. Consoles still excel at what they've always excelled in: sports games, multiplayer on a local scale, and ease of use.

One thing people seem to overlook a lot is simply that the PC is losing its advantages.

For instance, HDTVs, particularly plasma, provide for a better picture than many monitors, and are capable of very high resolution.

Additionally, while the PC market currently claims dominance in

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:PC as TV

[PhoenixFlare]

I run Win2k, with DX9, and use the multimedia functions of my card all the time, but have never seen this black screen of death? Must be an XP thing

Heck, i've used XP for 2 years now, and I can still count the number of blue/black screens i've seen on one hand.

To the original poster: Frankly, you shouldn't be blaming anyone but yourself if you're not competent enough to get Windows running fairly stable and virus-free. It's not all that hard if you can get past the irrational bias.

Gotta plug Apple somehow..

[Mulletproof]

"Meanwhile, Apple is taking its own tack, buoyed by the phenomenally successful iPod."

Wait, this is a story on the Battle for the Living Room, right? Apple isn't "taking their own tack" in this. They're not even involved! their sole product besides the PC is a piece of portable audio hardware, otherwise known as a walkman, generically speaking. How you can make the jump from walkman to BATTLE FOR THE LIVING ROOM is not only ridiculous, it's absolutely absurd. Ok, people are looking to supposively looking

Re:Gotta plug Apple somehow..

[Animats]

Good point. Mod parent up.

Indeed, Apple doesn't make any products for the "living room".

A stationary iPod, or an iPod base station that acts as a home stereo, might fill that niche. But that idea really works only if you have a home network, since the thing needs a network connection to the outside world, and nobody is going to buy a DSL line for their stereo.

Personal Video Player - Who Needs 'Em?

[joeware]

For the amount of money that they cost, does anyone really need a personal video player? How often would the darn thing get used?

I love music, and listen to it all the time, from home, in the car, and at work. I like movies too, but I find rewatching a good much far less enjoyable than listening to a good album. For that, iPods rule.

Overall, I find less time to watch movies than listen to music. I would hardly ever find myself stuck somewhere, wanting to watch a movie on a PVP. I don't go to Grandma's house anymore, and I am not a kid stuck in the back see on the way to the Grand Canyon.

The battle...

[Bl33d4merican]

I think the battle centers more on the fact that both consoles and PCs have aspired to be catch-alls. Consoles (many of them, anyway), play DVDs and now have multiplayer support. But computers do a lot more besides just gamming...and, with the flexibility PCs provide (not with any real sacrifice in graphics or gamming, IMHO,) they will eventually win out. If only we saw a better market for PC controllers more similar to the ones used in consol gaming.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Why the continued iPod myth?

[Michalson]

Steve Jobs has been highly critical of iPod clones with video and gaming features

Why has it become such a common conception that any harddrive based mp3 player is an iPod knockoff? Last time I checked Rio "invented" the mp3 player (Oct 1998, 32MB PMP300), and Creative "invented" the harddrive subcategory (Aug 2000, 6GB NOMAD Jukebox). It took over a year after Creative, and 3 years after MP3 players first appeared for Apple to enter the game with the original iPod (Oct 2001, 5GB iPod). By that time Creative was already releasing second generation harddrive players with twice capacity as Apple's best ipod at almost the same price.

So obviously iPod had nothing to do with creating the harddrive player. Maybe everyone is copying the iPod look? A general examination of the market doesn't seem to agree with this. iPod has a unique style of smooth curves and controls that blend into the unit. It's coloration and texture make it look almost ceramic from a distance. Compare that with just about every other player on the market: Rubberized edges and buttons, contrasting colors like sharp blues and reds stripping plastic silver. Where as the iPod look is like a bar of Ivory soap, the rest of the market is flooded with devices that look like tiny boom boxes. The only device that seems to come close to iPods smooth colors is the original Nomad Jukebox [nomadworld.com], the very product the iPod was copying (even then the Nomad retains more of the mainstream consumer electronics feel with its metallic silver highlights). Even the iPod look and feel is basically confined to the Apple court. The navigation system, an evolution of Sony's jogdial thumb navigation, is patented, and the placement of controls below and screen above is nothing new (the granddaddy of all MP3 players used that arrangement). Everything about the iPod screams different (a good reason for its success).

The logic that just because the iPod has market dominance now means that all products that meet the same need are clones is silly. If that kind of crazy logic where true then every desktop OS would be a "clone" of Microsoft Windows, even Mac OS X.

Re:Why the continued iPod myth?

[MoneyT]

While it's true that Creative had the first HDD based player, it wasn't going very far, I had a friend who had one, and the thing was like a tank, and no one wanted one, especialy when they heard it's price tag. But then Apple came along an redefined portable HDD based MP3 players, and the market took off, which is why Apple is given a lot of the credit

Incorrect.

[juuri]

Compaq created the hard drive based mp3 player and licensed the technology to Handango. You could buy a HD based player well over a year before Creative launched their product.

Re:Why the continued iPod myth?

[UnknowingFool]

Why has it become such a common conception that any harddrive based mp3 player is an iPod knockoff? . . So obviously iPod had nothing to do with creating the harddrive player.

Like many things with Apple, they didn't invent the technologies, and they weren't the first ones to sell it. But they are known for it. Apple made it a brand by its ease of use and combination of features. Remember Ford didn't invent the automobile, and many companies made cars before Ford, but why is he associated with it?

The lo

Incorrect, MPMan was first

[Powercntrl]

Last time I checked Rio "invented" the mp3 player (Oct 1998, 32MB PMP300)

Well, you should have checked more accurately... The Eiger Labs MPMan [fortunecity.com] was the first portable MP3 player.

I don't have a clue who made the first hard-drive based MP3 player because until Apple came out with the iPod, hard drive players were massive barely-portable beasties.

Re:Why the continued iPod myth?

[Sentry21]

By that time Creative was already releasing second generation harddrive players with twice capacity as Apple's best ipod at almost the same price.

And three times the size. And they looked stupid. And they used USB1.1. Let's face it, you may be a geek and not mind waiting hours for your music to download to a big, clunky, ugly-looking player, but for a lot of people (myself included), that just doesn't hack. The iPod is the size of a deck of cards, used firewire for almost instant transfer, and it just lo

John Markoff? Gaming? What?

[SphericalCrusher]

It's all about the games, not the consoles. So a console is faster and has better graphics than everything else. Big deal. Oh wow, it's a different color and pretty... big deal. Without the games, the consoles are just a box. No one wants a box. They want what's inside of it...

And why is JOHN MARKOFF writing an article on gaming? Go back to your flaming hackers stories.

Why do the consoles have to do EVERYTHING?

[MatthewB79]

I agree that some devices are better when they have more functionality. But with the console systems it's more like they're becoming a "Jack of all trades, master of none". Yeah, if you shell out the $40 to get the remote that "enables" DVD playback on the XBOX, you can watch movies on it. But why? My existing DVD player has much more functionality than the XBOX (not to mention more sets of outputs). It only cost $100. So the argument that we should buy a console because "it plays all the hottest games AND

Re:Why do the consoles have to do EVERYTHING?

[bigman2003]

Your comments might carry a little more weight, if they were accurate.

That '$40 remote' the Xbox uses to play DVD's is actually only $30. And yes, an Xbox arguably does have more functionality than your DVD player- because it DOES play games too.

On one hand, you want to bust on the Xbox for charging for the ability to play DVD's. Then you say that a device that plays games AND movies isn't a great idea. Well- then don't buy the DVD adapter! It's an option. It costs money because it gives people the c

Re:Why do the consoles have to do EVERYTHING?

[MatthewB79]

Well- then don't buy the DVD adapter! It's an option.

I understand that buying the DVD adapter is an option. But if I buy an XBOX, I already paid for a device that has the functionality built-in, meaning I (probably) paid more for the device simply because it has that built-in functionality. Show me a $90 XBOX without DVD playback option, then you can say it's a true option. It seems like I should have made my point more clear.

Re:Why do the consoles have to do EVERYTHING?

[bigman2003]

The Xbox has a drive that can read DVDs. But not a license. The DVD consortium charges for the license. So, when you buy the remote, (and the receiver) you are also buying the license.

So, if Microsoft threw in the DVD playback capability in every Xbox, they would be paying out to the DVD consortium for a lot of licenses that are never used.

relevation

[bersl2]

It's kind of scary, but I'm actually going to agree with this all-in-one scum:

Markoff also talks to WildTangent's founder Alex St. John, who predicts the PC makers and Intel have a losing strategy.

Most people don't want (or need) the flexibility of a true computer; they want a media suite, and office suite, and games.

The console people are always complaining about too much PC hardware. Well, everybody has different needs, so you can't suffice with one cookie cutter. Instead, have maybe four or five cookie cutters (standard, economy, deluxe, media, etc...), with a small amount of modularity (just like consoles...).

Software comes preloaded, and can be bought and is updated AOL-style (you sign off, it updates to a new patchlevel). Data is stored on some kind of USB memory drive or remotely. A consequence of these is if your machine breaks at the hardware level, you can trade it for a new one (maybe exaggerating there).

Of course not just anybody can develop for these machines: you'll need to license an SDK. Applications are written in some kind of Java/.NET-kind of environment, so software can be box brand-independent, and only first parties need (or maybe can...) to write an architecture-native VM. Architecture will most likely not be a marketing issue (they may all be different).

Oh, did I mention that the boxes are all locked down, laced with DRM, TCPA, DMCA, and any other good acronyms I missed. Software will automatically try to determine if you're trying to do something illegal/illicit (like scanning money, viewing kiddie pr0n, etc...). They might have a backdoor to make it easier for law enforcement to collect evidence.

And this has degenerated into a tinfoil bonanza.

A race to the finish?

[Anonymous Coward]

Frankly, there's 2 main contenders for the living room, namely the traditional console, and the PC.

Console Advantages:
Already based in the living room.
True Plug and Play (negligable installation + setup time, for both hardware and software).
Generally better hardware design.
Generally cheaper costs.

Console Disadvantages:
Usually uses propietry hardware/software.
Lack of standards and customizability (e.g. PS2 hardware would not work with GC hardware).
Generally more troublesome to develop for consoles.

PC Advantages:
Greater customizability.
Better storage options.
Generally more advanced hardware (at a cost).
Ease of development.
Better standards.
Greater compatability.
Technically feasible at present.

PC Disadvantages:
Troublesome and expensive to setup.
Non-negligable startup time.
Public perception.

(if I missed out any points, please add)
The key problem with PC is with it's setup and startup, else PCs would win the race hands down (but then, those are the key advantages of consoles to begin with).

Re:A race to the finish?

[n0wak]

Console Disadvantages: Lack of standards and customizability (e.g. PS2 hardware would not work with GC hardware).
PC Advantages: Better standards.
Err. Wrong. What if I want to play my Windows game on an Apple? On Linux? It only seems like there are greater standards because Wintel dominates completely. It's easy to have "standards" when you have only one player -- but then, everyone loses.

Generally more troublesome to develop for consoles.
Maybe getting the kits and licenses, yeah. But it's easier to

Re:A race to the finish?

[Sentry21]

PC Advantages:
Pirating games - Actual quote from a customer of mine at EB: 'Oh, I don't buy PC games, I have a friend who downloads them.' (Really fucker? So why in god's name should I tell you anything about it?)

Modding games (this may fall under your point of 'ease of development')

PC Disadvantages:
Platform Incompatibility ('Where's your Mac games section?' 'It's over there where it says "Blizzard"' - computers vs. consoles, not windows vs. consoles)

Driver hell - When customers say they have a problem w

PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[Vaystrem]

I'm sick of it - totally sick of wrestling with drivers and the OS and hardware and whatever just to get games working.

And it has ALWAYS been this way. I remember using debug to free up more EMS memory so Falcon 3.0 would run faster on my 386 sx 20 with 2 megs of RAM. I remember spending hours tweaking autoexec/config.sys to get the most conventional memory possible (i think 622 was about as high as I got)

So then enter Windows - yay its so much better - no its not - I have YET to run my legally purchased copy of Neverwinter Nights on PC without it crashing, I didn't return it out of support for a canadian software development company. And in the end I've nearly given up on gaming and I can't beleive that I'm alone. I see the hoops I have to jump through just to get a game to work on a PC - how many people really have the know how or the time to do this? Not many - will the PC die as a gaming platform - probably not but it will never go mainstream unless there are some serious changes that occur in usability. I long for the day I can put a disc in and load up a game without having to download a patch - without having to update my graphics card/soundcard/chipset drivers. Oh wait its called a Console.

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[Rallion]

YOu know, not everybody has those problems. In fact, discounting the problems with playing older games in newer versions of Windows, there have only been two games I couldn't get to run right away, and that was because my hardware's a bit out of date (GeForce4 MX, I will destroy you.). I'm talking about putting in the game, installing, and having it work fine right away. I think I remember a small hitch somewhere with Enter the Matrix...but I'm not even sure about that.

Get a good system and you won't have any problems. The only problems I've had are...well, the equivalents of trying to play GCN or SNES games on an N64, I suppose.

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[microTodd]

The key point of your post, of course, is the line "Get a good system".

How much does a "good system" cost? How much does a console cost?

Of course, until consoles get decent keyboard/mouse support the gameplay will always be different.

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[Rallion]

$550 total so far, including the monitor. SInce this is about console games vs. PC games, how much does it cost to be able to play all console games? If you bought the systems when they were first released, quite a bit more.

Granted, getting everything that cheap did involve using some older parts, but I did buy a pre-assembled computer here. It just lacked any kind of storage, since I had plenty of CD / hard drives lying around. Add the price of those in...these things are old, wouldn't cost much. The $550

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[microTodd]

$550? That's not a cutting edge system.

From PriceWatch:
Radeon 9800 Pro 256 - $300
GeForce FX 5900 256 - $300
CPU/MoBo combo, Athlon XP 3200 - $225
CPU/MoBo, P4 3.4 - $440

Plus sound card (Audigy2 is $60), case ($80), RAM (512 - $80).

So far, $800. Versus a $300 console (launch price).

PC games seem to be $10-$20 cheaper than console.

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[Rallion]

No, not true. Like I said, if I had an N64, I might have trouble playing some new games.

Re:PC's are such a pain in the ass for games

[master_p]

The problem is specifically what we call "the PC". PCs never had a fixed set of specifications, and that is why there are so many problems. Computers make excellent game machines, if they have a standard specification. In the previous century, I owned an Amiga, and I never had any problem, because the audio-visual electronics were standard.

Of course, I am not saying that all machines should be identical. I am saying that there should be specifications that all hardware must support. The last video standard

Nintendo?

[hethatishere]

One thing I don't understand is the level of media coverage that Sony/Microsoft get in comparison to Nintendo. Let's not forget that Nintendo is still very much in this race and last time I checked, Nintendo was far ahead (and gaining) compared to Microsoft in World-wide Marketshare. Yet the general media, still acts is if Nintendo is a non-player.

Piracy... on demand... or bust.

[Anonymous Coward]

The way that I see it this guy is preaching the same thing we've all known for a year or two now. While I agree that consoles are ideal for "dominating" the media center living room, the adoption of a media center to dominate is reliant on other things. For one thing, piracy. Large central media storage devices are great if you have large amounts of various types of media to store and display at the push of a button. You knock out the piracy, or try and build a legitimate product on piracy and the idea

I get the feeling

[Oriumpor]

this was only posted because of the author, not because of the content. Perhaps a bit like Katz HMMM? Now, if ever there was a need for being behind a restrictive content filter, it would be to add the two words "John Markoff" to the prostitution category.

[/tin foil hat theory]

Wow is this guy way off. How did he get a job?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are going all out GAMES ONLY on the next consoles. They will NOT be trying to be a all-in-one multimedia gamestation that this guy somehow thinks they need to do. Many companies have tried this and it just isn't practical, or profitable. Stuff breaks, repairs have to be made, and people begin to resent the fact that instead of buying 2-3 really top of the line devices seperatly that would probably be working for the next 5-10 years, that they instead went with a console that br

No sir, I don't like consoles.

[yoshi_mon]

I've had a few consoles over the years. Starting with the early 8 bit ones that most "gamers" are too young to remember. I've had fun with them but as time as wore on and my desire for games has grown more sophisticated I have moved firmly away from the console camp.

And so it gets me a little upset when some pundent starts go on about how PC games are doomed and consoles will eventually take over. Smacks of the "Apple is dying!" nonsence we have been hearing for how many years now?

PC games, while they can be as simple and mindless as a generic FPS, also can be mindnumbingly complicated as the latest Simulation or RTS type game. I personally would give up video gaming if I was forced to try and play a RTS on a console. The video mode for one would be totally unacceptable, trying to play with a standard console controler vs a keyboard and mouse would also be an excersise in futility, and finally while MP is finally coming to consoles it has no where near the polish or community that you have with the PC.

One of the main complaints I hear from the console camp about PC games is often how PC games don't work right. How sometimes it takes a patch and some tweaking to get PC games to work vs the console where it works right out of the box every time. And it's a valid complaint but a double edged sword as I see it. Traditionally console games are sold as is. If there is a bug or balance issue you pretty much have to live with it as there is no real update system in place. However with a PC games, patches are common. Not only to fix bugs but to often time add new features and fix balance issues.

Basicly I see consoles as a type of gaming system for those who don't really know enough about computers to understand how to make one a true gaming system, and there is nothing wrong with that. I've done enough troubleshooting on common issues to know that some people should just get a console and use it rather than trying to figure out how to setup their box such that it will run the dozen (or more) games that they wish to play. But for some of us, and we are not all that small, computer games are what we want and play.

We had convergence in the early 80's

[michaelmalak]

Sure, a lot of the Atari 800's and Commodore 64's were up in our bedrooms, but a lot of them were also in the living room. I even remember Atari's marketing verbiage that went along the lines of, "First there was Pong ... then we invented games that followed people home to their TVs." Why was there convergence in the early 80's?

1. The max resolution of computer technology matched the max resolution of television.
2. Because of the high cost of manufacturing electronics, families had fewer TVs/monitors.
3. Houses we

Re:PCfication

[MoneyT]

To start this isn't a troll people. Anyways, I actualy woudl prefer if things remained seperate. Console for games, PC for pron and stuff, phone for phone calls, VCR for VHS and DVD player for DVDs. Integration is only good up to a point, and I think a lot of places are reaching that point. ANd sometimes we're cramming things where they dont' belong (date books in cell phones, games in PDAs and PCs in consoles. Some cross is nice (PS2 can play DVDs, computer can keep track of dates) but in the end, I like A

Re:PCfication

[Zakabog]

I'll ignore the first two, since ya they're not good examples.

Your VCR/VCD/DVD player that played the respective media

The only one of those I had before a PC version was the VCR, I don't think I'd a VCR hooked up to my PC. But for VCD and DVD, I only had the PC version. A few reasons, I have a better sound system on my computer than on my TV (ok this is old examples, I've since bought a component stereo and a 56" HDTV), my 19" (viewable) monitor looks nicer than my 27" TV (old TV heh), more control