Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
I don't think that's what he meant though, he meant that the games now coming out on PC are console games.
Consoles are maybe good for pc gamig?
- Thread starter DooMeR
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
No getting away from the fact though, PC gamers are now playing console games
now, tell me what constitutes a console game? is it a racer? sorry we had those on the pc before they were remotely possible on anything else. shooters? try again.puzzle games? they were born on pc's and home computers, not consoles.
so, do you mean we're playing games on our pc's that were originally developed on a console? oh you do? so what, it makes no difference what it's developed on. Now it is unfortunate that some games developed on a console are console-orientated even when (badly) ported and this is a shame - but sorry again, thats been happening for years. Deus ex II anybody? at the same time, we have a host of games developed on the console first that excel on the pc so what's the issue there?
please...dont try to patronise me. it wont work.
what we have is a situation where an open system (the pc) fueled development of a comparitively cheap platform (the home console). as consoles progressed the playing field levelled, the revenue they generate and also the relativfely cheap cost to produce gaqmes on closed system are probably the two biggest contributers. You could mention piracy too but i wont
Now there is no reason why the pc market cant stay in the running if digital downloads really take hold. Even if future titles are almost exclusively developed on consoles - as long as the hardware stays sufficiantly similar, the cost of porting should be all that expensive and dev's shoudl eb recouping their costs and then some - if steam works for valve it should work for everybody else.Anyway digression, the point is......it makes bugger all difference what a game is developed on. its how its developed, and how its ported, that makes the difference. Whether its a great port (devil may cry 4) or terrible haqrdware munching port (GTAIV)/.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 650
- Location
- Shropshire
develpers will always have to aim for the largest markets. pc exclusive games are genrally nowadays just sims, i cant thing of more than 10 games in the past couple of years that are pc only (well mainstream games)
I do think though that perhaps the relentless push for better graphics has eaised a bit, which can be put donw partly to the console market. I cant be doing without my 1920 * 1200 resolution though, and my aa and af etc..
I do think though that perhaps the relentless push for better graphics has eaised a bit, which can be put donw partly to the console market. I cant be doing without my 1920 * 1200 resolution though, and my aa and af etc..
What makes you think he;s including the cost of the Monitor,kb,mouse and speakers in the computer set up?
many people on here have £1000+ rigs which are just the actually pc no peripherals which is easily 3 + times the cost of a xbox.
the "average" desktop pc is still AGP and running a pentium era processor, so you'd need to add in at least a new mobo.
Just hook up your PC to your TV and have the best of both worlds. Full 1080p gaming, in your living room, and the ability to play games like ETW (there's one which would never work on consoles).
I wonder though, even if all the hardware out there (PC and consoles) magically got 10x more powerful overnight, would developers actually have the resource when making a game to take advantage of this, or would all the extra coding, artwork etc make the games too expensive? I can see a point when the hardware gets so good that each developer is going to come up with one huge 3D engine, and just use it for all their games.
Incidentally Tefal, your sig (and the linked thread) gave me a great chuckle, thanks!
I wonder though, even if all the hardware out there (PC and consoles) magically got 10x more powerful overnight, would developers actually have the resource when making a game to take advantage of this, or would all the extra coding, artwork etc make the games too expensive? I can see a point when the hardware gets so good that each developer is going to come up with one huge 3D engine, and just use it for all their games.
Incidentally Tefal, your sig (and the linked thread) gave me a great chuckle, thanks!
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,400
i think pc gaming will pick up if someone makes a good small gpu for a cheap price that runs as well as the latest console and is used in laptops. the problem is no retailers stock decent laptops and pc specs at reasonable prices and tere is generally a lack of education on what pc/laptop hardware runs games best. most people will buy the 400 quid laptop and use his ps3 for games - what if his £400 laptop could also play games as good as a ps3.
Last edited:
you can get a pretty decent 3850x2 for 56 quid. and that will run cod 4 at a higher ress and with higher AF and AA at a better frame rate than the consoles.
But laptops?
The heat is too much of an issue, not to mention the touchpad. It would be terrible if that became the prime focus for pc games input..
Last edited:
You'll probably find that companies just make engines (with a tech demo game, think the unreal people and UT3) and others that don't have the grunt to make their own just license them and mod them as they need.
with these so called console ports, when are we ever going to get a decent game like CoD or BF that combines PC and console players on the same field. Without getting into the obvious differences and seeing mates that use a controller as effectively as a mouse+keyboard, im sure that these coders could get something to work ?
I'd love to join a game with mates on their consoles and finally get to school them
I'd love to join a game with mates on their consoles and finally get to school them
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 337
I will get crucified for this but....
I honestly think the whole pc vs console thing has a very simple answer.... Consoles are MUCH better.
Honestly for all the hype I genuinly can't tell the difference between my ps3 hooked up to my 46" LCD tv and a rig that costs in excess of £2000. It's utter ********. Yes I have got myself a good rig but this is due to the fact that, bar the use of Microsoft Office and a couple of other bits of software for uni, my PC is used for games like Football manager and CIV. These are 2 games (and genres) where the console market is not even close to competing in.
Apart from that, however, I have now seen a few rigs that have cost a small fortune to create that don't impress me more than my ps3. Seriously! I honestly believe people get caught up the numbers game when it comes to GPU's etc and don't actually just look at the game. My mate running Crysis at what I am told is max settings full AA or whatever on a PC that cost him over £2000 and a screen which was somewhere around £1000 just did not live up to the hype in the slightest. Ok it looked a little, and I mean a little, bit better than lets say Bioshock on my PS3 but the price difference is stupid. FFS his GPU's cost more than my entire rig (955BE , hd4870 1gb, 4gb 1600 DDR3 etc)
Waste of money!!!! Buy a console, hook it to your screen and never worry about upgrading until the next one comes out.
Ok gentlemen... let me have it
I honestly think the whole pc vs console thing has a very simple answer.... Consoles are MUCH better.
Honestly for all the hype I genuinly can't tell the difference between my ps3 hooked up to my 46" LCD tv and a rig that costs in excess of £2000. It's utter ********. Yes I have got myself a good rig but this is due to the fact that, bar the use of Microsoft Office and a couple of other bits of software for uni, my PC is used for games like Football manager and CIV. These are 2 games (and genres) where the console market is not even close to competing in.
Apart from that, however, I have now seen a few rigs that have cost a small fortune to create that don't impress me more than my ps3. Seriously! I honestly believe people get caught up the numbers game when it comes to GPU's etc and don't actually just look at the game. My mate running Crysis at what I am told is max settings full AA or whatever on a PC that cost him over £2000 and a screen which was somewhere around £1000 just did not live up to the hype in the slightest. Ok it looked a little, and I mean a little, bit better than lets say Bioshock on my PS3 but the price difference is stupid. FFS his GPU's cost more than my entire rig (955BE , hd4870 1gb, 4gb 1600 DDR3 etc)
Waste of money!!!! Buy a console, hook it to your screen and never worry about upgrading until the next one comes out.
Ok gentlemen... let me have it
At the OP, yes and no I guess, sucks that some PC centric franchises got dumbed down over the years to accomodate for Console but at the same time I'm very happy that some Console games came over, loving SF4, and RE5 I personally thought was an improved experience over the console version thanks to mouse and keyboard controls.
Yeah this is the point i was trying to make we have been getting a lot of console ports and they have all beeen better versions of their console counter parts Esspecily the ones by capcom. But games like crysis which are pc exclusives all though impressive graphicly you get a lot of people complaining that they cant run the game. I personaily would rather have a good looking game like re 5 that i can run maxed out at a stable 60 fps then a crysis type of game wtih awesome graphics that i struggle to run at 30 fps.
@ coolsouthern, if he was running crysis on a monitor costing a grand i'd assume would be a 30 incher running @ 2560x1600 if he was running at that resultion and at full aa and max settings it should defentily blow bioshock away on the ps3 which runs at 1200x675 according to the internet !
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
