What is Digg?394 Comments
- redrock34, on 10/10/2007, -1/+74STARCRAFT 2!!!
- Planets, on 10/10/2007, -3/+58Last "few" dedicated gamers? NVIDIA and ATI wouldn't keep developing new video cards (let alone drivers for them) if the PC gamer crowd was just a "few" people. Can anyone please explain to me why so many people have the impression that PC gaming is fading? It's as strong as it has even been.
- kbohip, on 10/10/2007, -3/+36Until very recently I was very worried about the future of pc gaming. At one point I was convinced the developers had given up on the platform completely and just hadn't bothered to tell anyone. I got a lot of new hope though in the latest edition of PC Gamer magazine. Not for many years have I seen that many new pc titles that appealed to me. It was enough to convince me it was time to upgrade my pc, and now I look forward to those new titles.
- frsrblch, on 10/10/2007, -4/+34Because I like to fight fanboy with fanboy...
1) That was covered in the article. Turn down the settings, everything will be okay.
2) What about people on regular TV's... you suggest they have an equal footing with some 52" HDTV? Latency issues will still affect gamers, and Macs? Macs aren't for gaming to start with. You leave Macs out of the PC debate, and I'll leave DVD players out of the console debate. Furthermore, frame rates are what affect your performance most, not graphics detail - see number 1.
3) Right you are... except for all that hardware made specifically for gaming.
4) Opinion. I've had some awesome times on Live, and I've played games full of 12 year old children who can't pursue a simple objective.
5) The last game I played where hacking was even remotely an issue was CS, and that's nothing some good banning can't fix.
6) Strategy games.
7) True.
Your argument for when PC gaming will start to die is when consoles start using the best features of PC gaming. Your argument just defeated itself. - Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Perhaps predicting the demise of PC gaming based on console sales is sort of like people who make wild-eyed claims about the USA being 130% hispanic by 2030 "if current rates continue".
- postal21, on 10/10/2007, -2/+27I was just looking at my newegg account today...
Its been a little over 3 years since I dropped 425 dollars on my 6800gt so i could play doom3 in all its glory...
I bought BIOSHOCK for my 360, because my PC wouldnt really be able to keep up, but by the time I had beaten it, my thumbs were tired, and I severely missed the mouse/keyboard combo. First person shooters are just MADE for computers, and that will never change.
These are some of the sacrifices that have to be made... im just not willing to upgrade still because of VISTA and DX10 scare me. - jorgepblank, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22To hear those two companies just saddens me, especially how they were the ones to make PC gaming great in the first place, and how they STARTED in the PC gaming industry. I think it's because of all the piracy, if a game is good, buy it! It might also be because of all the hardware requirements, on consoles you'll know a game works perfectly (Usually). I'm all for PC Gaming, and I'm sad to hear this.
If PC Gaming ever dies (It won't, but I mean, hypothetically, at least the big titles and all), people will reminisce about the days when you could create extra content, mods, maps, etc., heck they'll even miss hackers; all these things that make PC Gaming unique. - coheedcollapse, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21I own a PC and a console. It's stupid to limit yourself to one platform no matter how superior it is to the other stuff. Completely PC gamers need to realize that there are positive aspects about having a console around, just like there are positive aspects to gaming on a PC.
I'm not some random kid who doesn't know crap about the subject either. I practically grew up on Zork and qbasic gorillas. - deathweaver108, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20Want to play Starcraft 2 with a duel shock?
- LaSepultura, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21"Reasons why it's worth to be a PCgamer in 2007" (NSF56K)
http://www.gamespot.com/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=24525221 - SilverBlade2k, on 10/10/2007, -6/+23I think piracy is killing PC gaming. People download games with a few clicks, generate a key, and then they go. Pirating console games is a lot harder, and sometimes require hardware modding, which voids the warranty.
Microsoft has a big part it in too...they are pushing for games to be made for X-Box and X-box 360, not Windows. Vista sales are lacking and the DX10 requirement is a bitch. - sekhui, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18"Console gaming will always have a home for games too complex for the consoles"
.....what?
but i agree with what you were trying to say. :) - frsrblch, on 10/10/2007, -5/+20Console gaming will always have a home for games too complex for the consoles, and consoles will always have a large fanbase of gamers who want gaming to be simple and fun. Neither is going to take over, or be beaten out, but they will keep battling for the attention of gamers.
And the thought of porting X3 to the consoles made me chuckle. Managing a couple ships would be a logistics nightmare, let alone building up any kind of fleet. - Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/10/2007, -19/+32PC gaming is simply too expensive for most people. While it's often possible to play most games without breaking the bank, the problem with that is it won't last as long as a game console, which is equipped for its lifespan. Three to four years in, a mid-range computer is struggling to keep up, embarrassed by lag, long loading times and poor graphics.
DirectX 10 has effectively neutralized PC gaming as well, along with Windows Vista itself still not sitting well with many people.
Meanwhile, consoles are priced at an amount that a determined PC gamer would drop on a top of the line CPU or graphics card. The Wii is a simple solution to a kid's cry for video games. The Playstation 3 is primed this fall to begin an epic launch of games that will convince even hardcore Wii and 360 owners to check it out.
Now, it's all about the consoles. That will likely change in a few years once the dust has settled and the fanaticism yields, but for now, PC gaming is an afterthought. - Ziak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12The thing I hate about consoles is that they want to charge you a monthly fee to play online. I also enjoy getting into making Mods for the PC which is something you can never EVER do on a console. The complex nature of making a HL2 map could never be done well on a console, and editing and compiling a HL2 could never be done unless the Xbox and PS3 start shipping with Visual Studio...
- AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Doesn't mean that there are only a "few dedicated PC gamers" left, though. There's just (in my experience) a huge overlap between console gamers and PC gamers. Perhaps the game release cycle is faster on consoles, since the developers are dealing with known hardware, and the result is that more games are released for consoles than for PCs during the same timeframe. That would certainly account for the larger number of sales.
Plus, it's nice to know that, when you buy a game, you just have to start it up and it will work. End of story. No driver updates. No fiddling with graphics settings. No worrying about the installation process. Console gaming has a lot going for it. I happen to like both console and PC games, and I can see advantages (and disadvantages) to both. - mythicflux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12I hope Blizzard keeps it PC only.
- Darkestblaze, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12I'm really tired of the "piracy is killing _____" argument. Of all the games that i've played in the past three years, I absolutely would *NOT* have gone out and shelled out $50 for any of the ones i've downloaded. Those companies lost $0 by me downloading those games. The ones I was certain I was going to enjoy, I bought, and supported those companies. The rest of them I thought might be interesting, but i'm not going to spend money on something i'm not sure i'm going to enjoy, especially with the archaic return policies most places attach to software. I can't even read the damn EULA without voiding the option of returning it. Hell, even EBgames and Gamestop have stopped carrying PC games in their brick and mortar stores. Am I more likely to impulse buy a product when I have to wait a week to have it shipped to me, then cannot return it if I don't like it? I think not. When these types of stores update their business model, maybe piracy will go down. But to claim piracy is killing PC gaming? I'd say you're a bit off the mark.
- muffins, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13I'm perfectly content with my PC. Why? Because I don't have tons of money to throw away. I can't afford an HDTV with cable and surround sound. I can't afford MULTIPLE consoles. On my PC I can play any game that comes out for it and don't have to worry about what console its on. On the PC I can upgrade one part instead of the whole damn system every 3 years they make a new console. All of my games are backwards compatible. I can play anything from Quake 3 and Counter-Strike 1.6 to Bioshock and Crysis. The PC lets me do whatever I want and for a pretty cheap price. Yeah if you're a picky person then you have to have the latest video card every 6 months, but I was content with playing Bioshock on only medium graphics.
- jonnyeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I think he was referring to the gameplay, not the graphics and physics.
- sekhui, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12that might be the most asinine post i've ever seen on digg.
- yargthepirate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11The country of Korea rises up to slap you in the face while screaming "BGH 3v3 NO NOOBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111one"
- palehorse864, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13Actually, a well built computer can come in for a decent price and last the life of a console system. I just priced a moderate upgrade to my pc for cheap. The argument that pc's need to be constantly upgraded every 2 years as opposed to a console's life-span doesn't hold up too well when you look at it closely.
To have the absolute bleeding edge in graphics, you may have to upgrade every once in a while, but you can build a system better than the current console for around the same price in many cases (especially if you're upgrading and so already have fans, power supply, case, etc.) If you build a good system and keep playing it, you can play the latest games for years to come. In a few years, you will have to downgrade some of your graphics or resolution settings, but you can still play a good looking game really well. The reason that people seem to think consoles last so long is because they don't look at graphics options. As their console's life-cycle goes on, the developers downgrade the graphics to the hardware of two, three, or four years ago and there's really nothing you can do to upgrade. With a pc, you can still refuse to upgrade in that life-span and downgrade your graphical settings or resolution, but the games will still look pretty much as good as when you upgraded last (sometimes better as great looking engines come out), you just won't get the bleeding edge of the latest technology at ultra high framerates, but you don't get that with consoles either so it's really a moot argument.
The only reason pc's need upgrades is if you really hang onto it for a long time (In many cases, past a console's life cycle) or if you really must have the be all end all of the bleeding edge graphics. The lack of upgradeability is one reason I never tend to do much with consoles. Towards even the midway point, I find myself disappointed when a neat looking game I have been interested in is designed for consoles first and ported to the pc. It becomes evident that the console's texture memory and graphical capabilities are poor looking compared to the current pc on the market when you view something that has been ported over.
I think if you do an apples to apples comparison of a console's graphics and lifecycle to the performance of a pc, you will find that pc's don't really need upgrades that often, it's just when you choose to get the extra polish that new hardware offers. WIth consoles, you really have no choice. Also remember that many pc gamers like to play in higher resolutions and with more AA and anisoptric than consoles can manage. If you play at console resolutions with console AA and the like, you will find that the supposed frequency of pc upgrades is unnecessary. - thebaron2, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15This article is lame as hell and full of unsupported suppositions and assumptions.
"Console gamers don't demand groundbreaking new experiences in gaming as vocally as PC gamers, unless you are talking about certain, very specific new features."
Ehh.. source? - yargthepirate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11People think that there's no overlap at all between console gamers and PC gamers. In other words, they're dumb.
- mysteri0usdrx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12supreme commander
bioshock
crysis
command and conquer 3
battlefield 2
battlefield 2142
half-life 2
both half life episodes
half life orange box
every MMO short of final fantasy
need I go on?
damn... so few... so few... - kbohip, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Far Cry 2 looks to be awesome, Clive Barker's Jericho..I loved Undying, The Witcher, Legendary: The Box, and one that really has my attention from the story alone, Turning Point: Fall of Liberty. Not to mention Crysis is due in November, and I'm even looking forward to the next Half Life installment.
- Morphinity, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13PC Gamer magazine is a shred of what it used to be.
- cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Obviously someone hasn't seen the sales numbers of MMO's, RPG's and strategy games in the PC market.. all of which suck to play on consoles. I'd rather peel off my skin than to play an FPS on a console over a PC.
- MondayJBlack, on 10/10/2007, -6/+16When a little game called Crysis drops a demo in a month we'll see how the console fanboys feel.
After that, we'll be the only ones enjoying the full glory of Alan Wake with our quad cores.
And lets no forget Supreme Commander.
Oh, and someone tell the 9,000,000 subscribers of World of Warcraft to stop playing please. - Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10"What the author of this article doesn't seem to realize is most people just aren't rabidly obsessed with gaming to the degree that they cannot settle for "second best" "
Actually, that seems instead to be the common error of folks who claim you need to spend a lot of money to upgrade your computer over time. I'm perfectly happy (especially in multiplayer games) to turn down the graphics a notch for smoother gameplay. - Arramol, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Not to mention the RTS genre in general. Mouse/keyboard > dual analogs for commanding armies. I'm inclined to say the same for shooters, although I'm sure some will disagree there.
- h4mx0r, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Can people stop using the hardware price argument so extensively? Yes, I agree, it can cost a whopping much if you want to stay ahead of the race. However, that is a matter of preference and desire.
I was running a really old rig with a geforce 2 for about 3 to 4 years before I upgraded a year or two ago. I was always content, being able to play most things. Then, when the pixel shaders became more widely used and the increased usage of dx9, I finally upgraded to a 7600GT complete with a new mid-range processor/mobo for about the price of a console: 300-400. I am still playing today's best games to date at reasonable settings and speeds, and I have no complaints. In fact, I predict that I won't need to upgrade again for another full year at the very VERY least. - Morphinity, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Hellgate: London, Company of Heroes Expansion, Far Cry 2, Unreal Tournament 3, Sins of Solar Empire, Crysis, Guild Wars 2, Spore - shall I go on, mate? And that's all PC only titles (I think), I can go on to name some that are sharing the release with the consoles such as Call of Duty 4, Half-Life 2: Ep 2, Portal, TF2, Splinter Cell 5, Assassin's Creed, Left 4 Dead, Gears of War - do you want more?
- jorgepblank, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12If PC Gaming does die, and if it mainly is because of Direct3D 10, there should be an article or documentary or something called "How Microsoft Killed PC Gaming with Direct3D". What if Microsoft planned this? So that games could be made for Xbox 360? I don't know, I'm not saying PC Gaming is gonna die or anything, just wondering. If they didn't do it on purpose, then that's one huge eff up, to supposedly hope to make PC Gaming better with DirectX 10 and instead kill it.
Then again the problem could simply be that too few people want to switch over. What would happen if all of a sudden thousands switch over? Would it makes Epic and id rethink what they said? It's not that Direct3D is complicated, or anything, if anything it should be a lot easier to create games. The problem is that, that comes at the expense of a smaller target audience, at the moment.
Think about it, every once in a while there's always those stubborn people that don't want to switch over, I'm one of them, I don't want to switch to Vista just yet. Things like these happen, will it be something that will just gradually fix itself? People will eventually switch to Vista, and hopefully DirectX10 compliant cards, and then the developers won't need to worry much about the target audience.
But I do feel for the developers. There piracy, huge requirements, and altogether more work. They have to make sure their game runs EFFECTIVELY on as many systems as they can, on various combinations. They have to make sure it works on Joe Shmoe's GeForce 4 (Okay, maybe not), all of this is work. And if they want to port to Mac/Linux (Hah, yeah right), they will have to rewrite the rendering code in OpenGL if it wasn't already in that.
That's another thing that comes to mind, why not simply use OpenGL 2.0/2.1? Porting to Mac/Linux would be much easier. It should be equally as capable, id's engines have usually used OpenGL, another reason to think it might not simply be about Direct3D10.
I guess it's a combination of these, and that it's just a lot easier to write games for consoles, and there's more profit most likely. It might not be as flexible where people could write mods and extra content, but it's easier for companies, people still have some fun, and they don't have to worry as much about piracy, whether or not it'll work on Billy's computer (***** Billy), and a multitude of other things like keeping the game patched against security threats, taking care of hackers, etc. - theonlywizdum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Xbox 360 games cost $60, i bought BF2142 for PC a month after it came out for $40, (now it's $30) that $20 adds up after a while, especially if you buy older games. BF2 for PC is now $10, BF2 for xbox 360 is now $30. Plus there is the $60 a year for Xbox Live, on top of what you already pay for high speed, So i wouldn't exactly say that consoles are cheaper. they may be cheaper to start with, but then things start adding up. Consoles are also limited to gaming and media only, you just get more functionality out of a PC, think utility.
- deathweaver108, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9the companies that keep their winter homes warm by burning all of the extra cash they make from the MMOs they own would beg to differ with those that say PC gaming is dead.
- Narcowski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Console sales are always better than PC sales for the first few years after a console's release.
- DMDekoth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Team Fortress 2! Quake Wars! World in Conflict! Multiplayer gaming heaven.
- dillibob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8honestly i bought a 600 dollar hp, and slapped a 7600 gt in it (for about 100 bucks) and im gonna buy a 2 gig stick of ram and ill be golden. sure i might not be able to play on maximum settings but it sure looks about the same as a 360 or ps3 to me. plus your gonna need a goddamn computer anyways so u might as well make it a gaming comp
- Yeknom, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Thats why the only cure for the "uncontrollable" piracy are content providers like Steam. Digg me down, I don't care, but Steam is an amazing system for anti-piracy, content availability, and automated updating.
- avonwodahs, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10How can he compare a nintendo DS and a pc? A welcome bias on the opposite end of the spectrum but nothing more. Still a good read :-)
- Arramol, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Where exactly did you get the idea that you had to spend $1000/year to stay up to date with PC gaming? I've spent a total of around $900 on my system over the past three years and am still getting an excellent gaming experience, not to mention a machine that I can use to do homework, edit video, surf the web, edit photos, etc. And that's just from upgrading a retail box. Build your own, and you can have a system that's more powerful than PS3 right now for around $1k, plus the ability to do all the various non-gaming things a computer can do that a console can't.
- aaronm67, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Spore!
If it ever comes... - Ebulating, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10I will always be a PC gamer now that I'm used to playing games at 1920*1200, 16AF, and 4AA, but AA isn't a big deal at this res. Once you get used to this, playing a console is just painful.
And to all of you complaining about costs of PC, go donate plasma for $200 a month or buy a used car, that frees up a lot of money. There is always a way if you want it bad enough. - ren1999, on 10/10/2007, -7/+13Consoles are the ones with the bad graphics.
- siliconflux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Consoles completely suck when it comes to strategy (and to some extent RTS) games. You wont see me switch any time soon because of this.
- theonlywizdum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6you do know that Bioshock works on XP, right?
- baddog121390, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Actually Bioshock will run pretty well on a 6800gt
- Toast1185, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9All a console maker has to do is allow for a USB keyboard and mouse
-
Show 51 - 100 of 384 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is