Beware of the XBOX

[Matt_2000_17]

The PC is still and will always be the best platform for gaming.

Although the quality and speed of consoles has increased, it'll never reach the standards of the PC, simply because PC technology is constantly moving forwards. The technology within consoles only advances every 2 or 3 years. I'm not trying to take anything away from the console coz I own an Xbox and Gamecube but you have to admit that the PC is the best gaming platform.

Just remember, console games are created on the PC so without it there'd be no consoles.

The PC gaming market is massive, it has some of the greatest games ever created. At the moment, the market is slow but with great titles like UT2004, HL2, Breed, Deus Ex 2, Thief 3, Battlefield:Vietnam, Star Wars Battlegrounds, Far Cry, and many more waiting to be released, this is going to be a great year for the PC and will no doubt do some good for the market.

[KraniX]

Xbox is a better overall machine due to hdd, dvd, online etc.

Ben

sounds bit like a pc to me...

(but with a 733 cpu)

[Stewart]

Both good machines in their own right (games etc) but the Xbox is a better overall machine due to hdd, dvd, online etc.

If you want hard drives, DVD play back, and online gaming, you do it properly, on a PC. A console is to be judged on how good the games are, not how much like a PC in a box you can make it.

Game enjoyment always does it for me, not DVD playback, for which I can use my PC, or a DVD player. Having a third DVD player on my console isn't going to matter, if there are less games that I want to play on it, than on another system.

[directhex]

ho hum.

pc technology is constantly moving forwards, usually building on tech stolen from consoles (e.g. RAMBUS was tech used in the N64, then dumped by Nintendo in future projects for being slow, the Radeon 9x00 series is based on work by ArtX, whom ATI bought out after they designed the gamecube's Flipper & got them to hax it into infinity to make high-end PC parts). This is a BAD THING for publishers. If your game has a long release cycle on PC, it'll be old & not work by the time it comes out. The games of the late 90's which made the mistake of concentrating on a particular graphics tech that died just before release are testament to this. Of the limited number of people who buy your game, half of them involve excruciating phone calls to your tech support team trying to explain how the customer's PCWorld PC can't run your game.

PC games are NOT a good place to make profit

And I hate to say it, kids, but that's what the games companies are here to do.

Either way, people aren't gonna buy new games - they paid for Half Life in 1997, so they're damn well gonna keep playing Counterstrike. For ever and ever and ever.

Console games are worth more. Check the ELSPA Charts. In terms of pure units shifted, only one PC game makes it into the top 20.

The PC may well be able to kick ass in potentiae, but any suggestion that it isn't in severe trouble is just misguided

[daniel_owen_uk]

There is no doubt at all that the pc is a superior platform, anyone that argues it just doesn't know what they are talking about, you can talk about lighter os's and hardware compatibility all you like, you show me a games console that can keep up with my pc and I will eat my hat.

The problem is not that, the problem is that games writter just dont make enough money out of pc games, so they write for stuff like the xbox (which I have).

You can complain all you like about games being ruined by consoles, but in truth if it wasn't for consoles the games writters wouldn't have the budget to create the games we all love to play.

So basically STOP MOANING

[Matt_2000_17]

ho hum.

pc technology is constantly moving forwards, usually building on tech stolen from consoles (e.g. RAMBUS was tech used in the N64, then dumped by Nintendo in future projects for being slow, the Radeon 9x00 series is based on work by ArtX, whom ATI bought out after they designed the gamecube's Flipper & got them to hax it into infinity to make high-end PC parts). This is a BAD THING for publishers. If your game has a long release cycle on PC, it'll be old & not work by the time it comes out. The games of the late 90's which made the mistake of concentrating on a particular graphics tech that died just before release are testament to this. Of the limited number of people who buy your game, half of them involve excruciating phone calls to your tech support team trying to explain how the customer's PCWorld PC can't run your game.

PC games are NOT a good place to make profit

And I hate to say it, kids, but that's what the games companies are here to do.

Either way, people aren't gonna buy new games - they paid for Half Life in 1997, so they're damn well gonna keep playing Counterstrike. For ever and ever and ever.

Console games are worth more. Check the ELSPA Charts. In terms of pure units shifted, only one PC game makes it into the top 20.

The PC may well be able to kick ass in potentiae, but any suggestion that it isn't in severe trouble is just misguided

You're the one who's misguided. The PC isn't in any sort of trouble, the problem is that there has been a lack of games coming out for it over the start of the new year, and the same can be said for the consoles aswell.

The only reason for games to be released for consoles first is because they are easier to deal with because a consoles technology doesn't change from month to month. Creating a game for a PC is different because you have to keep up with the constant change in technology available and have to intergrate that into the game so it'll work. Thats why PC games take longer to create. Duke Nukem Forever is a very good example.

As for the ELSPA charts, there hasn't been enough decent games out this year for the PC, in order for more to be in the chart. Just you wait for the likes of UT2004 and Battlefield Vietnam. Then will see!

Where did you get the idea that PC technology is stolen from consoles? PC's have been around alot longer than consoles. Consoles are built on technology and research from the PC.

I'll keep saying it.

THE PC IS STILL AND WILL ALWAYS REMAIN THE BEST!!!!!

And by the way. I never said PC games were a good place for profit. And people will continue buy new games for the PC simply because they are the best in the business, AND YOU KNOW IT!

[Bunjiweb]

If you want hard drives, DVD play back, and online gaming, you do it properly, on a PC. A console is to be judged on how good the games are, not how much like a PC in a box you can make it.

Game enjoyment always does it for me, not DVD playback, for which I can use my PC, or a DVD player. Having a third DVD player on my console isn't going to matter, if there are less games that I want to play on it, than on another system.

I wasnt even comparing it to the PC, as the PC is not a GAMES CONSOLE

I was comparing it to the gamecube and other consoles.

The PC is a good games platform, probably better than the xbox....please dont make me feel stupid when im not..

Ben

[directhex]

You're the one who's misguided. The PC isn't in any sort of trouble, the problem is that there has been a lack of games coming out for it over the start of the new year, and the same can be said for the consoles aswell.

So the biggest selling PC games of last year (e.g. Halo, Vice City) and some of the biggest ones of this year (Deus Ex 2, Thief 3) being low-quality conversions from console isn't a problem? I'm not talking about the here & now, I'm talking about general industry trends.

The only reason for games to be released for consoles first is because they are easier to deal with because a consoles technology doesn't change from month to month. Creating a game for a PC is different because you have to keep up with the constant change in technology available and have to intergrate that into the game so it'll work. Thats why PC games take longer to create. Duke Nukem Forever is a very good example.

Most games these days are made using middleware & off-the-shelf engine components, making it a quick recompile job to port from any platform to any other platform. Duke Nukem Forever uses off-the-shelf components same as anyone else (god knows WHAT they're using at the moment, I'm sure it was the Quake 2 engine last time I cared).

At its core, games are designed for an API. Gamecube, XBox, PS2, Renderware, OpenGL, OpenSceneGraph or DirectX SDK is irrelevant - you end up just writing for one targeted set of commands, later tweaking as you see fit to beter exploit the target platform (with some ports made easier by similarity, e.g. XBox SDK and DirectX SDK). PC games only take longer when developers have to start chopping things to pieces to make games run on more hardware. How does this benefit consumers? If a developer could go "actually, we're gonna use features only found on 9x00 or geforceFX & not bother trying to add capability for slower cards cos in the end it looks ass & the high-end renderer has sacrifices made too", then you'd get better looking games! But... the "PC Elite" accounts for between 0.0 and 0.0% of the total market, so they can't do that - and as long as the average shmuck has a PC World PC with SIS630 onboard, publishers are gonna have to either release a high-end-only flop, spend silly time getting a game running at multiple detail levels, or release crap-looking games.

Either way the profits can be easily destroyed trying to pay for qualified technical staff at a call centre trying to explain to people how to click "install"

As for the ELSPA charts, there hasn't been enough decent games out this year for the PC, in order for more to be in the chart. Just you wait for the likes of UT2004 and Battlefield Vietnam. Then will see!

A couple of weeks with 2 PC games in the charts isn't really gonna offset the tide of games on other platforms is it?

Where did you get the idea that PC technology is stolen from consoles? PC's have been around alot longer than consoles. Consoles are built on technology and research from the PC.

I cited 2 very specific examples (RDRAM & Radeon 9x00 series). Did you not see them? I'll repeat. the first consumer use of RAMBUS memory was the Nintendo 64 games console. Nintendo said they were dropping it because it was ass about the same time Intel picked up on it for Pentium 4 systems heralding it as the next big thing. Nintendo commissionned a small lab called ArtX to design the Flipper coprocessor on their forthcoming console, codenamed Dolphin. ArtX was made from some of the best talent from former partners SGI, and designed a very good chip - but didn't realyl have much by way of fabrication process. At that moment, ATI swept in, bought ArtX, and started fabbing Flipper - a win for Nintendo, and a BIG win for them since they had technlogy that could be heavily enhanced for use in consumer graphics cards (& manifested itself in the 9500-9800 series)

I'll keep saying it.

--Snip cos this is just annoying--

And I'll keep saying that focusing on the platform rather than the game experience is retarded. What matters is the games. The problem is that the PC isn't a good home for them.

And by the way. I never said PC games were a good place for profit. And people will continue buy new games for the PC simply because they are the best in the business, AND YOU KNOW IT!

Which people specifically? People who matter to industry go straight for consoles, because they don't want the nightmarish experience of trying to configure £1000 of equipment just to play an advanced version of Doom - they just wanna come home, sit down, and play a game.

I've been playing videogames for 15 years, PC games for 10 of those, own 8 games consoles, and have walked through busy metropolitain streets with development kits on my shoulder. Through it all, all that matters is the games.

If you'll excuse me, I'll go back to playing Jet Set Radio on my Dreamcast, Super Metroid on my Super Nintendo, and the Unreal Tournament 2004 demo on my PC.

[directhex]

Can I just quickly add that whilst XBox and PC components are similar, THE XBOX IS NOT A PC. It has a standard specification, and no headaches trying to integrate different detail levels etc. It is a standardised platform. It is a games console.

And before anyone says "but I can run linux on it!!!", I had linux running on my Hitachi SuperH4-powered Dreamcast (as well as playing emulated games & watching DiVX) years before microsoft even thought about making a games console.

[5lab]

christ.. i thought narrow-mindedness had gone about this kinda stuff. its like everyone is 11 again..

one of the reason pc games dont do so well is simply piracy. sure you can get copied games for a ps2/xbox, but that requires you take the thing to bits, void you warentee, solder something onto the mobo.. then you have to have a pc with dvd-r or a mate who can supply the games. compare that to a pc where you can simply load kazaa and run the game.. its no wonder..

the pc is the most powerful and capable games machine.. but it lacks stuff that consoles have. its not as fun to have your mates round for a game of something, you cant just have 4 of you sat on a sofa playing tennis.. pcs are rarely hooked up to screens the same size as teh average console, so the games loose impact. and pcs just arnt as cool - i may suggest to a lass a game on a console to kill a bit of time, but i'd never ask if she wants a game of cs...

pcs are also a lot more expensive, to build in the first place then to run after that.. i brought my ps2 on release day, at a cost of £300. since then i have brought another controller (£20), a couple of memory cards (£30) a net adapter (£15).. and thats it. 4 years on its playing the newest games available, and its only cost me £400. if i'd spent the money on a pc back then.. £400 would have got me a celeron, ~500 mhz, and maybe a geforce 1 if i was lucky. that wouldnt play *anything* nowerdays..

what im trying to say is that pcs are technically the best type of gaming device, but for flexibility, cost, varyity of games and coolness, imo a console is the best games platform..

which one? i would say ps2.. gamecubes are nice, but there arent enough games around.. xbox is a bit big.. if they redesigned the xbox to look like a dvd player i might change my mind but at the moment the ps2 suits my livingroom really well, and im gonna stick with it for a bit longer

[Bindibadgi]

Tbh, the only reason why the console market is suffering (if you want to call it that)now is the over diversity of systems. What pisses me off is that developers will soley make for one or 2 systems and not the other - like resident evil for example. I can accept Mario being only on Nintendo like it always has, but eventually most games i like come out on the PC and i enjoy the superior graphical quality over that of a TV. If i had a HDTV it maybe different, but then again i prefer a keyboard and mouse and the ability to easily play online and at lans with the same equipment.

However, very little on the PC beats playing Pro Ev with 7 other friends or having Tekken/Street Fighter 2 Alpha tornys or getting out classics like streets of rage for the social or retro aspect.

People go straight for consoles as said - accesiblity. But i already have £2k worth of PC equipment for work and cause im an enthusiast (like many many other gamers or enthusiast scene people) so we wanna play the games with the best quality graphics.

What absolutely and wholey pisses me off though is the piss poor console to PC ports that some game developers do. Going the other way from PC to console is BETTER (although maybe not easier, i dont know, it shouldnt be any harder?) cause u just have to lower the texture size and resolution and lower poly models. Getting higher res textures and models takes longer i would have thought??

I think only making games for one system or console destroys the industry from a gaming perspective. If consoles had a base like IBM-x86 (no, im not saying "every console should be a PC" but im saying something LIKE that foundation infrastructure) to work off, then it would make coding games faster, easier, cheaper and better for everyone. Also theyll be easier to mutli-platform and console makers can bring out upgrades or new systems quicker.

[directhex]

misunderstanding, argument, whatever. it's gone, let's pretend it never happened.

play nice, kids

[Bindibadgi]

I had a great reply for you too Hex but i lost it Bah.

[directhex]

write it again then!

I enjoy reasoned debate \o/

[Bindibadgi]

write it again then!

I enjoy reasoned debate \o/

Cant remember what i said Something about where you define a PC and a console and if i had a nf2 shuttle plugged into a TV only with Xbox controllers plugged into the usb..

[BEANFro Elite]

well to be honest i'm very happy for games to be multiple consoles, but it should the way it used to be in the older days:

games developed for pc > other work with the pc coders watering down the game where applicable > release the game...

this is a much better compromise because all formats have a quality game.