This is not a new debate, but I found a column on Gamershell that covered the topic in some interesting detail. Personally, I love gaming on the PC and as the article stated, I am one of the few willing to put money into creating a top notch gaming system while the rest of the world plunks down $150 and fires up the Playstation. PC gaming also has an easy connection to the internet for multiplayer action, but as more and more systems open up to multiplayer, maybe there is a real threat to my favorite platform. Some points to consider:
"Case Study 1 – Pulling an Ion Storm: Ruining your own reputation with dumbed down console ports. In 2000 Ion Storm, in conjunction with Eidos, released Deus Ex, an unparalleled classic of role playing, action, and story telling. It won 35 game of the year awards and sold nearly a million copies, a poor showing for such a critical success, but still solid for a PC game, and enough to warrant a sequel. In 2003 they released that sequel, Deus Ex: Invisible War (made possible by those solid PC sales of the first game), as an XBOX game with a shoddy PC port tacked on as an afterthought. Very few cared when Ion Storm was finally put out of their misery two weeks ago when Eidos closed the studio down, but unfortunately they managed to tarnish both the Deus Ex and Thief series with craptastic console ports of games that owed their original existence to the PC. Why did this happen?
"Case Study 2 – Pulling a Rockstar: Capitalizing on cross platform potential. Rockstar (then called DMA Designs) released the original Grand Theft Auto on the PC in 1997, and the free form, non-linear gameplay, with the added ability to be a badass criminal and kill cops, was something nobody could resist. It was one of the most popular games of the year, and eventually Rockstar went on to make Grand Theft Auto III and GTA: Vice City, two of the most popular games of all time... on the PS2. Sure, the games were eventually ported to the PC, and ported fairly well at that, but why did they move to PS2 development (thus forsaking things like multiplayer modes and next generation graphics) and sell out their core audience that made them successful in the first place?
"Case Study 3 – Pulling a Polyphony Digital: Never even touching the PC market at all. This case study is the most irritating of all, and also perhaps the most telling. Polyphony Digital is the developer behind the incredibly successful Gran Turismo series, and while the publisher is Sony Computer Entertainment of America (SCEA), part of the same company that makes the console the game is exclusive to, that doesn't tell the whole story. Sony has published many games for the PC, and many exclusively for the PC (Everquest being one example, and that retarded PS2 port doesn't count as it wasn't the same game), so they certainly could have brought the Gran Turismo series to the PC without too much trouble, even improving it a great deal with improved graphics, controls, and multiplayer support. Why didn't they?"
Some more facts and points from the article:
"The console game industry saw 6.2 billion dollars in retail software sales in 2004, an 8 percent increase over 2003, so clearly the game market is growing into an even larger behemoth than it was before. However, when you factor in PC game sales, a paltry 1.2 billion in 2004, and a decline from the sales in 2003, you begin to see where this is going. All by itself, Grand Theft Auto - Vice City sold 5.1 million PS2 copies at retail, for a total of around 250 million dollars. That's a fifth of total PC game sales worldwide. One game. Also consider crap titles that were thrown together for movie tie-in promotion, like Shark Tale or Bad Boys 2 : Miami Takedown – These games, made for relative peanuts and with extremely short development times, consistently outsell all but the biggest PC titles – Games which took years to develop and that usually offer much more value for your entertainment dollar. How do you think it feels for a talented developer like S2 with their top notch PC exclusive title Silent Storm when it is outsold 20 to 1 (estimated) by the ridiculously bad console title “Bad Boys: Miami Takedown”?"
I personally can't stand consoles. I spend a lot of time at the computer so the keyboard and mouse combination feels supremely natural to me when gaming. I've never been able to feel comfortable with controlers more complex than the SNES ones. I definitely hope the PC gaming industry isn't dying. I can't stand the Gamecube or XBox (which my brother owns).
The demise of PC gaming has consistently been exaggerated. Let me take you on a trip through history (generally accepted as the best source for predicting the future). Recall the Atari 2600? Remember the Intellivision? Coleco anyone? Then what? POOF. All gone. A little forward in time and Nintendo resurrects the industry, leading us eventually to the boom we are in now. But what was ALWAYS there, even in this console dry spell and before? Yes, kids, PC games, and lots of em. Why? As long as they keep making PCs, someone will continue to make games for them. There is money to be made and people who will gladly part with it. It will never be the industry that consoles are for a hundred reasons, but unlike consoles, PCs don't exist because of games and are immune to the whims of that industry.
Before the console advocates put the PCs out to pasture, let them at least acknowledge that console gaming doesn't exist if it weren't for PC gaming. A) PC gaming is as much, if not more, responsible as arcades for keeping video games in the hearts and minds of consumers during their haitus. Consoles are just simpler, specialized, consumer-grade copies of that same spirit. B) The technology that drives today's consoles was developed for and tested in PC gaming. This is a big reason why I don't see PC games going away; N-Vidia and ATI would not exist without enough money to innovate, nor would most of these gaming companies.
My pc is an overclocked XP 1600+ with a GForce 2-400 and a 15-inch crt. It works fine on Medal of Honor, Max Payne II, etc. Nevertheless the magazines and web ads tell me that without pc games nobody would need an Extreme P4 or AMD FX. Dvorak wrote about a year ago that few actually need more than 900mhz--has that really changed?
If they can't sell you on a new, more demanding game, last year's pc still works just fine and probably will next year. So where's the industry? Bill R.
My pc is an overclocked XP 1600+ with a GForce 2-400 and a 15-inch crt. It works fine on Medal of Honor, Max Payne II, etc. Nevertheless the magazines and web ads tell me that without pc games nobody would need an Extreme P4 or AMD FX. Dvorak wrote about a year ago that few actually need more than 900mhz--has that really changed?
If they can't sell you on a new, more demanding game, last year's pc still works just fine and probably will next year. So where's the industry? Bill R.
I personnaly own a Xbox and I just bought a new pc, mostly to play game. I used both for different reason. I prefer to mplay game on a pc, the graphics are better, the way to play with a mouse and keyborad makes for a better playing experience. I bought the Xbox so my kids could play without the hassle of installing, patching, updating the drivers etc on a pc. I think there is a place for both, console and pc games. I will always prefer to play a game on a pc, especially RPG or action games but sometimes playing a sports game on a console in the living room with the kids is far better than being crowded around the pc. Long life to both gaming genre.
Games actually do use the newer hardware that's out. With your GeForce 2 MX 400 you're not able to run at high resolutions and you're definitely not able to see the features that DirectX 8 and 9 have added to gaming (which are very significant). Your computer can still run these games because it's not running all of the extra features that have been added in DirectX 8 and 9. There's a good Anandtech article about this that deals specifically with Halflife 2 but it applies to other things as well: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2281
Pay attention to the part on DirectX 7 visual effects. They have some good screenshots that show what you're missing.
This is not a new debate, but I found a column on