PDA

View Full Version : Is PC gaming dying? What's the word on the street?



Bobfish_Almight
05-05-2008, 04:49 PM
Personally I don't think so. Though I can understand the logic behind some of the arguments I've heard. What say you teeming, unwashed masses?

dingsi
05-05-2008, 04:51 PM
What's the word on the street? WHAT'S THE WORD ON THE STREET??


http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Matt/stop-AHE.png


You know I can't read you jerk!

Bobfish_Almight
05-05-2008, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by dingsi:
What's the word on the street? WHAT'S THE WORD ON THE STREET??


http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Matt/stop-AHE.png


You know I can't read you jerk!

lawlz

MalakvianPsycho
05-06-2008, 11:10 PM
Hell no. Console graphics will never keep up with PC. PC games are also released with scalable graphics, it was over a year before I could build a gaming machine that could run Oblivion Maxed.

PC games can also support infinite game content updates, player mods, expansions, ect.

And most importantly, analog sticks are nice for some things, but they will never match the precision and range of a mouse, especially for FPS. RPGs too for that matter. I have INSTANT access to over 30 functions with a keyboard & mouse combo, no cycling through little menus or any of that junk...
A console control can't match that.. at least not yet

Lpedraja2002
05-06-2008, 11:21 PM
Cheers to that mate! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

blarson11
05-07-2008, 02:19 AM
There have already been expansions for games on consoles, and a lot of games receive content updates as well (i.e. kill cams in COD or squad leader chatting in FFOW, as well as any maps or extra missions). The only thing consoles really lack is hardware upgrades, and even that is changing (for example you can replace the HDD in a PS3 with any standard HDD, i believe w/o voiding the warranty). I think the line separating consoles and PCs is becoming less and less apparent, with consoles drawing closer and closer to PC's in terms of capability, even incorporating features such as full internet browsers and mouse/keyboard support. I'd imagine that at some point in the reasonably near future that line will dissolve completely, but i wouldn't consider that the death of either one.

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 05:48 AM
I don't see the line between PC and console ever closing completely. PC's will always have an advantage simply because they're modular. Consoles come in generations every seven to ten years, whereas new parts for PCs are released virtually on a daily basis. What I can see happening, however, is each new generation of consoles being more or less at the same level as PC gaming of that quarter. Then they'll slowly lag behind until the next generation and the cycle will start again. Personally, you see, I don't think we'll ever truely see photo-realism in gaming

MalakvianPsycho
05-07-2008, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by Bobfish_Almight:
Personally, you see, I don't think we'll ever truely see photo-realism in gaming

Seriously? Have you seen the CGI in Beowulf? I could not even tell from the trailer it was CGI, looked real to me. I didn't know till I watched the actual movie that it was CGI, granted they probably put some of the best scenes in the trailer. The movie did look a bit "off" in many parts, subtle shadows, lighting, ect. gave it away as CGI. But there were also many scenes that were dead on, looked totally real.

So back to photo realism in gaming, just give it time. It is definitely in the PC gaming future. Hell, I expect 3D virtual gaming will be a possibility some day.

50 years ago if you described a computer to someone they would have executed you as crazy devil worshipper.

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by MalakvianPsycho:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bobfish_Almight:
Personally, you see, I don't think we'll ever truely see photo-realism in gaming

Seriously? Have you seen the CGI in Beowulf? I could not even tell from the trailer it was CGI, looked real to me. I didn't know till I watched the actual movie that it was CGI, granted they probably put some of the best scenes in the trailer. The movie did look a bit "off" in many parts, subtle shadows, lighting, ect. gave it away as CGI. But there were also many scenes that were dead on, looked totally real.

So back to photo realism in gaming, just give it time. It is definitely in the PC gaming future. Hell, I expect 3D virtual gaming will be a possibility some day.

50 years ago if you described a computer to someone they would have executed you as crazy devil worshipper. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you really think it looked real you're deluding yourself I'm afraid to say (which is no surprise for a Malk to be fair) I could tell immediately

TokyoPoliceClub
05-07-2008, 05:31 PM
As for the question, long answer; yes, short answer; no.
For right now pc's can definitly outpower a console and the joystick will always cripple console shooters. Most console games compensate with auto targeting but where's the fun when you're swinging a stick around until the reticle sticks on something? As of now pc gaming all the way.
The thing is building a pc is easily double the price of a console with the same hardware. Another problem that is becoming a growing problem is games released for the consoles and later sloppily ported to pc to make more money. Consoles are usually less upkeep then a computer too, unless of course you have an old xbox360 and happen to come across the red ring of death. pc's also have some issues with the whole playing with your friends idea. Yeah sure if you all have $900 we can play crysis multiplayer online together with pretty settings but good luck finding a group of friends with good computers.
What I'm trying to get out like an uncomfortable kidney stone is this: pc's right now are way ahead of consoles as far as techonolgy goes, but people will be less interested in the hassle that comes with a pc.
Yeah.

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 05:36 PM
I'm sorry but I have to say I completely disagree. The average user may indeed favour a console over a PC because of the dumbed down maintenance issue (being that there isn't anything to maintain in a components sense) but there are still a phenomenal number of people out there willing to go that extra distance for a top of the range PC. Plus the fact that if you know how to properly set one up you can practically ignore the system requirements listed for the games on the market

BTOG46
05-07-2008, 05:37 PM
50 years ago if you described a computer to someone they would have executed you as crazy devil worshipper
50 years ago the school I went to had a computer, it filled most of a classroom, and was less powerful than a digital watch.

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 05:39 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

caswallawn_2k7
05-07-2008, 05:43 PM
and they got to the moon with them types of computers but they havnt been since http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 05:47 PM
Well, that's still being debated...

NightOrchid
05-07-2008, 06:54 PM
Right now, its a very worrying time for the PC market. You have nVidia and Intel practically running the market. AMD, who now own ATi havent came out with anything decent in a long time, AMDs Phemon was a huge let down and the AM2 is no match for the Core 2 Duo, let alone the Quad Core.

This means that Intel and nVidia could charge anything they wanted because theres no competition.

At the end of the day, its the PC games industry thats driving the hardware market forward, look at Crysis, you need 2xGF8800 GTXs to run it maxed out. There all in on it together if you ask me.

PC market has a +ve and a -ve side, the +ve has already been mentioned, but the -ve. Once a piece of software is installed onto an accessible OS it can be manipulated, de-compiled, reverse engineered.

IMO, The bottom line is, the games publishers are terrified of Piracy and because consoles are closed systems without an accessible OS, then theres a less likely chance of that happening.

Why do you think Blu-ray won over HD, because of the Piracy and Copy Protection on discs, of course now people are finding that the CP is making some Blu ray Discs unreadable.

I think there will always be a PC market, because games are designed on PCs through SDKs - Sony Developer Kits, MDKs - Microsoft DKs and Nintendo DKs, which are sent out and freely distributed for development, thats why some ports are bloody awful.

They are definietly trying to promote the console as the gaming platform of choice.. you can stick a disc in and off you go.. theyve even got a patching system. PCs games have to be installed, options set, drivers updated, will it work.. will it not, CD Keys authenticated. It can be a pain, but the rewards of a PC can be amazing.. first and foremost scalable graphics settings and level editors. so cool.

OMG, Look at C&C3: Tiberium Wars, Im sorry but its just offensive on a console.

Anyway, Im looking forward to the new Microsoft PS Wii, its gonna be awesome.

Cheers
NightO

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 06:58 PM
Yes, that is exactly what I've been trying to say. I just couldn't put it anywhere near as eloquently

TokyoPoliceClub
05-07-2008, 07:01 PM
Couldn't agree more.

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by TokyoPoliceClub:
Couldn't agree more.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

No love

TokyoPoliceClub
05-07-2008, 07:42 PM
Oh haha that came out really wrong.
I'd explain what I really meant but then I feel like I'd be saying the obvious and become another casualty in the online war that is sarcasm. So I'll say it with parenthesis:
(Agreeing with the person above you)

NightOrchid
05-07-2008, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Bobfish_Almight:
Yes, that is exactly what I've been trying to say. I just couldn't put it anywhere near as eloquently

I kinda figured thats what you were tring to say.. hehe. Thanks. Its true though. Naive is the person who TRUELY believes that Blu Ray won through awesome quality. HD beats Blu Ray hands down.

Microsoft & Paramount invested alot of money in HD, but at the end of the day the audio and video standard, set out in their "BOOKS" belong to Sony, and because their Piracy mad, they'll invest Millions in Copy Protection if they have to.

Ok, FFS, BRING THE PRICES DOWN. That would wipe out piracy in one swoop. I know games cost alot to be developed, sometimes as much as movies, but if the brought the price of stuff DOWN:

DVDs down to 10/ XB360/ PS3/ PC & Wii games to 20. They'd sell thousands daily, and they'd still have enough left over for the new ivory toilet seat they want in the spare bathroom.

Its not rocket science, nope, its greed pure and simple.. GREED. or as my dad so eloquently calls em.. Money Grabbin Bast**ds.

Cheers
NightO

Bobfish_Almight
05-07-2008, 08:06 PM
Dude, are you me in disguise?

NightOrchid
05-08-2008, 07:28 AM
Hehe. Last time I checked dude,, No. Although, You can can be me for a day if you want and do my Psychology exam on Friday.

I think what we are both saying is what everyone who knows anything about the entertainment idustry as a whole, but the greedy arses in the publishing houses, have known for a while. In fact, surely they cant be that stupid.

I MEAN IT COSTS 10 (including popcorn and drinks) to go see a bloody film these days, i mean.. FFS.

I think we should all launch a world wide campaign to bring the prices down, and march on the horse of lords.

What do you think

Cheers
NightO

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 07:55 AM
It's a noble ideal. But as long as there is greed there will be overinflated prices. What bugs me most about it is that the rise in price allows more and more records to be broken. Completely trivialising the contextual success of older films and games. Like, for example, back in the eighties a game would cost me a fiver for the Amstard or the Commodore, so even if they sold a copy to everybody on the planet, something piece of **** like Halo still makes insanely higher revenue

Evil_Swordfish
05-08-2008, 01:14 PM
No, for me the pc will always be better than consoles. There are good console games, but to me online play beats everything, and playing an fps on a console is just a no go. Mouse and keyboard all the way, even if you're able to do mouse and keyboard I'd stick with a pc just because of the fact that I like modding on pc and you can't do stuf like it on consoles...Yet..

Some people made some valid points in this post and in overal I just think that pc beats console any time, anywhere...

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 01:24 PM
I wholeheartedly agree. When you step into a gaming store and you see the focus on console gaming I can understand how it would lead people to believe that PC gaming is on it's death bed. But they really don't take into account the specialist retailers available online. Console gaming has unarguably opened up the gaming industry to a whole new, prolific market. But consider how much of their sales are from games that have been traded in

Evil_Swordfish
05-08-2008, 01:35 PM
People keep on forgetting the mmo business, I've read an article earlier today on gamespy I think it was about 1 billion dollar of the gaming industry profit comes from mmo gaming such as World of Warcraft and Lord of the rings online, even a bit from runescape...Pc gaming will never ever die just because of mmo's

EDIT: article can be found here online subs exceed 1 billion annually (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10377&Itemid=2)

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 01:40 PM
EVE alone, which is one of the smaller ones in the grand scheme of thing. Has a daily traffic of 20000 people active at any one time

Evil_Swordfish
05-08-2008, 01:42 PM
PC gaming ftw :-)

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 01:49 PM
My mystical horse sense tells me you are CORRECT. You win a week of being yourself and having to subject yourself to my unique brand of insanity

BTOG46
05-08-2008, 01:55 PM
You win a week of being yourself and having to subject yourself to my unique brand of insanity

Your brand of insanity is by no means unique, it reminds me of someone, are you sure your heritage is Norwegian, and not Faroese?

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 01:58 PM
Yes Mister BMOC, I'm certain.

Who's Faroese?

moqqy
05-08-2008, 02:04 PM
Consoles are becoming more like PC every new generation. PC will always win in the contest of a PC and a wannabe PC. So if the consoles don't stay as they are, and start getting keyboards&mice&upgrades&internet, they're doomed to fail, since PC will always beat them in that area.

BTOG46
05-08-2008, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by Bobfish_Almight:
Yes Mister BMOC, I'm certain.

Who's Faroese?

Just another crazy Norseman, must be something in the Viking genes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 02:10 PM
The very fact that a PC is modular is a greatest strength. While that puts off a lot of the console gamers it's not really a huge loss because, let's face it, most console gamers are just too thick to know which side to pee out of. Consoles are, undoubtedly, going to appeal to a much wider audience than PC gaming. But just because there are more players, doesn't mean that PC gaming can be ignored. After all, twenty million people is still twenty million people. Even if consoles have fifty times as many users, I don't think any company is stupid enough to turn down the extra revenue

Bobfish_Almight
05-08-2008, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by BTOG46:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bobfish_Almight:
Yes Mister BMOC, I'm certain.

Who's Faroese?

Just another crazy Norseman, must be something in the Viking genes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should meet my daughter. She's a complete fruitcake

davo81
05-08-2008, 08:35 PM
PC gaming will become much, much more popular. Sony and Microsoft can't expect to release a console and let it dwindle for 5 years running every single game that is released. For instance Crysis even on LOW settings uses over 700mb of ram and over 200mb of VRAM. The PS3 has 256mb of VRAM and 256mb of RAM, while the xbox 360 has 512mb of shared memory (VRAM and RAM are shared together). Also the raw power of the consoles aren't even any match for a geforce 8800 series. I'd like to see another console acutally come out (PS4/Xbox3).

Bobfish_Almight
05-09-2008, 05:14 AM
That's true. But you do have to consider that consoles use their system resources exclusively for running the game, with nothing being tied down for anything else. It does make them more efficient, to a certain degree

ThijssjihT
05-09-2008, 06:15 AM
I don't think PC gaming is dying. Piracy will not completely destroy the PC-game industry. I, for example, download a lot of games. But I use it just for testing it. If it's a good game, I buy it. So did I with AC. Sure, downloading for testing is illegal too, but, that will only good for the PC game industry. Bad and bugged games will not be bought, so only good games will be released. I think, when everyone does so, even Gothic3 would be practically bug-free. So I think, piracy can also be good for the game industry!

Bobfish_Almight
05-09-2008, 06:18 AM
Downloading an ISO file is a grey area. Since no money is being exchanged for it some countries don't class it as actual piracy. Like you said, being able to do that and test the game first does encourage more people than would normally buy it to make the fully licensed purchase more often than people may believe

balkizor
03-29-2009, 12:07 PM
Are you kiding me? the ps3 has the power of a 2000$comp and it's not maxed yet pc=work game consoles=games and the game developers are bringin the new games on the x360 and ps3 first.
Another downsize for pc is having to buy new graphic cards ect. if u buy a console you'r good for 5 years(atleast) with amazing graphic and preformenc if u have a pc u have to buy new stuff evry year.Ps3 is a very poiwerfull device with a good procesor and graphic cards so is the x360 pc sucks in mi opinon.

caswallawn_2k7
03-29-2009, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by balkizor:
Are you kiding me? the ps3 has the power of a 2000$comp and it's not maxed yet pc=work game consoles=games and the game developers are bringin the new games on the x360 and ps3 first.
Another downsize for pc is having to buy new graphic cards ect. if u buy a console you'r good for 5 years(atleast) with amazing graphic and preformenc if u have a pc u have to buy new stuff evry year.Ps3 is a very poiwerfull device with a good procesor and graphic cards so is the x360 pc sucks in mi opinon.
you made a new post to show how little you actualy know? the PS3 the cell is a dual core 3.0Ghz CPU for most new PC's the standard now is a quad core around 3.0Ghz. also the PS3's graphics card is a modified Geforce 6800 and a 6800 is classed as low end now. also my PC is about 3-4 years old and still plays all the newest games on max settings. as for claiming hte PS3 hasnt been maxed out yet, sevral games already claim to use the full power of the PS3 with more coming this year.

drfeelgood8849
03-29-2009, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
sevral games already claim to use the full power of the PS3 with more coming this year.

i.e. killzone2.

davo81
03-29-2009, 05:22 PM
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c382/DigeratiPrime/holy_thread_resurrection_batman.jpg

lol. But seriously you dont have to buy new hardware every year. I myself have not upgraded in 3 years, still runs crysis at maximum with no problem though.

balkizor
03-30-2009, 12:17 PM
U can set it to max and it will work on max but it wont if it will hmm how to say downgrade.

ps: ahaha what a crapy comp rofl.

caswallawn_2k7
03-30-2009, 01:24 PM
consoles last so long for one reason and one reason only. the hardware is released it is left to stagnate so the cap stand still for years meaning if developers want to program for the console they have to put up with the limit. since console is a fair size market firms will make thier games work on a console.

but if you look at games such as GTA4 one of the games that is supose to take the most power on console's got a graphics improovement and multiple other addition and enhancements as a PC could cope with it but a console couldnt.

and if you think the game settings show lower depending on the ahrdware you are verry wrong. the setting looks the same across all hardware, just older hardware runs like a slide show. on the other hand if you shop smart a PC can easily last 5 years without slowdown.

Vendetta11
03-30-2009, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by balkizor:
Are you kiding me? the ps3 has the power of a 2000$comp and it's not maxed yet pc=work game consoles=games and the game developers are bringin the new games on the x360 and ps3 first.
Another downsize for pc is having to buy new graphic cards ect. if u buy a console you'r good for 5 years(atleast) with amazing graphic and preformenc if u have a pc u have to buy new stuff evry year.Ps3 is a very poiwerfull device with a good procesor and graphic cards so is the x360 pc sucks in mi opinon.
you made a new post to show how little you actualy know? the PS3 the cell is a dual core 3.0Ghz CPU for most new PC's the standard now is a quad core around 3.0Ghz. also the PS3's graphics card is a modified Geforce 6800 and a 6800 is classed as low end now. also my PC is about 3-4 years old and still plays all the newest games on max settings. as for claiming hte PS3 hasnt been maxed out yet, sevral games already claim to use the full power of the PS3 with more coming this year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you. People have no clue on how a higher end PC blows away any console out there in terms of specs. I have had several friends of mine who game on PS3's or Xbox 360's say that the games they play look sharper/better on my PC.

PC gaming is not dead yet.... And frankly, should never die.

caswallawn_2k7
03-30-2009, 03:36 PM
I also forgot to mention the PS3 only has 256MB of ram shared between the graphics card and proccesses, compaird to the standard PC that is now 2GB Ram for the proccesses and 512MB dedicated memory built into the graphics card, meaning the PC has a totaly of 2560MB of ram acrross both parts as aposed to the PS3 having 256MB across the two. that is before taking into account the graphichs cards with 1GB+ and PC's with up to 16GB of ram.

davo81
03-30-2009, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by balkizor:
U can set it to max and it will work on max but it wont if it will hmm how to say downgrade.

ps: ahaha what a crapy comp rofl.

err, what?... I think you should level up your speech skill, my novice man.

Michelasso
04-04-2009, 08:25 AM
Originally posted by Vendetta11:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by balkizor:
Are you kiding me? the ps3 has the power of a 2000$comp and it's not maxed yet pc=work game consoles=games and the game developers are bringin the new games on the x360 and ps3 first.
Another downsize for pc is having to buy new graphic cards ect. if u buy a console you'r good for 5 years(atleast) with amazing graphic and preformenc if u have a pc u have to buy new stuff evry year.Ps3 is a very poiwerfull device with a good procesor and graphic cards so is the x360 pc sucks in mi opinon.
you made a new post to show how little you actualy know? the PS3 the cell is a dual core 3.0Ghz CPU for most new PC's the standard now is a quad core around 3.0Ghz. also the PS3's graphics card is a modified Geforce 6800 and a 6800 is classed as low end now. also my PC is about 3-4 years old and still plays all the newest games on max settings. as for claiming hte PS3 hasnt been maxed out yet, sevral games already claim to use the full power of the PS3 with more coming this year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you. People have no clue on how a higher end PC blows away any console out there in terms of specs. I have had several friends of mine who game on PS3's or Xbox 360's say that the games they play look sharper/better on my PC.

PC gaming is not dead yet.... And frankly, should never die. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Too bad that what caswallawn wrote is not correct. The PS3 GPU is based on NV47 Chip (Nvidia GeForce 7800 Architecture). Not the 6800 one. Also the Cell CPU is 128 bit processor. An Intel dual core has 64 bits. In terms of floating point operation the 6 available SPEs are at least an order of magnitude superior to the ones of many PCs. Sure, the Intel i7 CPU is superior to the Cell CPU, but it alone costs more than a PS3. In any case the PS3 is still at the beginning. Just look what SE did with FF XII in the PS2. They really pushed the PS2 hw to the limit. The advantage of console videogames is that the hw is always the same.

Anyway, the biggest problem of PC games IMO is the piracy. Just look at what happened to the Windows release of AC (from Wikipedia): NPD Group reports that 40,000 copies of the PC title were sold in United States in July, while more than 700,000 copies were illegally downloaded according to Ubisoft.

It's not really worth the effort to port them to Windows, is it?

caswallawn_2k7
04-04-2009, 09:54 AM
either way the graphics chip is still miles behind the PC top end if you actualy compare the power outbut of a 6800 and a 7800 they are verry close and both fall below the 7900's. nvidias entire numbering method is a joke take the geforce 9's the only geforce 9 with more power than a 8800 is a 9800 all other gefoce 9 cards fall short. so if you dont know this you wont realise saying it was the 6800 was most likly a compliment as the 7800 will be lower down the list for all it uses a slightly newer chip.

as for saying the cell is 128 bit that is a joke the only true 128bit CPU ever used was the PS2's CPU. this is why since you want to use the joke that is wikipedia as a sorce you could find out the cell has actualy been adapted to use in a cipset to link up a PC CPU and the graphics card as it doesnt have the power to replace the intel or AMD CPU's.

as for using piracy as an ecuse for why something should stop doing games if that was the case sony would of been out of bussiness from the PS1, sony only ever sold hardware because of how easy it was to pirate games this is why PS3 sales are down more than anything else. the Wii and 360 are easy to pirate on so people are getting them for this reason, the sad fact is it is only piracy that keeps games consoles going and untill the PS3 security is broken it wont sell any were near what the PS 1 and 2 did.

also on the point of piracy it has been shown games that use realy strong anti piracy methods get pirated the most, look at spore it had some of the most strict anti piracy software in it to date and it was the most pirated game of 2008. now that people are relaxing the anti piracy software people are starting to buy games more as they dont feel the anti piracy software is intruding on them as much or causing as many problems.

the question you should be asking is why port a game to PS3 when it takes so much more to do and has such a small user base compaired to the PC and 360 that use relitivly the same back end as they both run on a version of windows.

Michelasso
04-05-2009, 08:02 AM
Well, since I'm technically curious about this CPU comparison subject I actually did in the past many searches in the hope to find some comparing tables. Unfortunately I couldn't find any. Still, the GFLOPS performances of each SPE at the time of the first Cell production were impressive. Also the PS3 broke the ******ss record doing folding@home. If you have any link to a comparison between the Cell CPU and the Intel i7 I'd be grateful. I'd just like to repeat that a PS3 costs $400. A state of the art PC costs thousands. If one just needs to run Windows XP, MS Office and a web browser there is no real need for any PC upgrade. A $500 laptop now does the job. And for gaming... many buy a console.

About piracy.. You basically said that piracy helps selling hw. But being piracy obviously bad for the game developers, your argument can be used to say that developers would have a much better deal making PS3 exclusives. Only one development platform, no theft of intellectual rights. I don't know what it takes to crack a Wii or a X360 (and I don't want to discuss about it either. Not here at least. Forum policies are to avoid piracy talks), but I still see that the X360 games sell very well.

Still I agree that to put extra protection on PC games is plain stupid. Like the one of limited licenses. As usual they just damage the honest customers and challenge the crackers to make a patch for them.

caswallawn_2k7
04-05-2009, 08:33 AM
there is no comparison but the are sevral motherboards using the cell as a chipset (instead of intel and nvidia mother boards) all it does is offers a bit extra speed between the CPU, Ram, GPU and other addins.

piracy is a double edged sword and it is a case of how easy it is to hack the console. without going into detail the PSP just uses a software hack and has loads of piracy on it so most developers stay clear. but the other consoles all need a hardware mod to make them working meaning more average users would be unwilling to do this, more so with the types of live now banning people if it detects the hack.

but it is the sad fact the PS 1 and 2 did so well because of this and it's why alot of people got the consoles and why it originaly started the massive market in console mods that are arround now. but even so in all them people who got the hardware purly to pirate games there are still actualy quite a few will get the consoles and be honest and buy the games or buy games that are worth the money.

but realy now the only thing that holds PC back and makes the majority of people complain is the security and the fact they dont realise a PC wont last forever meaning they complain games dont work when thier hardware gets out dated. I paid about 1000 for this PC about years ago and it still plays all the latest games fine and is actualy still more powerfull than alot of people who claim that they just bought yjr PC but it wont work.

people have became conditiond to consoles and because of this they think if they go into a store and buy a cheap PC it will be better than a older more expensive one purly on the grounds it is newer. the sad fact is there are 2 big parts to PC gameing, first is the true PC gamer who understands how the hardware works and what to look for to make the games work. then you have the second group who have mostly played consoles and dont understand the hardware side of PC so they claim PC is failing because they dont understand how to work the PC's.

Michelasso
04-05-2009, 09:35 AM
Well, as far as I know the first XBOX was pretty much crackable without even applying a mod chip (I know a guy that did it. He just modified the OS I think. Not sure), but still it went out of the market pretty fast. The PS2 is still selling an amazing number of consoles, and so are the PS2 titles. Consider that many PS2 titles are cheap now, there is no need to mess up with illegally downloaded titles. New titles are not performing that bad either.

About PCs for gaming... Whatever you spend they cost (much) more than a video game console. Getting more or less the same results. Many PC games are better played with mouse and keyboard (thing that I personally hate). Usually the big tvs are in the living room, which is the best place for a console and not for a desktop PC (unless one wants to start a family war with the mommy or the wife, sure!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). So most of the times (not always, most of the times) one must sit down in a stupid chair instead of a very comfortable couch. Then most people nowdays buy just a laptop and not all of them have enough power to play games. To buy a second PC only for gaming would be, IMVHO a waste of money. I'm actually surprised that desktop PCs are still sold. Right now they are not very cost effective even in the offices. Even in terms of space.

No one denies that the latest PC hw will always have more power than video game consoles to play games. It's pretty obvious seen the 10 years life cycles of the second ones. It's that the consoles just do a good job for a much cheaper cost. But sure PC games will never disappear, the installed base is and will be enormous, with the HW getting better and better. Maybe there will be a raise when all laptop will have a good graphics card. After all the laptops don't look bad in a living room. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

caswallawn_2k7
04-05-2009, 10:01 AM
you can get laptops with as much power as a desktop there are even sevral runing multiple graphics cards in SLi but the main point your missing here is with every new generation by Sony/Microsoft they move close and closer to a PC. the fact is consoles are becoming nothing more than a media centre PC.

as for the screen size problem with LCD screens now they are that cheap that you can easily aford another large TV for another room. but the fact is complaining about screen size just prooves this more, when I was a kid I was happy enough to play my nes on a 14inch TV, now for a monitor I wouldnt have less than a 19inch. but as I said LCD's are cheap I also have a 32inch in my room that I can link the PC up to, pluss the option to use wireless keyboard and mouse so I han play on a large screen from my bed.

as for the original Xbox the same problem as I mention in my last post aplies of microsoft kicking people off live for it.

Michelasso
04-06-2009, 07:45 AM
Well, it seems pretty obvious that you are a huge fan of PC games. Nothing wrong with that. But I'm totally the other way around. At least for gaming. I didn't play games anymore before the Playstation came out. Even if the performances could be inferior to the one of the PCs (but were it? games like FF VII has been said to be much worse in the PCs), the games were exceptional. I didn't own a PC either because at that time it really was a waste of money. What I had to do I did it in the office, Internet included. The (cheap) PS brought me back to the delightful world of virtual entertainment. And I kept it in that way. Now I own a MacBook, but I bought it for work. It doesn't have enough GPU power to play games well (it's the old model, with the Intel graphics chip), and I don't care either. For that I own a PS3 that just does the greatest job. There is no way that I am going to play a game with the keyboard anymore, also spending 3-4 times the money for it. I simply hate keyboard/mouse gaming and I love my DualShock 3 (with sixaxis).

About consoles as Media Centers... Obviously consoles like the PS3 have a proprietary system. This make the PC/Mac more flexible for media. To stream music/videos from the PC/Mac to a console is indeed a waste. Too much redundancy easily fixed with the right cable for the Mac. And I even have the IR remote for that coming with my MacBook. Another option would be to use a NAS. My router for example can act as a Media Server. That could be the best configuration. I still have to test it, tho. But yes, I have to agree that the PS3 could do with some (major) media center improvements. Starting from the formats supported (no matroska, ogg and some others). This is a little of a shame from Sony indeed, but it does the job to the extent that I need it.

caswallawn_2k7
04-06-2009, 01:31 PM
I'm not actuaaly biast one way or the other I belive consoles and PC's both have thier uses. if you look at my sig I actualy have a 360 and PS3 as well as my PC. but yeh I would rather play on a console for things like driving games and arcade games, but when it comes to things like shooters and RTS games the only way to play them is through a PC.

and my media centre PC paint is there are firms selling PC's slightly larger than a DVD player that are basicaly PC's but designed to be used in the living room as a media player stopping the need for a full PC in the room. as for getting other none standard file formats on the PS3 the only way is to use linux on it.

but my point about consoles moving towards PC is that consoles use to be for gaming and gaming alone (the Wii still is) but from the PS2 onwards they have started to add things such as web browsers, keyboard and mouse support, DVD/Bluray play back and support for pictures and audio files. if some1 mention this type of thing happening a few years back it would of seemed stupid as it didnt seem like something that would ever happen.

but your saying you hate the keyboard and mouse setup there is actualy a firm makes a USB device for the 360 and PS3 that allows the use of a mouse and keyboard instead of the standard controller and this device for all it has a prety high price tag actualy sells realy well as the lack of keyboard and mouse is the main thing that stops PC users going totaly to console. but then again chances are the next gen of consoles will probly offer support for this out of the box. then there is a chance console's will affect PC sales but till then as I said both have thier uses and both always will till one can offer both ways of play perfectly.

Michelasso
04-07-2009, 06:17 AM
Just one thing: from what I understood game developers prefer to invest time in making the port of games to consoles working with the controllers. C&C RA3 devs clearly stated that. I actually agree with this. The FPS proved that the mouse is not a must. Halo 3, for console, has been the most sold FPS ever. Then, guess what? I don't like FPs at all!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That's why I stick with consoles. Their games fit more my tastes.

caswallawn_2k7
04-07-2009, 09:35 AM
the main thing is the fact the console controller dont have the dexterity for fast paced game play in either game. as for halo alot of that is target lock so its actualy closer to a RPG than a true shooter as there is very little skill needed for it and if you do take the time to actualy aim properly chances are you will be killed by some1 who didnt bother.