PC vs. Console question for the technically inclined..

[Mr. Clark]

I would not personally REALLY want to see CM on a console. There would be no room, then, for the great user made mods, scenarios, etc...

Like I said, I'm happy splitting my gaming time between PC and Console.

Here's another snippet about Baldur's Gate 2 PS2, for what it's worth:

"The game is probably not going to be a port, but rather an original game tailored to the PS2. "Most likely it'll be original," add the Interplay representative, who added that Interplay is still in the decision-making process about many aspects of the game. No news was revealed as to whether Baldur's Gate II would be Internet-compatible, or even multiplayer. "

Not very revealing.

[The Commissar]

What gets me angry about these "Next-Gen Revolutionary Consoles" is that EVERYONE is jumping on the bandwagon. People like Peter Moleneux (who stated that he will no longer be making any titles for the PC - only consoles) and the developers of Halo (Halo may not grace my monitor if Evilsoft has a word about it and its XBox) are leaving. Many more are following.

This makes me want to buy a cheap old van, load it with C4, and drive it into Sony's/Microfosfts/Nintendo's office. Do these devs not realise that the PC will catch up and DESTROY these consoles in about 6 months after they are released? Come on people, the PC always catches the consoles and beats them out even if the console is more powerful in the beginning. Think PS2, N64, etc. They all had their "highs" in the beginning, then bye-bye. Computer technology advances by another Gigahert

If these fools keep leaving the PC ship, there will be no one left to pilot the damn thing into the future! I do NOT want to see consoles and their idiotic twitch-fests dominating! I want QUALITY RPG's, not those Japanese hacks. I want shooters with a BRAIN, NOT "Resident Evil XX" (Golden Eye also comes out for the PC, so I wont mention it). I want flight sims. I want realistic driving games. I want RTS games, not cinematic interactive films without a brain. I want to stop rambling!

Anyway, I think you get my point. Con-darned console whipper-snappers! *shakes fist menacingly*

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[Mr. Clark]

Technology evolves at the speed of light, so there is certainly no doubt PC's will bypass any console on the market.

For me, the advantage of consoles has always been that I can have great games and great graphics for the price of $400 or less. I don't have to upgrade every 6 months to play the latest game. Consoles make great gaming available to those who cannot afford the super PC, and it's inevitable upgrades.

For personal reasons, I like console gaming because I've always hated sitting at my PC with a joystick. It just feels... unnatural.

I also like the ability to shift between games w/o having to install them all on my HD.

For business reasons, I think companies like consoles because they don't run into the "Hey, your game sux because it doesn't run on my personal PC setup!"

Also, when developing games for PC's, companies cannot target high end systems, but must instead program for high, mid-level systems or less... because that's where the majority of people lie.

With a console, everyone has the same system. Thus programmers can put as much high end detail into a game as the console will allow, and everyone with the system can still play.

I think it's easy to cut down a console if you don't own one. I also think the majority of people would be surprised at the depth that can be crammed into some console games. Sure, there are stinkers... plenty of them. But they exist for PC's too.

Now, just to make Commissar shake his fist a little heavier...

Shooters w/ a brain - There are at least 4 I can think of coming out this year for PS2. Half Life (with new levels, graphics, weapons, etc), Red Faction, Aliens: Colonial Marines, and The World Is Not Enough.

Realistic Driving Games - There are more driving games than I could possibly count arriving this year for PS2.

The one that has me interested right now is a little game called GETAWAY. It's basically a very smart DRIVER:

"Set in London, England, Sony's Team Soho have authentically recreated a 40

kilometre patch of Englands Capital city, including amazing representations of the Palladium, Kensington Place and even the Tower of London. Ala Grand Theft Auto and Driver 2, you can cover this terrain either by foot or by vehicle. I use the term 'vehicle' loosely because of the fact that there are many different types available, from taxi's to Mercedes and clapped out golf GTI's.

To make the game as realsitic as possible, authentic traffic has been placed in the city landscape, although too faithfull a re-creation of this and it'll probably be quicker to get out and run!

Anyway, the game is mission-based requiring you to sneakily follow

kidnappers and even chase on foot where necessary, but how you get there is completely your choice, as it is an immense free roaming environment leading to all sorts of mayhem which will presumably result in crashing and jumping through market places or even through the Millenium Dome (whats the point, it's gonna be destroyed anyway) sideways on two wheels or something to that extent"

RTS - Check out RING OF RED: http://ps2.ign.com/previews/14417.html

WWII w/ mechs... odd but kinda cool.

[This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 01-15-2001).]

[The Commissar]

For the shooters:

3 out of 4 games you mentioned will/have appeared on the PC. Half Life was good in 98 - an addition of a few levels wont really save it.

Driving games: That game does seem pretty cool, but I could swear Ive read an article about in for the PC. Now to just dig it up...in one of my PCG back issues I should think.

And, how could I forget, wargames. Thank goodness your average "stoned-teenager" of a console player wont really enjoy the idea of having to *gasp* think and not just button-mash. The only solely-PC genre left? It might just happen...

As for the console cheapness...

Not entirely true. For example, I havent bought a new $3000 PC in a looong while. I've just bought lots of updates, spread out over a period of time. Im about to upgrade my PC yet again with a 1Ghz processor, new motherboard, 264 RAM, and a 20 Gig HD. All for about $450 - thus, not far from the price of a brand new console.

In return, I get quality games

[Mr. Clark]

Heh. I totally agree on Half Life. With games like TWINE and Red Faction coming out, there is no way I'm dumping $50 into Half Life.

With internet connectivity, a Hard Drive, and a rumored plug in processor upgrade (taking the PS2 from 128 bit to 256 bit) coming within the year, Consoles and PC's are blending more and more.

I think what we will soon see (and what was predicted in PC circles a couple of years ago) is a new system emerge that is a total blend of PC and Entertainment System. (although I don't think it will "spell the end of the PC" as some magazines were saying.)

The new systems (PS2, XBox, and GameCube) are getting closer (OK, GameBox... er Cube isn't, but the other 2...) but I think it will take another generation of machines before we will see a total merging.

[This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Jeff Heidman]

The thing is, it seems like everyone is constantly predicting the merging of machines of differing genres into one another, but it never seems to happen.

Your TV was going to be your web browser. And your PC was going to be used as a TV! Now your TV is going to be your PC screen? Or is your PC screen going to be your console screen?

I am not buying it. People use these things for different tasks. Why would I want to surf the net on ym TV? Didn't I buy a TV, to uhh, watch TV? Why would I want to watch TV on my PC? Why not jsut watch it on my TV, which does a better job of showing TV programs?

Similarly, why would I want to play console games on my PC, or vice versa? They are optimized for different things, and when you try to combine them into one, you inevitably end up doing several tasks, none of which you do very well. Then someone comes along who specializes in an individual task, and the combo box loses out, every time.

I remain skeptical.

Jeff Heidman

[Guy w/gun]

Ok my 2 cents:

Consoles are superior to PCs because there are few hardware conflicts. I Guarantee you will here no complaints about games crashing on consoles.

PCs are good because they allow developers to make games for niche gamers (just about every member of this board I consider a niche gamer). Hell, you can get away with a grass growing sim on a PC!

The only down side is that PC game sales are unbelievably bad. Red Alert sold 2 million copies (I think). Its the highest selling PC game off all time. 2 million copies is NOTHING to a console game. If a console game sells 2 million, its considered a flop.

Yeah PCs are going to be around for awhile, but just wait a few years and we'll be seeing consoles with 3 GHZ processors, 50 Gig HDs, 2 gig ram, bitchin video card, AND most importantly open licensing so just about anyone can make anything for consoles. X-Box is the great grand daddy of whats to come.

[The Commissar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

Yeah PCs are going to be around for awhile, but just wait a few years and we'll be seeing consoles with 3 GHZ processors, 50 Gig HDs, 2 gig ram, bitchin video card, AND most importantly open licensing so just about anyone can make anything for consoles. X-Box is the great grand daddy of whats to come.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rejoice, stoned teenage morons of the world!

Dont you see? Precisely because of these high expectations for the console is why if the PC is overpowered, as you say it will, there will BE no niche games. Because guess what - as a publisher on a console, would you make another

"sUpA kOol dOoDz fIgHtIn cHaLinGe" that will sell 6 trillion copies to every half-witted simpleton who owns a console, or a wargame which sells several hundred thousand, AT BEST. As you've said, consoles are used to high sales. Wargames would never flourish on a console. Indie companies like BTS wouldnt flourish on a console, because they need things like the net to spread the word.

You better pray consoles stay tuned for the twitch crowd, because if PC gaming producers lose interest, bye-bye every interesting genre that wouldnt sell 2 copies to your typical console player.

Note - I am not insulting EVERY console player, just the majority.

Woops, quite a rant there, isn't it?

[This message has been edited by The Commissar (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Vanir]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr. Clark:

Basically saying he knows nothing and has been wasting your time for the past four pages.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought he seemed quite knowledgable, but to each his own.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Carmack is a chump.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hee hee. Well, you may be right. I only know the guy by reputation

I do know for a fact, however, that the PS2 version of Unreal Tournament runs at a slower framerate than it does on my P3 500 PC. Maybe just bad programming? They also had to simplify some of the levels so they would fit into the PS2s 32 megs of RAM (UT wont run on a PC with less than 64).

You are right that it's not worth arguing about. The only important thing is if the game is fun to play. It's just interesting when you see someone claim the PS2 is 5 times as powerful as a graphics workstation, then someone else claims the X-Box will be more powerful than PS2, even though X-Box is really just a Pentium 3 PC with a nice graphics card. Obviously, someone is way, way wrong. Time will tell.

------------------

You've never heard music until you've heard the bleating of a gut-shot cesspooler. -Mark IV

[This message has been edited by Vanir (edited 01-15-2001).]

[John Hough]

I've said it before, but it bears repeating: PC vs. Console isn't a matter of one being better than the other, but rather a matter of different Gaming Experience.

It's gamepad and sitting 6-12 feet away from a low-res TV vs. keyboard/mouse and sitting 12-18 inches from a hi-res monitor. Regardless of the other technical specs, the console will ALWAYS be a better platform for platformers, fighting games, and other 3rd person action games, and the PC will ALWAYS be a better platform for 1st person shooters and strategy games. Just because of how the control and display devices contribute to the overall Gaming Experience.

So talking about which is better is really kinda meaningless. The real question is which platform suits your needs as a gamer better, or whether you need both.

-John

------------------

sometimes i'd like to kick your f-ing head

but i guess you're just a human too

-EMBRACE, "SAID GUN"

[Mr. Clark]

Agreed Vanir!

Commissar, I think you are mistaken in your thoughts that only stoned teenagers play consoles. I honestly think that if you give the PS2 a year, and then look at the assortment of games, you would be surprised.

Also, you have to give some slack to the people who can't afford the gaming PC. I know you can upgrade a PC for cheaper than buying a new one, but just look at the playstation ONE... It has been around for 5 years. Only now has it been replaced with the Playstation 2. For 5 years, Playstation owners have been able to play a TON of different games, after only initially spending the money to buy the system when it was released. There is no way that a five year old PC would be able to play as many games as the original Playstation can, without upgrading once.

Overall, don't get yourself too worked up, I'm positive that PC and PC games are around for a loooong time to come. We'll all have our Combat Mission 10 - Beyond Depends Undergarments!

One of the great things about PC games is the community that can form around them, such as we have here. You don't ever (in my experience) see that w/ a Console game.

Until you are able to d/load upgrades, new scenarios/skins/etc, and multiplay on Consoles, you won't see that happening. That time IS coming soon however.

In the end, as always, it will be the support that each individual genre, and individual game receives that will decide what stays and what goes.

CM is is very successful, because it's very good. That's why I play.

[Guy w/gun]

Well all I got to say is this...

You wanna know what f#@$ed up gaming?

Playstation.

You see before PS, video games were for a select few. You had Mario, Luigi, Sonic, and a host of other cartoony characters that filled video games. Even games that were supposedly serious came off as "cartoony" (narc, code name-viper, basically any action game) of the limitations of the consoles.

Then comes PS. If you have read any console game magazines, PS is dubbed the "console that made video gaming cool"

And thats right. It made it pop and trendy. And thats when it all went to ****. No longer do you have the Hardcore gamer playing platform games, you have poser stoned teenager assholes playing Tony Hawk pro-skater, Gran Turismo, and twisted metal.

Games as a whole have taken a ****. And I feel sorry for those really hardcore wargamers. Wargames are a dying breed. If Nintendo can barely compete in this screwed up gen-x video game market with Mario and Donkey Kong games (actaully Nintendo is doing fine thanks to a little trump card called "Pokemon") I have no Idea how wargames would survive a PC-console intermeshing.

[Vanir]

There are 5 things (6 with some consoles) that fundamentally separate consoles and PCs.

1. Interface. The controllers. Consoles rule at racing and fighting games because they have the best controllers for it. PCs rule at strategy games. Starcraft or CM with a joypad? I don't think so. Yes you can buy pads for the PC and mice and keyboards for the PS2, but most people don't, and, as Mr. Clark said, it just doesn't feel right.

2. Storage. The presence or absence of a hard drive alters they way a game is developed and played. This does not apply to the X-Box which has a HD.

3. MEMORY. The biggie. And the one reason consoles will never really catch up to PCs any time soon. The PS2 has 4 megs of video memory and 32 megs of regular RAM. The video memory is very fast embedded DRAM, but the 32 is just regular RDRAM. There is only so much memory you can put into a system and still sell it for 300 bucks. And there is only so much data you can fit into 32 megs, no matter how fast the processor. My computer has 256 megs of RAM and 32 megs of video RAM.

4. The screen. Standard TVs are limited to 640 x 480 resolution IIRC. I play CM at exactly twice that resolution. This will be less of a factor when HDTV becomes common in 10 years or so.

5. Bugs. Fewer with consoles because of their standardized hardware.

6. Price. You get what you pay for.

Me? I get whatever console has the best fighting and racing games, and use my PC for eveything else. The best of both worlds.

------------------

You've never heard music until you've heard the bleating of a gut-shot cesspooler. -Mark IV

[Mr. Clark]

Vanir, I completely agree, except I use my Console for any action type game, and my PC for any SIM or Wargame.

Guy w/ Gun - So you would rather that only rich little punk elitist snobs played video games? I hate to break it to you, but just as many "losers" play PC games as Console games. Don't believe me? Check out the Quake 3 forums. It's not Consoles that started the whole ClAn mentality, full of Co0l DeWdZ.

[This message has been edited by Mr. Clark (edited 01-16-2001).]

[Chupacabra]

Heh, I don't usually get into this argument, but for some reason I sorta feel like it now...

As plenty of other folks have said, the difference isn't quality, it's gaming experience. I've never owned a console, but I've played console games of course. I can remember just as many console games that I've rated "damn fun" as PC games. The really great games I've played have all been PC, but that's my style. If I liked FPS games better than I do, Goldeneye would be up there. If I liked driving games better than I did, GTS2 and Driver (the Playstation, not the PC port) would be up there.

PCs as a gaming platform aren't going away. Why? Because PCs are, first and foremost, a productivity platform. No matter what console developers do, people are still going to own PCs to check their email, order from Amazon, write their papers, do their taxes, compile their databases, and all that other stuff. A significant portion of these people aren't going to want to own more than one computing devices (like me), and so won't buy consoles, and will continue buying games for the PC.

Peter Molyneux can say he's not going to develop for the PC anymore, and that may work for him, but I think the majority of game developers, ESPECIALLY if the Xbox takes off, will find it economical to develop for the PC as well.

------------------

Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super