This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

"Consoles are holding gaming back".

#241sirtonnePosted 3/28/2014 11:19:43 AM
Not gonna read through all the responses here, but in case it hasn't been said yet there are 2 very common sense reasons consoles aren't holding gaming back, in fact PC gaming as we know it owes it's existence to consoles.

1. They are what drives the gaming market's growth. PC gaming went from a niche gamer's platform with different types of games than consoles to mainstream gaming with AAA multiplats because of the profitable market consoles created. Big games cost more and more to make so the larger console audience is needed to justify costs. If they went away, so would many devs, and PC gaming as we know it.

2. Most people don't have high-end PCs able to significantly outperform new consoles anyway, so making games look and perform like a whole gen better than current consoles would be pointless, there wouldn't be enough gamers to buy them for it to be profitable.
#242Unbridled9Posted 3/28/2014 11:32:08 AM
r0ge00 posted...

http://i.imgur.com/Zq9dMcA.png


Yea. It's pretty clear that this is HEAVILY biased. If using a potato for the 360 didn't que you in (here's a hint, if you want to be taken seriously, don't do something like that) than the fact that it doesn't even try to factor in hard copies and used games for the 360 would.

I love steam and all, but saying it's cheaper while then marking games like GTAIII as n/a just shows you're not being fair and know nothing, not to mention comparing them for the price of what appears to be a new game while including bundles for Steam.

I got a 360 with all those games. It cost me nothing since I stole it from someones house. Therefore the 360 is better because it costs nothing to steal someone elses games, right?
---
The enemy of knowledge is ignorance, not religion.
#243LoshadtPosted 3/28/2014 11:49:15 AM(edited)
sirtonne posted...
Not gonna read through all the responses here, but in case it hasn't been said yet there are 2 very common sense reasons consoles aren't holding gaming back, in fact PC gaming as we know it owes it's existence to consoles.

1. They are what drives the gaming market's growth. PC gaming went from a niche gamer's platform with different types of games than consoles to mainstream gaming with AAA multiplats because of the profitable market consoles created. Big games cost more and more to make so the larger console audience is needed to justify costs. If they went away, so would many devs, and PC gaming as we know it.

2. Most people don't have high-end PCs able to significantly outperform new consoles anyway, so making games look and perform like a whole gen better than current consoles would be pointless, there wouldn't be enough gamers to buy them for it to be profitable.


The problem with #1 is that AAA gaming has definitely been in the gutter for a while now. Developers want as many people as possible, and to get as many people as possible they have to invest exorbitant amounts of money into creating an "accessible" game and heavily marketing it to said audience. So while consoles made video games more profitable, that obviously doesn't work wonders for a lot of the people who liked video games in the 90's.

Technologically speaking the average PC used for video games (not facebook games and flash games) usually isn't much better than the PS4/Xbone, but as the years go on what is considered average will continue to improve while the consoles remain the same, meanwhile console users will still expect good graphics, which means at this point other things (usually gameplay elements) will have to suffer. The previous generation started out comparable to fairly high end computers at the time and could still compete for a couple of years, the current generation is already laughably obsolete and will more than likely be the longest lasting console gen yet.
---
Remember to hug you're waifu.
#244SinfullyvannilaPosted 3/28/2014 4:36:49 PM
SilentHawk29 posted...
Lesser hardware yet the games are more complex. Why is that?


I'm just saying, the previous games were made on lesser hardware then the latter(except for invisible war, that was pretty comparable), with that in mind, how can hardware inferiority relate to "holding games back"?

It's contradictory logic.
---
Friend Code 3050-7626-8586 Abra/Sigilyph/Gothorita FS, PM me for FS trades.
#245PraetorXynPosted 3/28/2014 4:39:16 PM
Unbridled9 posted...
r0ge00 posted...

http://i.imgur.com/Zq9dMcA.png


Yea. It's pretty clear that this is HEAVILY biased. If using a potato for the 360 didn't que you in (here's a hint, if you want to be taken seriously, don't do something like that) than the fact that it doesn't even try to factor in hard copies and used games for the 360 would.

I love steam and all, but saying it's cheaper while then marking games like GTAIII as n/a just shows you're not being fair and know nothing, not to mention comparing them for the price of what appears to be a new game while including bundles for Steam.

I got a 360 with all those games. It cost me nothing since I stole it from someones house. Therefore the 360 is better because it costs nothing to steal someone elses games, right?


Come back when you have around 200 console games for about $1000 . U didn't start using Steam until Skyrim came out! and I've got a around 100 games on there and about the same on GOG.com
---
Console war in a nutshell:
http://imgur.com/xA6GJZ9.png
#246PraetorXynPosted 3/28/2014 4:43:46 PM
Sinfullyvannila posted...
SilentHawk29 posted...
Lesser hardware yet the games are more complex. Why is that?


I'm just saying, the previous games were made on lesser hardware then the latter(except for invisible war, that was pretty comparable), with that in mind, how can hardware inferiority relate to "holding games back"?

It's contradictory logic.


Invisible War was greatly held back by Xbox hardware. That's why it has tons of loading transitions instead of massive open levels like Deus Ex.

Most if the time the games are held back because they're trying to appeal to console gamers but there are plenty of examples of consoles themselves holding games back.

Thus really became apparent to me when I saw my friend play the Xbox port of Morrowind.to this day I don't think I've ever witnessed anywhere near those load times in anything else.
---
Console war in a nutshell:
http://imgur.com/xA6GJZ9.png
#247BlackWizardMagusPosted 3/28/2014 6:45:20 PM
Sinfullyvannila posted...
SilentHawk29 posted...
Lesser hardware yet the games are more complex. Why is that?


I'm just saying, the previous games were made on lesser hardware then the latter(except for invisible war, that was pretty comparable), with that in mind, how can hardware inferiority relate to "holding games back"?

It's contradictory logic.


No, they were made on superior hardware; the PCs at the time of release of game A were already superior to the consoles that multi-plat game B came out on years later. Consoles can't handle too much going on at once; thus, things are smaller and more limited compared to PC games.
---
"The black wind howls. One among you will shortly perish"
Magus
#248DarkZV2BetaPosted 3/28/2014 6:50:23 PM
RetroGamerGuy posted...
Clouddx posted...
RetroGamerGuy posted...
SaQu1B posted...
Statement is true. Console gaming is for people who are not smart enough to built their own computer and must resort to someone else feeding them the games. Console gamers are more into casual no skill games. That is why CoD sells millions of copies on consoles.


Lol. I don't really see Jrpgs being made for PC sooo yeah.


Exactly, we don't like casual no skills games.


Rpgs aren't meant to be ridiculously hard. It's meant to tell a story. That's the sort of thing that appeals to me. Although it isn't true that rpgs require no skill. You do need to have the ability to plan out your way throughout the game so that you aren't getting killed left and right. Battles such as for example the Lingering Will in KH, that isn't something people with no skills can get through.


Mainstream JRPGs don't require any sort of planning or forethought. Any measure of difficulty is the exception and not the rule within that genre.
That said, JRPGs do a lot of things. Story is only one of them. I, for one, don't enjoy a linear, driven, "story" JRPG experience so much as an interesting world with lots of character, and I'd bet I'm not alone in that.
---
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross
#249BlackWizardMagusPosted 3/28/2014 6:58:40 PM
Is there a reason for this resurrection of 15 year old arguments between western and eastern RPGs? I thought maybe we all realized that the billion dollar game industry can afford various sub-genres.
---
"The black wind howls. One among you will shortly perish"
Magus
#250TheWayOfTheGunPosted 3/28/2014 7:00:37 PM(edited)
Here's the truth.

PC gaming is lame. It's attracts the nerdiest of nerdy gamers. While this is great for community developments such as a mods it also turns of the mainstream.

Add to that the instinctive stinginess of PC gamers when it comes to controls (M/KB fir life bro!) and graphics, I honestly despise PC games slightly more than console gamers.

The only reason why PC gamers think so highly of themselves these days is because the originalness of the PS1/N64/Dreamcast is no more.

But the sad thing is that the console games are looking more like PC games and ending up just a poor ,mans version.

Was listening to this the entire time I typed this -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xQXkh8Mek

---
Glorious God Gamers > PC Master Race > Console Peasants ---> http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/508/644/9eb.jpg