Bananadude said:
LOL! You are so wrong with that statement it's scary! Evidence?? I heard similar arguments years ago when PS2 was released. We're still here.
Evidence? Just goto your local
*competitors!* store and try and find the small PC section for games. The new waves of consoles now are totally different to the PS2 \ N64 wave. PC game devs have been churning out crap for the past two years, only decent games I can think of are HL2, Quake 4, UT2004, oh and Football Manager 200x.
What, they're knocking console games out in weeks now are they? Development periods and budgets are comparable. Plus console technology is closer to PC now than it's ever been. Not to mention it's PC hardware/software that is driving the console tech forward. Without PC's, you'd probably still be playing the SNES! .
That’s definitely true, consoles do borrow tech from PCs as NVIDIA and ATI are making the graphic cards for the 360 and PS3.
If you have ever got into level designing, you will know what I mean, I have made a CTF level for UT2004 in a popular mappack for the game (Flag Pack 2004
http://www.planetunreal.com/fp2004/). If you play UT2004 you probably have it on your machine.
Back in the original UT in Unreal Level Editor 2, the only thing you had to worry about were the map layout, the BSP architecture, sound placement and BSP optimization. In UT2003\4 you had to worry about terrain, emitters, static meshes. In the original UT, you could easily knock up a map in a week if you spend around three hours a day on it. In UT2004, it took me seven months to make CTF-FP-Sobek, and that was just using the content ingame, I didn’t model anything in 3dsmax or Maya, that’s why PC games take so long to make now. In UE3 you have to worry about putting different layers on textures to create a bump mapping effect, the vertex shaders as well, its getting too much for level designers to do, you have to have around 3 people to actually create one level now.
If you're playing on a crappy system, sure, but you can't judge a game based on it's worst performance on a system that doesn't meet the recommendations. See these games on decent systems with all settings cranked up to the max and you can't help but be impressed. Consoles just level the playing field for their games, which is great in some respects but a hinderence in others.
Do your research. DX10 is far more than a simple performance upgrade. .
I thought DX10 was just more tightly integrated into the OS to make the frame rates better? And a couple of new effects, better cloud effects is all I can remember
With respect, that is just your own opinion. And people have said the same about GoW. The game sold very well (the most important thing when it comes to the future of the PC games market) and millions of people DID enjoy it. But you're never going to please everyone.
How anyone can say PC gaming is dead is beyond me. You're failing to see the big picture. A cursory glance at the evolution of this industry should make it quite clear that PC and console gaming is here to stay.
Don’t you think that 550 quid for a Geforce 8000 is a total
**** take? When the Voodoo2 came out, that was £180, people thought that was expensive at the time, but now its getting silly. Most of the decent games for the PC are coming out for the Xbox 360.
One of the only reasons why the PC was so popular was for fast paced FPS games, like UT and Quake, and also football manager sims and RPGs games. The PC peaked when UT and Quake 3 first came out. Online gaming was absolutely massive back then. Fast paced FPSs are dead now, Quake 4 multiplayer sunk like the Titanic, that’s the only genre of game (and stragey) that you cannot play on a console because of the controls. CS is the only game that’s keeping the online gaming scene for the PC alive, so many “hardcore” PC gamers back in the day I know have now turned to the 360
