The rest of the articleOriginally Posted by The Inquirer
The rest of the articleOriginally Posted by The Inquirer
Last edited by Stoo; 07-08-2007 at 10:52 AM. Reason: Please do not copy entire articles verbatim
quote taken from someone from another site that posted a similar thread to yours.
Interesting read i say:
I think Gaming is about to change (it is already) The signs have been there for a while now, but this is how I can see aleast one version of the short term future based on the following assumptions :
1) Exclusivity is dwindling. The same games are appearing on PC, 360, PS3 (but often not the wii - different target market/lesser hardware)
2) Sony has embraced open standards for online gaming and keyboard/mouse support, plus allows the use of mods. The 360 has LIVE, which is somewhat ropey and allows peer to peer gaming, but has decent friend list support. Online gaming is now standard and viable though with both consoles.
3) Console Developers are now starting to embrace KB/M, open online gaming and mods. Im talking about UT3 for the PS3. Mark Rein has now confirmed KB/M support, and we know it works with PC mods and has an open network policy here
4) Building a decent gaming PC runs to atleast $1000 or £700. I know you can build them cheaper, but Im talking atleast mid to high end ish technology, not average, plus the top end PC's cost a fair bit more.
Future Outlook for 2008
Many people will not bother upgrading their PC's further. They will keep the ones they have got and use them for older games, web, office, email, photos etc. For their games they will buy a PS3 or maybe a 360 and have it on their desks, plugged into a KB/M and their hires monitor. They will not bother with some of the next gen PC titles as they simply cant justify the massive (by PS3 standards) cost outlay to make the game playable.
It seems to be already happening. People in forums are saying that they have decided to buy X console rather than spend $500 on a new graphics card. With the UT3 announcement, its feasible to play your PS3 like its a PC, on your desk without being tied to a peer to peer online gaming network like the 360. It will have proper PC based servers.
There will always be people who will still buy consoles for sofa use, and people who will buy PC's for hardcore gaming use. Im willing to bet though that the trend above starts growing in numbers.. partly thanks to the likes of NVIDIA and ATI with their massively overpriced graphics cards which cost as much as a 360/part of a PS3, plus the fact that PC exclusivity seems to be going (but not fully gone yet) out of the window !
My new PC is beefy, but thats it now... no more massive upgrades. Im seriously tempted by putting a PS3 on my desk for gaming if KB/M support in my favourite FPS games is available, plus I can browse open net servers (rather than MS LIVE match making peer to peer).
I don't fall into that crowd. I have my PC and I spec it for gaming as well as the other stuff I do. I've never really liked the consoles and fall into the 'Why should I buy one?' camp.. I'm strictly a mouse and keyboard fella (I hate, loathe and can't use console controllers apart from the Wii) and I buy my PCs to do multiple things, I can't see that changing (unless the market forces me too!)![]()
I'm a PC gamer and.. I completely agree with Mark. He's got it spot on.
The PC is better placed to act as the system to create games/mods than actually play them exclusively.
yea and these games made for consoles where made using a PC after all so i dont see why the PC gaming scene wil die. i do believe that if nvidia and ATI price there cards more reasonable than that should boost the PC scene
This sounds very familiar - why? Becuase it was said when the PS1 came out, when the PS2 came out etc etcFuture Outlook for 2008
Many people will not bother upgrading their PC's further. They will keep the ones they have got and use them for older games, web, office, email, photos etc.
Building a high end gaming pc is just as expensive as it was a few years ago really, if not cheaper relative to consoles.
Plus this is one persons view, whereas the guys behind Crysis are making it for the PC only (at least initially). If the quality of graphics etc is going to be driven by consoles then there will be much less improvement and innovation as companies will not be making games to take advantage of the most powerful hardware - i.e. PCs.
It sounds like the same old argument that has come out time and time again
As soon as I work out how to emulate a PS3, I'll be happy
J.
Just a reminder folks, please don't copy entire articles from other websites, it's not only rude, it's also a breach of copyright (Unless you sought the permission from the article holder).
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
i understand man its getting too redicolous in the PC front has it costs an arm and a leg to run the latest games on its full glory. why cant PC developers develop there games aimed that yesterdays technology (7 series and 8 series)instead of tommorows (9 series gfx's) ?
developers need to optimise their games to work on older systems. if graw2 can run on a ps3 easily which has a 7800gt if not mistaken then why cant a PC with a 7800gt run the game on max settings too? this shows that PC developers are not fully optimising there games for such systems.
If everyone used exactly the same operating system and hardware they could![]()
well the majority use windows xp or vista and im sure most people have only a 7800gs if that... all im saying is force maximum settings on a 7900GT at least. older cards should be the benchmark of games instead of newer or none existing ones(crysis needing a bloody 9 series card ).
i am pretty sure a game like graw2 can EASILY be played on a 7800gt on MAX settings if they had set that has the card has the benchmar
Like many 'hardcore' console gamers you seem to be making the same error of judgement: that console games run at the same quality settings as a PC version.
GRAW 2 on the PC will be running at much higher quality settings than the PS3 version, the resolution is just a starting point but textures and details affect everything to.
The reason why they shouldn't stop making games for the next technology is the reason why the PC is the best gaming system: it pushes the boundaries of the technology and of the art and gives game developers the freedom to make what they want not what they're forced to.
And enough of this nosense about PCs being more expensive than a 360 etc. Everyone needs a PC, everyone wants to play games, combine the two and you make a saving. My system is apparently faster than a PS3 but allows me to do more than what that console can do (apart from play Blu-Ray movies, the one good reason to buy a PS3) and will do more in the future.
And as far as the original point goes, I say 'whatever.' The next release of graphics cards will force developers to use the technology because it will excite them too much.
I would much rather have games developers concentrate on content and playability, innovation and enjoyment than concentrate on the latest graphics. I've become a bit bored with games of late simply because very little is coming out that hasn't been done before. If I was going to try and reinvigorate my passion for games I'd probably get a Wii, it's so different. I also can't stand a controller for FPSs so I'll have to keep the PC.
The good news as I see it is that if DX10 is not required then I don't need to buy vista!
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)