Is The Xbox The Cause Of The Pc Gamer's Downfall?
Starchy
Join Date: 2003-04-21 Member: 15727Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2003-04-21 Member: 15727Members, Constellation
in Discussions
Article today on Slashdot :
<a href='http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/07/0758206&mode=nested&tid=127&tid=186&tid=206' target='_blank'>http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=0...tid=186&tid=206</a>
I have to agree with this, the Xbox was the downfall for Deus Ex 2. It had the ability to be as good as the original. The Xbox simplified this game and ruined it for me. Sure it was OK at best, but such a disappointment.
What do you think?
<a href='http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/07/0758206&mode=nested&tid=127&tid=186&tid=206' target='_blank'>http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=0...tid=186&tid=206</a>
I have to agree with this, the Xbox was the downfall for Deus Ex 2. It had the ability to be as good as the original. The Xbox simplified this game and ruined it for me. Sure it was OK at best, but such a disappointment.
What do you think?
Comments
Seriously this has been run into the damn ground so much already. Sooner or later you will have to respect the fact the Consoles are the bigger market than PCs and therefore the primary focus for many people out to make money will be to make games for consoles because thats where the money is.
Seriously, lets stop arguing about this problem shall we. Consoles and PC's have different Pros and Cons but on the other hand the money is in the console world rather than the PC one and thats where the games companys are going.
ut2k4, HL2, Doom3, Far Cry...
Mouse>joystick thingy
P.s. Starchy is you avatar commander keen?
Anything slightly similar? Lets see, well they're all FPS's for a start and all but 1 and sequels.
Then we look at the X-Box and the must have games are games like Ninja Gaiden, Full Spectrum Warrior, Halo 2, Fable and Psi-Ops to name a few. Thing is these titles all show more inventiveness than most PC titles and will be/are shipped without hardware faults and conflicts, a game designed for a specific hardware platform, no game breaking bugs etc etc. Something the PC really cannot hold a candle too. No offense I love my PC but from a business perspective it really is more cost effective working on games for consoles. Not to mention the time saved on developing for a set platform can lead to designers coming up with all the nifty features that we like but without the huge development time.
PC games are not original anymore, all the innovation has gone to consoles. The PC market is slowly becoming an area of rehashed ideas, sequels and similar genre games in order to make the money back by ensuring sales.
ut2k4, HL2, Doom3, Far Cry... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
i was thinking the exact same thing
Whats the problem now is companys put all their resources on console version of the game, and realese a half-arsed version to PC cuase , yeah you can PATCH PC GAMES.
That aside, consoles are like Macs. They work, because they're limited. And boring.
Time.
The PC will not be outdated because it is a vehicle of change, it changes with each upgrade released. No one company has to be relied on to make PC parts.
Given a few years the Xbox will be outdated... There is no denying that, it happens with all consoles.
-------------------------
However if you are counting all the microsoft consoles, from the Xbox now, to their future generations of consoles, that is something different.
Halo 2 is a sequel which will totally ride on the success of Halo, still not sure why that is, you say PC games are not original...so Halo 2 with the same vehicles, the same battles, the same enemies and the same levels over and over and over and...OVER! That's original now? Oh please. You could say that about any games these days.
Yush Beretta, it's Commander Keen. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hellooooo cut-and-paste approach to level design! Goodbye, coolest features! Hello, frameskip and massive loading times on a bloody console!
Given that the x-box is just a mid to low-end PC with a shiny black plastic case, I'd say that it'd be more akin to developers putting out games oriented toward people with four-year-old machines. Maybe even five or six. Except lacking talent at it.
Hopefully developers will actually bring out the full PC versions (oops... iD may have already fallen on the crapwagon with cutting co-op in D3) and then slice off the unneeded parts.
And actually, on a related note.. I find that kind of funny. The fact that HALO frameskips on the x-box, yet they're going to be putting Doom3 on it. I predict either 'hey.. waaaaait! THIS isn't Doom3! It's Unreal!' or 'wow... beautiful vacation.. love the hulking zombie things..' reactions.
However, it's 2am here, and I'm too tired to expound on these short sentences. Maybe tomor... later today.
Yes, Warren spector himself mentioned that he didn't see a reason to make a different pc version, but at the same time, most of the changes that eventually became part of the downfall, were design visions planned when the game was in the planning stages.
Not explicitly pc-related, but simply poor design choices.
EDIT: oh, and Thief III, unlike DX:IW is an awesome game. I bet he didn't even play it.
He nothing more than a bitter fanboy to me.
EDIT X 2: Talesin, ID isn't developing the coop bit for Doom 3. The guys that are converting it, are.
JC even mentioned that they had to "streamline" (read: remove detail, and change the level design) bits of the xbox version, for it to even work. In short: You prolly won't get the full experience when playing the xbox version.
Yes, Warren spector himself mentioned that he didn't see a reason to make a different pc version, but at the same time, most of the changes that eventually became part of the downfall, were design visions planned when the game was in the planning stages.
Not explicitly pc-related, but simply poor design choices.
EDIT: oh, and Thief III, unlike DX:IW is an awesome game. I bet he didn't even play it.
He nothing more than a bitter fanboy to me.
EDIT X 2: Talesin, ID isn't developing the coop bit for Doom 3. The guys that are converting it, are.
JC even mentioned that they had to "streamline" (read: remove detail, and change the level design) bits of the xbox version, for it to even work. In short: You prolly won't get the full experience when playing the xbox version. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Okay, this is where I draw the line.
Thief 3 is NOT a good game. I haven't even played Thief 1 & 2, but I can tell a bad game when I play it.
Second off, yes, consoles steal many of our great games. Guess what? The next far cry game? Yeah, console exclusive. And yeah, Consoles ARE doing a lot of the innovation right now.
Thing is, is almost everything they are supposedly "Innovating"- was first done on the PC. When it boils down to it, PC does things 100% new, Consoles do things 50% new.
And so many PC Games are sequels or something- who cares, if its fun? I still play Halo SP for its great AI(though I honestly believe the only way it was "Great" was because it dived away from grenades- other than that, its okay). I still play Counter-Strike. I still play all kinds of old games, because their FUN! So whats wrong with making games much like older ones? I mean, innovation is great, but I'd rather have a kickass game with no innovation than a okay game with tons of innovation.
On to the topic.
Sorry, but reading through the article, I get this distinctive flashback to an old issue of the Play Time, my gaming mag of choice in the early 90s. In the same issue they reviewed Wing Commander 3, some reader wrote in about how the C64 was really the pinnacle of game design, and about how full motion video sequences, CD-Rom, and, worst of all, those flashy 32-Bit consoles, were the bane of designer creativity. What do I want to say? I want to say that sorry, Mr. Long, but you have become a grumpy nostalgic.
Before I go on, I'd like to make it clear that I doubt the PC will stop being an interesting market for computer games any time soon. Why? Four words, all abbreviations: FPS, RTS, MMORPG, and, most importantly, mod. There are genres that arguably work best with a keyboard and mouse near you - and now please don't insult my and your intelligence by citing Halo and FFXI. Yes, I know they're good games, but both, as well as their genre-bretheren on the consoles, are still being credited at 'almost reaching PC quality interfaces'. In other words, they are nice, they are fun, but they are in an uphill fight against control schemes that just <i>work</i>.
Incidentally, the three genres I cited are three of the most profitable and high-profile in the market. But even if that market dried up, I would keep playing PC games. Why? Independent developers. Show me the group of dedicated fans who managed to code a full-fleged spacesim on the basis of the XBox - and managed to survive MS' lawsuit. I can name <i>two</i> that did so on the PC. Add to this that we will stay in need of a PC until there's another machine that's capable of running our word processors, P2P programs, and IRC clients just as well, and try to tell me that the PC will become unattractive as a gaming platform anytime soon.
This in mind, I could really not care less about whether I'm playing games on a console or a PC. Both have potential, both have limitations, and as it always was, it's the designers job to avoid the ones while fulfilling the others. If they succeed in that, the game will be fun, regardless of whether I'm playing with a gamepad or mouse.
I'm tired of having Ion Storm cited to me as the herald of the PCs demise. I enjoy Spectors games as much as the next guy, but that he prefers his XBox to his PC doesn't mean I have to, as well. Ion Storm released four games in the last half decade. That's not enough to make their half-departure to the console market representative of the industry as a whole. On that note, Invisible War was not a bad game, and its shortcoming have remarkably little to do with the XBox version - sure, there could've been higher-res textures and a few less loading screens, but in the end, that doesn't make or break a game. Such features just don't, they merely look good on press releases. In the end, it all comes down to Ion Storm having taken risks in the design process and having failed with them - independently from platform.
Allow me to offer another example: Blizzard. This well respected software house develops currently two titles, one for console, one for PC. Why? Because SC:G is fit for consoles, because it will be the most <i>fun</i> to play there, while WoW is best suited for PCs, i.e. the most <i>fun</i> on that kind of platform. I couldn't imagine a healthier approach - creating games for the systems that go naturally with them, as opposed to either smearing a title out over all systems there are (thus leaving many customers somewhat unsatisfied in the best of cases), or forcing all games of a dev onto one platform, simply because one has traditionally worked on it.
The divides between the platforms are crumbling - development houses are no longer forced to exclusivity. It's thus understandeable that users of a single platform feel 'left out' because 'their' devs 'abandon' them. It's understandeable, but not really sensible. I've got a PC, I've got a GC. I use both of them. I have fun with both of them. What else could I, as a gamer, wish for?
(and i have a PC and a GC too <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->)
I don't understand online gaming on consoles, it's always seemed like a PC thing to me, and what is online gaming without a keyboard to type.
i personally don't like using a mic, because i feel stupid talking to a screen.
Also, why design an RTS for a console, without extreme optimisation and innovation, it just doesn't work very well, you just can't beat a keyboard and mouse for functionability.
likewise, imagine playing a platform game, like super mario sunshine on a computer, you cound't play thatwith a keyboard and mouse(well <i>I</i> couldn't)
Consoles and PCs are both good in their own ways, they should never be competing against each other, as their main purposes are different.
A sequel incidently.
One of the only decent (non port) games on the X-Box too.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Full Spectrum Warrior,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On other consoles, not really that wonderful. I just don't see what the fuss was about.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Halo 2,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wait a moment.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->well they're all FPS's for a start and all but 1 and sequels.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<span style='color:white'>If you need a break from this forum, I can simply <i>give</i> it to you, you know?</span>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Fable<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If it ever comes out. I've seen X-Boxers list this game every year since the X-Box has been out. It has yet to materialise.
As a counter however, I say Black and White 2, which also, has never materialised.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thing is these titles all show more inventiveness<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ninja Gaiden you realise is based off the original Ninja Gaiden and its gameplay is as old as the hills (but still fun).
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The PC market is slowly becoming an area of rehashed ideas, sequels and similar genre games in order to make the money back by ensuring sales.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the X-Box certainly has so many original games, oh wait, no it doesn't.
Where is the Robot Alchemic Drive? The Guitaroo Man? Ico? I agree with your point, but the X-box isn't the place to look for originality, that would be the PS2 (all those games are PS2 only incidently, and are among the most unique around). The X-Box is filled with rehashes and ports however, most of the time the best games released on the X-Box actually get ignored anyway, like Panzer Dragoon Orta (itself a sequel).
If you want originality, the X-Box is the wrong tree to be barking up at.
Then microsoft came in and bought it up... thats all. It threw down some $$$ and built a console solely to play a game that would have graced the record books of PC gaming. Saying the Xbox is better is laughable... considering the only reason it is still selling is because MS stole a perfectly good game out of the PC market and shoved it down the FPS starved console owner's mouths.
However, the thing the Xbox has over the PC is accessability... anyone can pick up a Xbox controller and get into the game. Not everyone can tweak their system just right to get the game to run smoothly (or get it running in the first place).
What I expect to see is Consoles lagging behind PCs... giving access to great games which are now outdated to those without the technical knowhow to get them from a PC. Also I predict consoles greatly mimicing PCs, to the point of issueing Keyboard and mouses with the consoles. Why not? the PC has great flexability, and can perform many functions vital to today's business world. Only by putting easy to access games next to functionality will Consoles continue on surviving.
So its a win win situation... consoles for the casual gamer, PCs for the dedicated gamers. Everyone is happy <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
but an xbox doesn't have to run all the crap that comes with windows <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hellooooo cut-and-paste approach to level design! Goodbye, coolest features! Hello, frameskip and massive loading times on a bloody console!
Given that the x-box is just a mid to low-end PC with a shiny black plastic case, I'd say that it'd be more akin to developers putting out games oriented toward people with four-year-old machines. Maybe even five or six. Except lacking talent at it.
Hopefully developers will actually bring out the full PC versions (oops... iD may have already fallen on the crapwagon with cutting co-op in D3) and then slice off the unneeded parts.
And actually, on a related note.. I find that kind of funny. The fact that HALO frameskips on the x-box, yet they're going to be putting Doom3 on it. I predict either 'hey.. waaaaait! THIS isn't Doom3! It's Unreal!' or 'wow... beautiful vacation.. love the hulking zombie things..' reactions. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
actually, the id people have been working there arse's off to get doom3 to run at 30fps on xbox. They re-written the xbox particle and lighting codes (it used to take 7 passes with the MS version, it only takes 4 with iD's) which gives them alot of free system resources.
They also have announced that they are using several tricks with xbox's modifed geforce 3 card to get it to run smoothly.
I felt my comment was fair given what he had stated. It is <span style='color:white'>Stop using an insult to describe those of opposing opinions.</span> to mention on one hand, making a sequel to an FPS game is unoriginal, and then immediately turn around and point out one of the 'orginal' games on X system which is itself an FPS...and a sequel.
I don't know about you, but claiming that doing so on one platform is original and on another magically original, is a complete contradiction in terms to me.
Incidently, I don't even own a PS2, like quite a few people in this thread (surprisingly) I own a PC and a gamecube. I only have my gamecube for the quirky games on it, but then again, they aren't original either, nintendo has simply been rehashing the exact same games for years now (Mario, Zelda and Harvest moon to be precise). Heck, Wind Waker is basically Ocarina of Time with sailing around but has an almost completely identical structure. The PS2 is the only console of the three to have completely outstanding and original titles to me.
My point (Which wasn't clearly stated) is that if you want to compare PC to console originality, the X-Box is the worst to do it with. I'd definitely use the PS2 there, and where I agree with him in that consoles tend to have higher amounts of original games, as it has the most 'different' games I've seen: PC or console.
Such as? Prince of Persia is arguably the best platformer on the X-box (not that is an achivement however, because there isn't any competition except blinx, grabbed by the ghoulies and voodoo vince, which are all terrible too as well as being X-Box exclusive) and in fact is probably one of the best platform games around. Where exactly did the game make the X-Box version suffer as it was on the PS2 as well (comparing it to the three aforementioned X-Box exclusive platformers). What about Beyond Good and Evil or Vex (Also multiplatform, and also, much better than the three aforementioned X-Box exclusive platformers). As a matter of fact, I can't even see how console development affected any of those games on the PC either, in fact, I'd say the console versions were better than the PC version (As so happens with platformers).
So care to name an actual example?
In fact, the only part of POP on the box that I enjoyed was that they still allowed you to unlock the original game; a feature 'disabled' in the PC version by making the hidden wall passageway unbreakable.
And as for Doom3 on the xbox, and using 'tricks' on the GF3-custom chip... it's most likely the standard nVidia fare, cutting down colour calculations. So the visual quality will suck. But most don't really care about that, apparently.
And is that 30fps idle? Because Halo worked fine, so long as you were standing still or not in combat. Then it'd frameskip like a mofo. I can only imagine what D3 will look like, if they go for the classic DooM style 'horde of enemies rushing at you' approach to battles.
The only real factor is <u>money</u>. A console is cheaper. Yes but with the size of the Warez movement today, realisticly, the PC is cheaper. I am not for stealing games, movies and music but it has to be said, because it is a factor of the market. PC allows you to do more in every single aspect, you will all see when they bring out the MS home entertainment centre/xbox. It will be a console <u><b>AND</b></u> a PC.
Ah topic: Yes definetely. When developers are working on ports to and from weaker PC's, it takes away from the majority of us PC gamers who want the best out of our games.
I guess the obvious argument to that is the console's hardware, since the latest consoles are just like a low-end PC with TV-out for graphics. Their ease of use (the "shove a cd in an' start 'er up" approach) compared to a PC makes them appealing to younger players and their parents/older siblings who don't like being called over every few minutes to click the start button (like my brother used to do. grrrr...)
Back in high school most people has at least one console at home, including all the people who would have classed my friendsand I as nerd/geek or whatever for having our own computers (most families had one, but that was different). While we were playing Half-Life, Quake3 and Unreal Tournament the console crowd was playing older games like Quake2
This quote (slightly edited) from SaltzBad sums up why I think consoles are so popular:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->[That aside, consoles are like Macs.] They work, because they're limited. [And boring.]<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If all you want to do is shoot a few zombies ever now and then and not have to spend loads of money on your equipment then a console is perfect. I think xbox is trying to be more PC-like with the newer games and such. Pity they couldn't pack some decent hardware in that shiny black box they love so much.
Well, there's my 2cents, so flame away! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> My apologies if my English isn't up to scratch, I've lived in China for the past month so I'm getting used to the way they speak it...