The Future of the Console

This was a topic I discussed with a gamer friend of mine. Basically we spoke about the rise of iOS and Browser style games, not to mention the Phoenix like resurrection of the PC market in the last couple of years, as well as the decline of notable console exclusives. This got us to wondering what will happen to the console in the next year, as each generation since 2000, it seems like consoles are becoming more and more like PCs, gaming stores are in decline as online markets take over, and honestly this generation has not been as ZOMG AMAZING like previous console generations.

My questions are simply this, what does a console offer that a PC cannot provide? Do you think iOS and PC gaming will eventually drive the console as we know it extinct? Do you think the PC is basically the evolutionary end of the console? Do you think part of this might be due to the rise of the West in gaming since PC has always been dominated by Western developers whereas consoles have are more dominated by the Japanese market?

If the cost of a PC decreased, then consoles might decline slightly. As it is, consoles have simpler multiplayer capacity whilst retaining a significantly lower cost than a PC.

I, for one, intend to leave the console market and get into PC gaming because I hate everything about the companies in control of console gaming and believe that they are destroying it.

Mobile games will likely remain a niche, no matter how pretty they get.

I'm gonna have to shift to PC because I can't afford to keep up with smurfing $600 consoles and $110 games. Pirate everything until I smurfing die.

Lately I've seen articles on gaming sites titled like 'where are the next gen consoles', '10 reasons why we need the next gen consoles' etcetera. I laugh at those, because this generation has brought little else than shinier graphics.

That's why I have high hopes for the next two years, as console-developers will need to focus more on gameplay than graphics (the latter already being sort of 'maxed out') until the next gen arrives. If this turns out the way I think it will, consoles will return to more of a niche state while all the graphics-fanatics switch to PC. And that might just be what I want: less triple-AAA crowd-pleasing-fireworks console games, and more depth and gameplay-focussed console titles. Maybe new IP's will become the standard again, rather than the exception.

All we really need is for Gaben to have Valve release a console (as he has hinted at doing) and hook Steam up to it and it is Game Freaking Over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete for President

Lately I've seen articles on gaming sites titled like 'where are the next gen consoles', '10 reasons why we need the next gen consoles' etcetera. I laugh at those, because this generation has brought little else than shinier graphics.

---

eh... True media hub potential, indie developer support and promotion from PSN and live arcade, online play becoming standard and a necessity, the massive push for creation and user generated content, and as much as I personally hate it, motion gaming? I feel like we've probably taken the biggest jump in the history of consoles this generation, other than the advent of 3D environments in the PS1/N64 era.

I don't think consoles are going anywhere. It's a matter of comfort and convenience. My consoles are where I'm comfortable, where I entertain, and where my family is. A desk is nowhere near as comfortable as a couch or lovesac (amazing, highly recommended, buns in comfort forever) sitting in front of a big screen TV. I feel like I'm hiding from the rest of the house in a computer room. Yeah, I know I could hook a tower up to a TV, but I like the division. Most things I do at a computer, but when it comes time to relax and game or watch movies, I want to move over to a giant sac of foam. To me it's like arguing that TV's are going to disappear because monitors have better resolution and you can stream most anything now.

I'm console 4 life. I just can't get into mobile or PC gaming. Consoles keep everything wrapped in a tight little package, while PCs require constant upgrading unless you spend a ton of money up front. I also prefer to play games on my HDTV, and while I can hook a PC up to that as well, it's just an extra step as I'd probably want to unhook it to browse online/look at porn.

Consoles will become more like PCs, but I don't think they will go away. There will always be a spot for a Sony or Nintendo device on my self.

Pretty much what Del Murder said.

I do the odd spot of PC gaming but my PS3 provides a much simpler format when it comes to any kind of gaming whether it be in my room or wherever. Plus, I think the online multiplayer side of it is great & there is much room for improvement. Also not to forget the local multiplayer side of it. I often have friends over and we could go 2 on 2 in games like Fifa, among others.

I have been a largely PC gamer ever since I was a wee tyke and we had a Commodore 64. Most of my favorite video game genres (strategy, sim, etc.) work best with keyboard and mouse. So I will always be doing a lot of gaming on the computer.

That said, I love my Xbox 360, it runs several million times better than my old clunker computer does. I like how it's just plug and play.

I grew up on consoles, but ever since I got my high endish laptop in May of 2011, I have been mainly gaming on that, be it emulated stuff, games from Steam, etc. I'll probably get the next slew on consoles, but I agree that they are in trouble. That said, if consoles go the way of the dinosaur, it won't happen as quickly as people think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

I'm console 4 life. I just can't get into mobile or PC gaming. Consoles keep everything wrapped in a tight little package, while PCs require constant upgrading unless you spend a ton of money up front.

---

I might just go to my grave maintaining that this notion is incorrect these days. It really hasn't been true that PC's are vastly more expensive for years, nor that you have to go about upgrading them constantly.

I built my computer for about $1,000-1,100 about five years ago. That was with some parts which were pretty near top of the line, easily chewed through everything I threw at it during that time period, and with the exception of a new graphics card when the original died back in October, has had no real upgrading to speak of save adding another 1TB hard drive to it, which isn't really an issue since most people have at least one extra drive anyway, even if just external. And it's worth noting that the hardware I bought still vastly outclasses what's in a console today.

And I'd like to point out that I paid that for a fairly top of the line Core 2 Duo, top of the line graphics card, 8GB's of RAM, an exceptionally well built case, power supply, and a great quality motherboard. I could have easily built something with slightly lesser parts and saved a few hundred more dollars while still having a machine that would toss any current console on the ground and kick its teeth in.

When you consider most people who own a console are probably going to own a PC as well, the cost difference between buying a good PC which will last for years like mine, and buying a middle of the road PC and a console is negligible. Particularly if you buy the console closer to release. The reality is that a decent PC can last for years, and isn't as expensive as many people seem to either be convinced of or are trying to convince people of.

And it's worth noting that that graphics card I had which died lasted longer than my PS3 did, and I replaced it for not much more than it would have cost to have my out of warranty PS3 replaced. The difference being that in replacing my graphics card I got something which was quite powerful, and far more powerful than my old one. Not the current top of the line, but at about the price level where you start getting diminishing returns in the price to performance ratio.

Anyway, PC cost rant over. I agree with Pike on the idea of a Steam console. It would be kind of strange, yet completely awesome and probably would massively shake up the market.

That said, I don't see consoles going away despite them becoming more and more like PC's. While I may have just ranted about the cost of gaming on a PC being entirely overblown, he reality is that most people are idiots when it comes to buying PC's, let alone not doing stupid tit on them and ending up with 30 viruses from downloading a bunch of porn and clicking shady links in their emails and on websites. Consoles are simpler and give more of a feeling of stability, whereas the PC market is fairly divided amongst manufacturers, software, etc, and for those with no knowledge is a hell of a landscape to navigate.

Though I wouldn't be surprised to see more manufacturers probably trying to go the Nintendo route of cheaper consoles, smaller power jumps and lower development costs. It'd be awesome if we see them implementing better development kits and tools as well, though I'm not holding my breath. I think the Android box being talked about now may be a step in that direction. Let's face it, $600 launch prices are stupid, developers are having a hard time using the power these machines have anyway, and there's a years long growing period in working out the kinks in the whole process which just needs to be dialed back frankly. I kind of wonder how much opening up the machine a lot more might help that though, since I think a lot of problems in making development faster and more accessible likely lie in how closed off the development environments are.

As for me personally, I've gone through a rather seamless transition over the years from a largely console gamer in my youth with some PC games here and there to now playing almost nothing on consoles. There was a time when I'd be buying 20 games a year on consoles and playing them, now, aside from buying fewer games in general due to time and money constraints, a much smaller percentage of them are console games. In fact, since Christmas I think I bought 2 or 3 games on my PS3. On my PC I've bought easily 2-3 times that thanks in part to Steam sales, but honestly, there haven't been any other PS3 titles I wanted. The PC seems to be where all of the interesting stuff is happening for me these days.

As it is, I expect I'll probably skip the next console generation, or at least the first few years of it, which I've never done before.

Well, I'm a simple man with simple tastes. I want to sit in my recliner, push a button on a wireless controller, and be playing Xenoblade Chronicles on my HDTV within 1 minute. When I'm done I want to turn it off from my seat, flip to something on TV, and go online, also within a minute. You can't do that on a PC yet that I know of.

$1,100 is still more than 3 times what I paid for my PS3. While I agree that PCs can be a lot more powerful than consoles, that's been the case for ages. It's not about power it's about the games and the experience. I just don't get the same experience sitting at a desk playing on a PC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GhandiOwnsYou

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete for President

Lately I've seen articles on gaming sites titled like 'where are the next gen consoles', '10 reasons why we need the next gen consoles' etcetera. I laugh at those, because this generation has brought little else than shinier graphics.

---

eh... True media hub potential, indie developer support and promotion from PSN and live arcade, online play becoming standard and a necessity, the massive push for creation and user generated content, and as much as I personally hate it, motion gaming? I feel like we've probably taken the biggest jump in the history of consoles this generation, other than the advent of 3D environments in the PS1/N64 era.

---

Point taken. I think what I was trying to say was to me it feels like gameplay wise there weren't as many surprises as previous generations. No new genre rose to the surface. We got more sequels than we could ask for. Of course there is motion controls like you said, but it got no love for good reason. Online play a necessity? I think there are a lot of gamers not specifically interested in this. Let's hope someone proves me wrong again, it means something has been flying under my radar.

Also, just throwing this out there:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...o-game-console

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

$1,100 is still more than 3 times what I paid for my PS3.

---

Again, this is a non issue. As I said, you can get a computer that's more than powerful enough for $800-900. When you consider most people own both a console and a $400-500 PC, the price difference is negligible.

As for your other comments I also disagree with you there. Many console ports have full controller support these days, and since few people I know even turn their PC's off, the idea that you couldn't be playing a game within a minute, turn it off and quickly switch to watching TV simply has no basis in truth. I know several of people who do just that.

I have always, and will always, be a console gamer, unless PCs find a more layman-friendly approach to gaming. I just hate that whenever I buy a new PC game, it's going to take advantage of the highest end hardware available, so I'll either have to upgrade my hardware or it won't work right. I like being able to just buy a game, pop it in, and then sit back on my couch and play with a controller. Plus, local multi-player isn't exactly ideal with a PC, whereas consoles are designed for it, and local multi-player is about the only multi-player I take part in anymore. I'm not knocking PC gaming by any means, these are just my personal preferences.

As far as consoles dying? No, I don't think so. I think we will see consoles mutate into something radically different than they are now (hell, think about what they were before this gen? First they were strictly game boxes, then game boxes with CD playing capabilities, then game boxes with CD and DVD playing capabilities, now they're full on entertainment centers complete with Netflix and web browsers), but I don't see them going away.

I just don't see PC gaming ever becoming mainstream, and handheld gaming will always have it's market, but I don't see it replacing a sit down big screen experience. I don't see all the Halo fratboy tournaments on XBOX that regularly took place in my dorm hall being replaced by PCs.

If consoles were to die, I think we'd see a huge decline in the video game industry altogether. Like it or not, consoles made video games the medium to be reckoned with it is today. In the same token, it also brought it to the state of shameless capitalistic rape that it's currently at right now, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

Again, this is a non issue. As I said, you can get a computer that's more than powerful enough for $800-900. When you consider most people own both a console and a $400-500 PC, the price difference is negligible.

---

I don't have a PC so the difference is not negligible for me. I only have a laptop because, again, I prefer doing things from my couch. The only reason I would ever buy another stand-up PC would be for gaming, and it's just too expensive to buy a PC for that purpose when I have plenty fun playing console games. When Super Mario, Nathan Drake, and single player JRPGs come to PC then I will consider switching.

PCs may be more powerful but more power is not necessary to make a great game. Console gaming is so much easier, more streamlined, and more fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

Again, this is a non issue. As I said, you can get a computer that's more than powerful enough for $800-900. When you consider most people own both a console and a $400-500 PC, the price difference is negligible.

As for your other comments I also disagree with you there. Many console ports have full controller support these days, and since few people I know even turn their PC's off, the idea that you couldn't be playing a game within a minute, turn it off and quickly switch to watching TV simply has no basis in truth. I know several of people who do just that.

---

There are two faults here. The first is that your assumption about what PC people might own is too variable to be worthwhile. The only concrete numbers with regards to cost is that a gaming PC costs several times a gaming console; any additional information is meaningless. If I wanted, I could buy a £100 headset, and a £400 custom console with an £80 custom controller to go with my £800 HDTV. But assuming that people are going to do that is pointless and just skews your estimation. One can more reasonably assume that because a person owns a console, they won't need to fork over extra cash for a middle range PC, since they'd only need it for Office and the Internet. Any £100 PC will do that easily.

Similarly, not everyone leaves things on all the time, so that assumption is also nonconducive. A console costs £200, a gaming PC costs £800+; that is the only definite information we have regarding the base cost. The additional costs you should focus on is that of the games, since they are the only necessary part of gaming other that the medium.

Man. Not having a desktop computer is just weird to me. Like I realize that laptops are sort of the new standard for computers now (probably going to be replaced by tablets), but they don't seem... I dunno... solid enough for me. My current main computer is a desktop and my next one will be, too.

Anyways this thread is really turning into a personal preference one. As for me, my computer is on 24/7, Steam is always open, and I've got those 200 Steam games available to me at any time. Too bad my computer is terrible and can't even run some of them. That's why I've got my 360, for Skyrim and other graphics-intensive things. Now if I had a really decent computer, THEN things would be different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

PCs may be more powerful but more power is not necessary to make a great game.

---

You keep mentioning as though it's important to the point I was making but not only is it irrelevant I never even argued otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flambard D'Quinceteth

But assuming that people are going to do that is pointless and just skews your estimation.

---

Seeing as I didn't make such an assumption I have to disagree. The reality is that most people I know don't buy netbooks, and even a bottom of the barrel laptop running the worst hardware on the market from my casual browsing of the section the odd time I go to Future Shop tells me people are going to be spending at the bare minimum $350+tax for a complete piece of tit laptop that will likely be toast in 3-4 years. I literally went with the bare minimum price I can imagine for a mediocre laptop, and adding the cost of just about any console onto that will be almost the cost of simply buying a computer that's going to give you sufficient power to play games for the next 5 years minimum.

Quote:

---

Similarly, not everyone leaves things on all the time, so that assumption is also nonconducive.

---

So what if they don't leave their PC on all of the time? Maintain a PC well and it will start quite quickly, especially with decent hardware in it. I can start up my computer from being completely shut down and be opening Steam in not much more time than it takes to start up my PS3 and get to the menu screen in a game. My point was that realistically, Del's argument that he likes to start playing a game within a minute of hitting the power button is a non-issue, and it really is. Factor in things like sleep or standby modes in computers and it's even less of an issue.

And honestly, I don't know anyone who shuts down their computer save for their laptops on occasion. Even then, most people just close the top and let it go into sleep mode. My assumption that not only do most people not shut down their computers, but that it's unnecessary is based on first hand knowledge of the habits of dozens of friends and family.

Quote:

---

A console costs £200, a gaming PC costs £800+; that is the only definite information we have regarding the base cost.

---

Again, I offered up the real cost for mine, not to mention have experience building great PC's for others for less money, and years of browsing prices for major manufacturers. This isn't some guess work that you could build or buy a PC that will last you five years easy for the cost of buying a mediocre PC or laptop and a console. This is years of my own first hand experience in how much this stuff costs. Most people seem to think gaming PC and equate it with top of the line processors, 16GB of RAM, and $500 graphics cards. The reality is that not having stuff does not mean you won't be able to run top of the line AAA games released five years from now and have them look good. Far from it with a little smart shopping. When it comes to buying a PC, a little knowledge goes a long way.

Quote:

---

The additional costs you should focus on is that of the games, since they are the only necessary part of gaming other that the medium.

---

I could focus on the costs of the games, but considering games tend to be cheaper on the PC, that's a point of comparison that the consoles have already lost. Factor in the utterly absurd deals Steam runs almost every single day and the comparison only gets worse for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pike

Anyways this thread is really turning into a personal preference one.

---

Agreed, which is largely why I'm staying away from discussing what people find fun. I could care less if Del or anyone else prefers console gaming. It has no impact on my life and is about as important to me as what colour underwear the people in the house at the end of the street wear. But if we're going to start talking about gaming on a PC being too expensive I'm going to argue the point because in most cases I don't buy it. Sure, if you're never going to buy a PC or laptop anyway then it's more expensive than a console. But if you're already buying a middle of the road laptop or PC, my simple point is that for the incremental cost of buying a console as well, you can have a gaming ready PC that will serve you well for years.

Again, I'm not trying to convince Del or anybody else to skip the next console generation and buy a gaming ready PC instead. I really don't give a tit if they do or don't. I do care when they start arguing that PC gaming is prohibitively expensive though because it's not only demonstrably false, the comparison only further breaks down when you factor in game prices. Honestly, for the last few years I've been able to play more PC games for less money than I have console games. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of my console games that I own, and have enjoyed a lot of stuff that released this generation, but PC gaming is costing me a lot less these days despite buying considerably more.

To add a little gasoline to this fire, I'll give you an idea where my discussion with my friend went, which was that Sony and Microsoft's consoles would eventually evolve into PCs in a few console generations unless they reversed modern development practices and returned to what made consoles unique from the PC market. Amusingly, we both agreed that even if both companies went pure PC eventually, we both had a difficult time feeling Nintendo would go that route. We figured they would keep the console niche market going in this scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pike

Man. Not having a desktop computer is just weird to me. Like I realize that laptops are sort of the new standard for computers now (probably going to be replaced by tablets), but they don't seem... I dunno... solid enough for me. My current main computer is a desktop and my next one will be, too.

Anyways this thread is really turning into a personal preference one.

---

For people like me who want to use their own computer at other places, having a laptop is the better option for me. I also don't really care for tablets or smart phones. Sure, those are more portable, but I am rarely in a position where my laptop is a problem in terms of space.

I'm not going to try to kid anyone here and try to say that it is better than some pimped out gaming rig, but I'm a person that does not needs max setting for everything. Plus, I feel my laptop is damn great as it is. Again, I grew up on consoles, so I have no problem going that route if that is an option.

I also have grown to love putting my laptop on my HDTV. In fact, I am typing this now sitting comfortably on my couch. I also have various set ups rigged to play emulated and "official" games on my couch with minimal effort, console controllers and all. I don't consider myself a "computer guy" and setting that stuff up was quick and easy. Yes, hooking up a desktop PC to a HDTV is also easy, but if I am going to sink a decent amount of money into a computer, I rather have portability.

Say a friend called to just chill. He wants me to go to his house just to BS. Usually in my group of friends, people tend to multitask when we are just generally hanging out. Instead of getting in his way and using his computer, I can close my laptop, throw it in the bag, drive to my friend's house, open it and immediately resume whatever I am doing with my settings on my "territory."

But as Pike said, this is pretty much a personal preference thing. I guess I felt like throwing in my preferences too.

EDIT: Just caught up with the thread too. Now I'm wondering how many people are going to yell at me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

You keep mentioning as though it's important to the point I was making but not only is it irrelevant I never even argued otherwise.

---

I was just mentioning it in general because someone made that point in this thread somewhere. You probably didn't mention it but I wasn't sure since I'm sure as hell not going to read all that.

It's red, by the way.

What great blockbuster high-budget games are there exclusive for PC that are not MMO? This is not a trap question, I genuinely do not know. Many of the great series are for both (Mass Effect, Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed), but others such as Uncharted, Super Mario Galaxy, and God of War are console only. Hell I'll throw Xenoblade in there too since that has been the best JRPG of this generation by far.

I know PC games have Diablo III and WoW and those are big titles, but they are online-only games and I've always thought PC was better for online play. For the best single-player experience, console is still the way to go.

i haven't read this thread and i'm not gonna but

OUYA: A New Kind of Video Game Console by OUYA — Kickstarter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krissy

i haven't read this thread and i'm not gonna but

OUYA: A New Kind of Video Game Console by OUYA — Kickstarter

---

Beat ya to it on page 1. Still not sure what to think of this though. All depends on what games will be developed for it.

I think low end consoles (such as the Ouya) and cloud gaming is going to take over the console industry, while the PC will of course, still be the preferred platform for hardcore gamers.

It's not a wonder that the Ouya kickstarter has earned 4 mil in 2.5 days. The industry has been trying to push a "PC console" for awhile so it is not a new idea. But I think we now have the technology and consumer base to make it happen. Back when the Phantom was trying to make waves many people till didnt have broadband, HD space was still expensive, etc. Alsso, Graphics for mobile games are becoming more and more impressive... and right now developers are preferring to develop mobile and social games because they are cheaper to develop for and more profitable/less risky. But just imagine the potential for games like these being developed except for with a controller and meant to play on a television.

There are cloud services such as OnLive and PlayCast being built into internet TVs/part of cable packages. Gaikai, a cloud service, was just bought by Sony and a Sony spokesperson has claimed that cloud gaming is the future.

I think the idea of expensive, clunky, architecturally closed consoles is becoming less and less appealing to people. On top of all that, Nintendo and social/mobile developers have tapped into a market of "non-gamers" which is much bigger than the gamer market. That being said, I don't think the Wii U will be a big success like the Wii was and in fact, think that the Android/iOS games (or even took a back seat to the DS) and stunted the Wii's growth in the latter half of its lifespan.

I have a decent gaming computer. The graphics card is mid range for the time (ATI 5770) and it still handles most things at a level I am more than happy with. When the next round (ATI 8xxx although I will probably go back to NVida) comes out I will upgrade the graphics card for another $150ish or more and be good to go. I play games on my TV from the PC all the time with a controller. I have surround sound and everything. It is no different than a console for me. When I am done, BAM!, my PC is already on the TV...go to netflix or something else. The Steam summer sale JUST started so I imagine I will get some more games and play them on the PC on my TV as if it were a console.

I refuse to buy a full game for download on a console because they don't want to support backwards compatibility so they can sell you the same game again in a few years. How many times has Nintendo sold Super Mario Bros. or Squenix sold Final Fantasy IV? Having one machine that can do all of that (and it is getting easier to emulate older games) is a far nicer option and I don't have to remember where I stored everything any more. With Steam and GOG I can just redownload everything again if I want. AWESOME!

My biggest problem with consoles now is that they are trying to be PCs instead of gaming/simple multimedia devices. XBox was great until the last UI redesign. Now it is annoying and cumbersome all so they can use the Kinnect which is awesome for a lot things but control of an OS and gaming are not amongst those things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

I was just mentioning it in general because someone made that point in this thread somewhere. You probably didn't mention it but I wasn't sure since I'm sure as hell not going to read all that.

---

Quote:

---

What great blockbuster high-budget games are there exclusive for PC that are not MMO? This is not a trap question, I genuinely do not know.

---

Tends to be genres the PC is better at more often than not if you're looking for AAA type titles. Obviously stuff like Starcraft, other RTS titles like the Total War, Dawn of War, company of heroes types. You've got your turn based/4X stuff like Civilization 5 (don't play Civ 5 by the way), though you get some really cool stuff like Amnesia: The Dark Descent in there. And obviously not exclusives, but you honestly couldn't pay me to play games like Portal, Left 4 Dead, Metro 2033, or just about any other FPS or strategy game on a console over PC. Mouse and Keyboard just feels too good. Thing is, AAA development tends to focus on multi-platform without the backing of a company like Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft just because it's expensive as hell and it's a bad idea to limit your sales like that. Luckily, aside from getting a lot of the good multi-platform stuff lately, PC also has a much better scene when it comes to indie titles and lower budget games. Stuff that is really good, but budget wise doesn't compete with major console developers, and especially stuff that just can't deal with the licensing hoops major console manufacturers make you jump through.

Honestly, that stuff is more the draw for me these days, and it's one of the big benefits of an open platform.

Quote:

---

For the best single-player experience, console is still the way to go.

---

I disagree, but only because there's nothing that makes one or the other better at single or multiplayer (though you could argue being an open platform allows a wider variety of online games on PC, and with less silly bulltit forced on the player by manufacturers). The only thing that leads to the distinction I think is that many people who play PC games prefer PC multiplayer to console, and historically consoles focused more on single player, even long after online was available on PC's, by simple necessity. There's no fundamental functional difference which makes one better at a specific style of play than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete for President

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krissy

i haven't read this thread and i'm not gonna but

OUYA: A New Kind of Video Game Console by OUYA — Kickstarter

---

Beat ya to it on page 1. Still not sure what to think of this though. All depends on what games will be developed for it.

---

I had heard about this but hadn't looked into it closely until earlier today, and all I can say is holy smurf, this is a console I can get behind. As long as people are putting out great games for it, consider me there. I actually like the concept so much I'm considering supporting the kickstarter if my money situation allows.

An inexpensive console that's a completely open platform for developers and end users, and since it's not bleeding edge technology, probably pretty easy to develop for, plus everything on it has to be either free-to-play or offer a free trial? Essentially a lot of the benefits of a PC in a low price console form factor. Seriously, just take my damn money already.

I wish I had some money so I could back that OUYA thang. I can't wait for that.

First of all, it is absolutely preposterous to claim the console is in trouble, or that the console is going anywhere.. Every year, guaranteed, a Call of Duty, a Rockstar game, a Bioware/Bethesda RPG, all come out and make more money than you possibly can in any other medium today. PC is great, as I'll get to, but they'll never reach that popularity. When you have to copy and paste a line of code from a google search into your .ini file, that's the point at which the overwhelming vast majority of the consumer stops participating. And Android/iOS does not cut into the console market. Almost everyone who plays on those platforms are not "gamers." I know some of us are the exception, but I've had a smartphone for almost a year now and I do not enjoy playing video games on my phone.

That said, I think a lot of you that are more than capable, bright young individuals are not giving PC a fair shake. I have to agree with Vivi that you have all fell for the propaganda that PC gaming is more expensive than it really is. Yes, a proper "gaming" PC will always hover around that $900, 1k mark, but it is not necessary. Because this console generation has gone on for so long, you can decently play the vast majority of new titles coming out today on a rig that is maybe half that cost. And I'm guessing it will probably be like that for the foreseeable future, considering how big the base on PS3/360 will continue to be even into the next generation.

But the real kicker is that the money you may spend extra on a PC, you're almost guaranteed to make up in the cost of games. Because of piracy, distribution outlets for PC games are willing to practically give the games away to you for free. And I"m talking about games that are 1-2 years old or even came out this year. Like I got last year's Dragon Age II along with the complete edition of the first one for less than $10. Or this year's amazing Crusader Kings II with a ton of other games from the publisher for $12. I'm buying full titles for less than $3 on the Steam summer sale right now and new games from this quarter that are going for $30, $20. Not to mention on launch day, you're almost guaranteed to get the game for at least $10 less. And do we even need to get into backwards compatibility??? The range of titles you'll be able to get for almost pennies???

In any case, I haven't jumped the console ship. It does have its advantages. I've played Call of Duty on PC and Call of Duty on console and I think we shouldn't undervalue the achievement this generation that developers have managed to make FPS more fun on consoles. With games like Killzone and Gears of War, you can't translate their heavy gameplay adequately to a mouse and keyboard. On a comfort level, I'd never want to play a JRPG, an action game, or a racer hunched over my desk, but at the same token I'd never want to play a strategy game, a simulation title, or an intense WRPG laying lazily on my couch. They both have their advantages and can do incredibly fun things that the other can't.

And I think that's what you guys are missing. We don't have to say which one is definitively better and which one is undisputably useless. We can all win.

One last point, I think it's a mischaracterization to say consoles have "gone PC." This started when Sony let you play your music CDs on your PlayStation 1. In fact, we can take this back to devices like the home stereo or the VHS, before PCs even did these kinds of things. There's no reason why something that plays videos like hulu or netflix is more foreign to a console than it is to PC. Other than a web browser, it's hard to point out what is exclusively in the PC domain that consoles have taken. When a console has a word processor and lets you make spreadsheets and connect to a printer, then we can say it has gone PC, but until then I don't buy it.

Bolivar, you're nuts. Mouse/Keyboard is a far better input device for shooters than a controller.

I'm not sure what exactly the future of consoles is.

I want consoles to go away, presonally. I'm sick of the fanboy arguments, sick of the restrictions, sick of the exclusivity war.

I like playing with the PC. With the exception of handhelds, it's my favorite console. So I get my games on PC. Why does this exclude me from the rest of the gaming community? Why can't I play Mass Effect 3 alongside gamers using an XBox 360 or a PS3? The games are functionally identical.

Why isn't a game console just a media platform? We never get DVDs that only play on Sony DVD players, or anything like that. We don't get a computer that can't link to all of the internet.

Consoles are getting more and more PC like in terms of their capabilities, yet they are still living in a world before PCs existed. Their views of how games have to be developed, how they can be sold and marketed, is dragging down the industry.

You can go out, buy a game, and have it work on your PC, your Mac, a Linux system, or practically any other OS out there. Yet consoles won't recognize it. Why not? What is a PS3 except a graphical and gameplay focused computer with peripherals, a customized OS, and a Blu-Ray player?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

Bolivar, you're nuts. Mouse/Keyboard is a far better input device for shooters than a controller.

---

Yes, I am nuts. But I've been playing shooters on PC for a long time, I played Counter-Strike competitively and sunk countless hours in Team Fortress classic and the original half-life. I absolutely agree with you that mouse & keyboard is a far better input device, targeting is easier, more accurate shooting is possible, which elevates the skill required and makes skillful playing far more rewarding.

But it's not as fun. Again, I've played Call of Duty on PlayStation and Call of Duty on PC and it's far more fun on PS3.

Another point to your post, Sony does allow cross-platform play, but only a few developers like Epic Games and Valve take advantage of it.

It depends on the game really. Some shooters like Quake and adventure games I can deal with playing on PC/Mac, but some games call for the ease and simplicity of a console. Either way I can't see consoles going away anytime soon. Companies will push the exclusivity of content on their particular console if they see the market going more towards PC gaming. Console gaming also offers casual and other type of gamers the opportunity to play with multiple controllers to create the ultimate social gaming atmosphere. That's not something you can typically do with one keyboard and mouse...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

Console gaming also offers casual and other type of gamers the opportunity to play with multiple controllers to create the ultimate social gaming atmosphere. That's not something you can typically do with one keyboard and mouse...

---

This is one of my biggest selling points for consoles. Don't get me wrong, online is cool and all, but ever since Contra showed us how it's done there's been nothing as fun for me as co-op with a buddy sitting in the same room as me. Fighting game parties, or 4 dudes on a big screen pounding beers and playing modnation. That the core of console gaming over Computers to me, they are built to accomodate social play.

Where there are also LAN parties for that in the "same room experience". My PC friends have no problem bringing all their Desktops to one persons house to do a few instances on an MMO as a means of having fun on a Saturday night. Consoles certainly do it easier, but co-op gameplay is often being neglected in games in favor of online play. To developers, it's the same thing.

There is a world of difference between having a buddy press connect on controller 2, and bringing an entirely separate machine over to set up for each person that wants to play. Even if you were to ignore all the setup, you're still looking at a roomfull of guys all staring at their own screens.

Considering a co-op involves a split screen, I would say you are still having a bunch of people in a room, staring at their own part of the screen. You can still glance over the side and see what's happening on your friend's PC as well, it's not like a PC screen is some private dark theater with one admission. Also, when you start playing around with games like Halo that allow your to hook up multiple systems and TVs to do high number co-op, I feel the difference is negligible. Not to mention that even in consoles, co-op is starting to be slowly fazed out in favor of online play.

My friend told me one time how much one of those gaming pcs cost and I was like whoa! Too expensive for my blood.

I'd be a PC gamer if it wasn't so damn expensive! You can upgrade and mod game sand stuff with PC. You can't do that with consoles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Considering a co-op involves a split screen, I would say you are still having a bunch of people in a room, staring at their own part of the screen. You can still glance over the side and see what's happening on your friend's PC as well, it's not like a PC screen is some private dark theater with one admission. Also, when you start playing around with games like Halo that allow your to hook up multiple systems and TVs to do high number co-op, I feel the difference is negligible. Not to mention that even in consoles, co-op is starting to be slowly fazed out in favor of online play.

---

Hit and miss I suppose. My favorite co-op games have always been the ones that didn't split screen. Run n' Gun and Beat em up type games like Contra, Metal Slug or Streets of Rage. These types of games are coming back in force on the PSN and Live Arcade lately. They're easy for developers to make and people love polished, old school titles. Hard Corps: Uprising and Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World are good examples.

As far as modern gaming goes, I think a lot of people have rebelled against the shift to online. Enough at least to make developers turn back a bit, realize that they didn't SWITCH camps and they just have a new camp they have to keep happy too. Motorstorm comes to mind. The original ONLY offered online multiplayer. There was a fairly sizable backlash though, and since then they have offered split screen as well.

A console offers reliability, reliability and reliability. I've never had trouble running a console game. That's why I'll always stick to them.

And the iOS can suck it. I am not letting Apple drag me into their IT Master Race. I've been playing along for long enough while I was in film school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freya

I'd be a PC gamer if it wasn't so damn expensive! You can upgrade and mod game sand stuff with PC. You can't do that with consoles.

---

Yes you can; it's called "buying the next one." And in the long run it lasts longer and is cheaper.

I cannot stand online play. Online gamers have no respect for the fact that the people you're playing with have put the time aside to play a game with you because you aren't sharing the room with them. Online gamers are a contemptuous bunch of people and I'm glad I don't play with them any more.

No. Graphics change if I remember correctly, every like 8 months. Now a console lasts for about 8 years before there is a new one. If you have a PC you can have the better graphics the entire time. Like currently, I can't buy myself a WiiU, Xbox 720 or PS4 but I can upgrade my PC. If you want to keep the same graphics for 8 years, yeah sure, but if you want anything better, PC it is. And instead of buy a new console every bit, you can just buy one new part. That to me is cheaper.

Consoles are not reliable. Red ring anyone? While most PC problems are human errors, they got themselves a virus or messed up something. Console, that's all the developer. The only way there is human error is if they've tried to mod it.

Oh yeah, I forgot I'm the only person left on the planet who places no importance in graphics and has felt that way since he played Donkey Kong Country and realised it was actually kind of crap and easy, but those graphics sure were nice.

And I guess I forgot to take the 360 into account, but then it has Microsoft's name on it so I already ignored it :3 I've been playing my PS2 and N64 for quite a long time I guess.

My next gaming purchase will in fact be a PC, but that's because I'm sick of consoles trying and failing to somewhat imitate them. I guess I'd actually forgotten that reason because I've been so set on not playing those particular ones for so long that it's become a habit I don't even think of the reason for. Man, that last post of mine was kinda ignorant really.

Having said that, bringing up the "human error" thing for PCs is a bit unfair when you factor in that putting a computer together is one of those things some people just cannot understand, no matter how hard they try to. I actually did a computing course for a year and frankly learned nothing because I couldn't get my head around any of it. When I do buy my next PC, I'll be asking someone else to help me put it together because even with instructions I am useless at this stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReloadPsi

Having said that, bringing up the "human error" thing for PCs is a bit unfair when you factor in that putting a computer together is one of those things some people just cannot understand, no matter how hard they try to. I actually did a computing course for a year and frankly learned nothing because I couldn't get my head around any of it. When I do buy my next PC, I'll be asking someone else to help me put it together because even with instructions I am useless at this stuff.

---

Yeah, but the human error stuff that causes the most PC problems isn't with regard to building them, or even cleaning them out. It's simple every day stuff like don't open attachments from strange emails. Know what the hell you're downloading and that it's from a trusted source. Don't download porn to your computer. Don't open up the control panel and start messing around with settings if you don't know what you're doing first.

You know, the basics. And to be fair, the same sort of general idiocy has done in many a console as well. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen people stick a console near the floor so dust can better accumulate inside. Or put it in a small enclosed space with almost no room for the air to vent, assuming they didn't outright cover the air vents. When it comes to basic incompetence, no electronic device is safe. Barring that though, a PC made from decent parts is going to last as long as any given console. Longer when the console is made by Microsoft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReloadPsi

Having said that, bringing up the "human error" thing for PCs is a bit unfair when you factor in that putting a computer together is one of those things some people just cannot understand, no matter how hard they try to. I actually did a computing course for a year and frankly learned nothing because I couldn't get my head around any of it. When I do buy my next PC, I'll be asking someone else to help me put it together because even with instructions I am useless at this stuff.

---

Yeah, but the human error stuff that causes the most PC problems isn't with regard to building them, or even cleaning them out. It's simple every day stuff like don't open attachments from strange emails. Know what the hell you're downloading and that it's from a trusted source. Don't download porn to your computer. Don't open up the control panel and start messing around with settings if you don't know what you're doing first.

You know, the basics.

---

Again, something else I hadn't actually considered because I give people too much credit :P

Nothing wrong with giving people too much credit. You're less likely to become a cynical ass like me if you can be consistently optimistic like that.

Alright, don't get all dandy you two. Let's get back to bashing gaming platforms!

smurfing Microsoft! They're trout, but the only alternative is to go to Sony! GRRR.

Things a standard XBOX 360 can do a PC cannot: nothing
pros: better graphics than the average PC at 720p, great controller for shooter, better scrolling than a PC, indented Analog Sticks prevent thumb slips.
cons:No Wifi- limited in terms of types of games (with some exceptions) no internal hard drive, have to pay for service

Things a Wii can do and a PC cannot: motion controls
pros: really really cheap, wide range of games, plays gamecube
cons: bad graphics, shoddy controls, few inspired titles, no internal hard drive.


Things a standard PS3 can do a PC cannot:
blu-ray movies and games, a bunch of tiny things not worth mentioning
pros: supports 1080p, 3-d games and video, blu ray, wifi, expandable drive, free games and videos, wide game selection, great controller for platformers, fighting games, and racers. Motion controls that aren't mandatory. Backwards compatable. Playstation home.
Cons:Terrible Terrible trigger buttons! Trigger buttons break easily! Not all games have trophies (either do it or don't sony) Impossible to use saves from old systems. No minecraft

PC:
Pros: modable games, tons of exclusives, infinate reverse compatability. Freelancer.
Cons: Gaming PCs cost tons of cash, dwarfing the other systems

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hypoallergenic Cactuar

Things a standard XBOX 360 can do a PC cannot: nothing
pros: better graphics than the average PC at 720p

---

720p wasn't that high a resolution by PC standards when the 360 came out.

Quote:

---

great controller for shooter, better scrolling than a PC, indented Analog Sticks prevent thumb slips.

---

The first point is debatable at best, but all of them are moot since the 360 controller has been available for PC for years.

Quote:

---

Things a standard PS3 can do a PC cannot:
blu-ray movies and games,

---

Not true. Any PC with a blu-ray drive could play blu-ray movies, and since most PC games will install to, and run from, the hard drive without the need to even have the disk in the drive, there's no benefit to using blu-ray discs for games since they're more expensive and leave you paying royalties to Sony.

Quote:

---

a bunch of tiny things not worth mentioning

---

I'd be curious as to what those are. As a PS3 owner since a month after release I can't really think of any.

Quote:

---

Not all games have trophies (either do it or don't sony) Impossible to use saves from old systems. No minecraft

---

My dislike of trophies aside, it was only a few months after they updated the system to allow trophies that it became mandatory for all games to have them. There hasn't been a game that wasn't trophy enabled in over 3 years at least. But if you're referring to not patching in trophy support for games older than that, that's not Sony's call to make, nor is it worth spending the money to do even if it's possible.

Quote:

---

Cons: Gaming PCs cost tons of cash, dwarfing the other systems

---

I just give up... Is there an emoticon for blowing my brains out?

Vivi, your attempts to argue that a PC that can play modern games can be cheaper than a console are futile /borg. It is impossible to buy or create a PC able to play modern games for less than £200. I mean that not as a slight to PCs - because they are superior and people who disagree are fools - but a simple statement of necessary truth.

Did I ever claim otherwise? Yes, in absolute dollar terms a PC is more expensive than a console. But again, when you factor in that most people who buy a console to play games also by a PC of some kind (whether it be a laptop, desktop, or god help you, a Mac), the actual amount of money that's been spent is nearly identical. Again, my argument is that whether you buy a PC and a console, or simply spend some extra money buying a PC that will play games five years down the road and skip the console, you spend the same amount of money with the only difference being whether or not your playing PC or console exclusives during that time period.

Moreover, due to the difference in game prices on PC and Console for the average AAA release, the money someone saves from owning a PC is significant if we only assume even a $10 savings per game (the usual price difference between a new AAA console game and it's PC counterpart), and a relatively modest amount of games purchased. Say, for example, five games. That's $250 alone, and it just bought you a Wii, 360, or PS3 at current prices.

And that's a modest price difference. I've gotten games that were a year old or less in Steam sales for between $20-25 less than they're being sold for at local stores used. That adds up, and it adds up unbelievably fast if you're smart about waiting for the right deal to come along.

Whelp, We've proven one thing beyond a shadow of a doubt. Consoles aren't going anywhere, and neither are PC gamers. Both camps are foaming at the mouth to defend the honor of their chosen platform. That said!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freya

No. Graphics change if I remember correctly, every like 8 months. Now a console lasts for about 8 years before there is a new one. If you have a PC you can have the better graphics the entire time. Like currently, I can't buy myself a WiiU, Xbox 720 or PS4 but I can upgrade my PC. If you want to keep the same graphics for 8 years, yeah sure, but if you want anything better, PC it is. And instead of buy a new console every bit, you can just buy one new part. That to me is cheaper.

Consoles are not reliable. Red ring anyone? While most PC problems are human errors, they got themselves a virus or messed up something. Console, that's all the developer. The only way there is human error is if they've tried to mod it.

---

I have never known any console to have a wide, systemic issue other than the 360. The Original 360 was tit though, so I'm not even going to argue on it's behalf. Issues here and there, sure. All things considered though, I know many more people whose PC's have given the gigantic issues than people whose consoles have failed outright. A big reason for this is, as has been commonly touted, the PC is used for far more than just gaming, meaning it is more vulnerable as a whole to intrusion and failure. LOL PSN GOT HACKED. Compared to how many other reputable websites? Even if you are the worlds most careful internet user, you still should factor in that in MOST households the computer is a shared device, and you're probably not going to be the only one on it. Especially if you have a family. Good luck keeping your elementary school aged kid from clicking a sketchy link. PC's are just as vulnerable, if not more so, than consoles to frying out. If we're going to talk about people knowing what they're doing, most system failures for consoles require little more than an arbitrary knowledge of soldering and the ability to find ehow.com articles to fix anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flambard D'Quinceteth

Vivi, your attempts to argue that a PC that can play modern games can be cheaper than a console are futile /borg. It is impossible to buy or create a PC able to play modern games for less than £200. I mean that not as a slight to PCs - because they are superior and people who disagree are fools - but a simple statement of necessary truth.

---

We're at the steam sale right now buying AAA titles for $3 and $5. I guarantee you console gaming is probably more expensive in the long run.