ID Software: PC gamers moving to console

Nate_MachV said:
I hate to admit it too, I once was a console nay-sayer. But, lately I've been forgetting about my PC and now that I own all three consoles, they are getting my attention. Don't get me wrong I know about all the perks of PC gaming. Higher Res, more intuitive controls and deeper gameplay. But, honestly, gaming is my hobby and the easier and more accessible way for me and my busy work schedule is to put in my disc and enjoy my game. No hassles and quicker to the point. Sorry
Click to expand...

How is it less hassles than a computer? Most games even legally purchased can be cracked for no CD's or the makers dont require them. If its a steam game no CD needed. PC: Power on / wake up / turn on monitor (computers left on all the time). Open game, go into multiplayer find server and join.... Console: turn on console, turn on TV / reciever. Find game, insert disc, go to multi player section, find server ... join.

Same thing?

Both have their strengths. For me I cannot stand FPS games on consols, just doesnt work for me. However racing games and so forth just fail on the PC for me. I make use of my PS2 once in a while still, even my N64 till I got my Wii when it came out. I play the Wii with my wife and a few games with friends. I have nothing against the consoles, but the price point of the 360 / ps3 is not worth it for me. Hate paying to play something I already bought, ontop of higher game prices and tech that cannot be upgraded.


And its about time someone realized piracy is not killing the industry. Same with the film industry, release crap and thats what you'll get in return.
 
Domingo said:
Let's just be honest and say "people are buying more copies of FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS on the console than the PC."
PC gaming hasn't died, but it's gone into a niche market. People are really only buying MMO's, the Sims, and RTS style games now.
iD and Epic see the writing on the wall because the games that *THEY PRODUCE* aren't capable of being played on the types of PC's that the majority of people are buying.
We can all sit here and talk about how great PC games are (which is true) but the average Joe's computer won't do the things that make them great. The only advantage for most people is the Kb/M and unless you're a serious player - do you really even care? Clearly not enough people do.
Click to expand...


Yeah I feel that same way. First Person games are easier still on PC however, because of the mouse and keyboard. Consoles only recently have been massively adopting a lot of FPS games because of the online capabilities. They still are a bitch to play, but they're making money..
 
I have not owned a console since Nintendo64, and will be a PC gamer for as long as I will play games.
 
Ripskin said:
How is it less hassles than a computer? Most games even legally purchased can be cracked for no CD's or the makers dont require them. If its a steam game no CD needed. PC: Power on / wake up / turn on monitor (computers left on all the time). Open game, go into multiplayer find server and join.... Console: turn on console, turn on TV / reciever. Find game, insert disc, go to multi player section, find server ... join.

Same thing?

Both have their strengths. For me I cannot stand FPS games on consols, just doesnt work for me. However racing games and so forth just fail on the PC for me. I make use of my PS2 once in a while still, even my N64 till I got my Wii when it came out. I play the Wii with my wife and a few games with friends. I have nothing against the consoles, but the price point of the 360 / ps3 is not worth it for me. Hate paying to play something I already bought, ontop of higher game prices and tech that cannot be upgraded.
Click to expand...

This is assuming you have a PC that can play said game. With a console it's brain dead easy, you know the game will work. A PC game on the other hand you have to read the recommended specs (as everyone know the required specs are total B.S.) and even then it's a crapshoot. Oh yeah and the hassle of upgrading every 6 months or so just to be able to maintain the gaming experience.
 
Keiichi said:
This is assuming you have a PC that can play said game. With a console it's brain dead easy, you know the game will work.
Click to expand...
Not always true; most of the times they will work but as of late there has been some issues with console games and performance, be that aging tech in the consoles or lazy coding, there is still a possibility for crappy performance on a console even when it's designed for said console.

Keiichi said:
A PC game on the other hand you have to read the recommended specs (as everyone know the required specs are total B.S.) and even then it's a crapshoot. Oh yeah and the hassle of upgrading every 6 months or so just to be able to maintain the gaming experience.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree here; you do not have to upgrade every 6 months, if you do apples to apples and play on the same resoloution as you would a console you can truck along quite nicely on a gaming rig for quite some time. Until I upgraded to what is in my sig I was on an AthlonXP 3000+, 6600GT (AGP) and used that for a few years, even able to play Stalker, R6Vegas, and Ghost Recon. Granted all of the eye candy wasn't there but it was quite playable and quite enjoyable.
 
FallenMystic said:
I have to disagree here; you do not have to upgrade every 6 months, if you do apples to apples and play on the same resoloution as you would a console you can truck along quite nicely on a gaming rig for quite some time. Until I upgraded to what is in my sig I was on an AthlonXP 3000+, 6600GT (AGP) and used that for a few years, even able to play Stalker, R6Vegas, and Ghost Recon. Granted all of the eye candy wasn't there but it was quite playable and quite enjoyable.
Click to expand...


True, Now that the consoles have aged a bit, most typical desktop pcs bought in the last 3 years are only a $200 vid card and maybe a ram upgrade away from playing the same games at console graphics levels.
 
Garfing Sharks said:
Man these threads suck
Click to expand...

while few will like to live in denial, I can't help but agree with his statements. After another thread, I calculated I own 138 pc games. But lately I've bought both pc and console versions of games (bioshock, cod2 and 4) so I might be consider middle of the road on purchases. I love pc gaming but can't ignore that playing on a console just "works" easier


OK i'm gonna stop now. Drunk :D :p Love pc gaming. just hope it doesn't ever dilute so much that there is no improvement over consoles (no higher textures, resolutions, keyboard whatever)
 
PC gaming continues to and will always outshine console gaming. Sure you have some games that are great fun that are only on the consoles (like the Burnout series and many many others) for which I do own an XBOX 360 and an original XBOX and a Wii and a PS2 ( no ps3 yet...don't have the need nor desire though I will probably buy one in the future since I'll probably want a Blu-Ray in the future and why not have a gaming console as well with it? :D ). I also have kids and they play the Wii and PS2 from time to time. The XBOX 360 belongs to Daddy and it's a "no touchy" device in the house.

Truth is, there are already so many great PC games out that are lasting a long time. UT2k4, CS, CS:S, Quake 3 (dwindling but still around), COD 2, COD 4 now will last a long time, Crysis, WoW, etc. Even if they stopped making PC games right now, people would continue to be PC gamers for years and years. On the console you have your big games like Halo 2 and Halo3 and........well that's about it really. Those 2 games people will play far into the future. Other "big hit" type games all have sequels that come out every year or every couple of years like the Madden series or Burnout series.

I think there is room for both. FPS games CAN be played on the 360 using the kb/mouse using the XFPS or the XFPS+XIM ( http://www.xim360.com ) and you can use the kb/mouse on the PS3 (or so I'm told) for FPS games. But seriously...why. If the game is available on the PC, then you might as well play it on the PC. Take UT3 for example. I'm never going to buy that game when it comes out on the XBOX 360.
 
I still play both, gasp! Amazing.....this must not register in the dev's minds.....
 
As was mentioned, it has to do with money, and the fact that Id is just not as relevant as they once were. It goes along with the article. You need to make games that are profitable, not games which are critically acclaimed. Certain games just don't sell well on the PC, regardless of the quality. And FPS's are definately gaining a large marketshare on consoles.

As for kbm on a console, the PS3 can work, but half the games that support them still have major limitations on them (lag anyone?), and you can also be blocked from joining games where people use controllers. And I have an XFPS 360 sniper and XIM on the XBox 360 side, and it's just not the same. Sure, my Halo 3 KDR tripled, and my skill rating jumped, but it still feels like I'm a cripple compared to what I can accomplish on a PC with a kbm.

PC Games are better towards more niche market games, and consoles cater towards the hardcore market. As for having to spend $800 upgrade every 6 months? Bull ****! Video cards on the PC side have been capable of running PS3 & XBox 360 quality graphics since at least May 2006 (and earlier if you want to be technical about it. Upscaling 600p anyone?). What you're really complaining about is not that you have to upgrade, but that you can't run the games at the settings you'd prefer to run the game in. If you can run games at medium settings @ 30 fps, you have a machine running at greater capability than any current gen console.

As for Blizzard, I can't imagine them porting WoW over to consoles. I can't imagine MMORPG's on consoles. It comes down to that console gamers are always looking for the next best thing, whereas MMORPG's survive on a player sticking to one game for years on end. And I can't imagine that Sony nor Microsoft would ever allow an MMORPG that was actually halfway decent on their consoles either. They make money from licensing games (which is partly why consoles tend to be cheaper at release than an equivalent PC, because of the loss leader effect), so of course they want people always moving onto the next best thing. If all of the sudden 8 million XBox users became addicted to WoW 360, 45% of their market would disappear. Throw in other PC games which have huge addicted audiences too, and you're talking probably 80% of the XBox or PS3 market now on 5-10 games. This would mean that the console cost would have to jump (unless you wanted to pay $29.99 per month for the subscription based games), so when the PS4 comes out, instead of paying $600, you'd most likely be paying $1200.
 
Probably the PC gamers who haven't upgraded their PC since the last ID game came out will probably be switching to consoles.
 
Long time PC Gamer and I've bought consoles now too. Have I switched? No, I just bought additional systems....
 
I've been moving towards console games also for one very simple reason: I don't have to buy them. I can rent console games. With PC, everything is pay-to-play, even if the game sucks. With Steam and such, it's even harder to resell or trade.

I'm still more than happy to pay extra for PC hardware to play games in the resolution and aspect ratio *I* choose, and at quality settings that consoles can only dream of, along with my choice of controller(s).
 
Chombo said:
Probably the PC gamers who haven't upgraded their PC since the last ID game came out will probably be switching to consoles.
Click to expand...

Or anyone who purchased a laptop of any kind, or anyone who bought any of the standard off-the-shelf PC's at Best Buy, or anyone who purchased any of the decent offers Dell has, too. Hell, most of those can't even be upgraded if you want to.
That's the main issue. Too many PC's (even brand new ones) simply won't play games.
It would be like Game Stop selling buttloads of NES systems, but customers can't play GTA4 on those.
Another factor is that casual gamers DO NOT CARE about keyboard/mouse controls. That's something that only people on boards like this make a big deal of. There are more console FPS gamers out there than on the PC, and there have been for years. The lone PC stalwart is the 10-year-old Counter-Strike.
Do you think the average Joe cares about configuring details on his games? No. He wants to play the game and play his friends at it. Does he care about turning up the resolution? Nope. Most casual customers just choose the defaults.

Much like any other discussion related to this, it's like a Ferrari-owners club discussing Nascar racing. People on here aren't typical.
 
Bullshit....until I can play on a console using a good mouse AND keyboard....there will be no FPS console gaming for me.....thumbsticks SUCK ASS....at present, I love my 360, but it plays Forza2 and MX vs ATV only...plus it doubles as a music box and dvd player for my 37".
 
Nytegard said:
As was mentioned, it has to do with money, and the fact that Id is just not as relevant as they once were.
Click to expand...

Yeah...even the Doom3/ET:QW engine is looking kind of....average...these days....CoD4 graphics blows iD's engines away in looks, in my world at least. Same for Crysis, at least in looks.

It might be a case of staying in the game, and consoles will bring them more cash flow I bet....
 
The key word was "hardcore pc gamers" on that claim he simply is smoking. FPS suck on the console no matter how much B.S. that pecker wants to lay down.

On a side note, what was the last good game ID put out? D3 was pretty but come on, aside from producing game engines these guys lost the golden shine a long time ago.
 
Just like I figured. "FPS games on consoles suck!" ...yet the sales numbers disagree.
 
Domingo said:
Just like I figured. "FPS games on consoles suck!" ...yet the sales numbers disagree.
Click to expand...

My throry on that is because FPS's; until recently really didn't exist on a console front; I think the only one I ever played worth much was Goldeneye. And due to this there isn't much of a comparason for those on a console so the matrix of what would be a 'good' FPS game is skewed. Therefore that which is slated as 'good' on a console lands in the relm of mediocre at best. See Halo; highly touted on the Xbox; move it to the PC... fairly crappy game.
 
It would be so simple to end the war and make the world a better place *MJ song playing*
SUPPORT KEYBOARD/MOUSE for console!! I'll shed a tear if they do..
 
I guess id Software will wait and see how well QuakeLive and then Rage turns out before they make a real decision on this. I think QuakeLive will be a nice little game though and since it's a freebie no real pirates to worry about. Then again it's Quake 3 with some new web integration tidbits (to my knowledge) so it.
Also, I would like to point out even id Softwares old engines are seeing new life in projects like Warsow since they are nice enough to GPL the engines once they are done with them.
 
FallenMystic said:
My throry on that is because FPS's; until recently really didn't exist on a console front; I think the only one I ever played worth much was Goldeneye. And due to this there isn't much of a comparason for those on a console so the matrix of what would be a 'good' FPS game is skewed. Therefore that which is slated as 'good' on a console lands in the relm of mediocre at best. See Halo; highly touted on the Xbox; move it to the PC... fairly crappy game.
Click to expand...

right. this post would be relevant in 2002.

Typical biased PC fanboy, knowledge of console gaming still lagging many years behind. bet its also a surprise to you that consoles have more than composite outputs now?
 
Why do people keep saying FPS are still new on consoles? Where the hell have you all been living the past 15 years?
 
FallenMystic said:
My throry on that is because FPS's; until recently really didn't exist on a console front; I think the only one I ever played worth much was Goldeneye. And due to this there isn't much of a comparason for those on a console so the matrix of what would be a 'good' FPS game is skewed. Therefore that which is slated as 'good' on a console lands in the relm of mediocre at best. See Halo; highly touted on the Xbox; move it to the PC... fairly crappy game.
Click to expand...


Loved Halo PC
 
Domingo said:
Just like I figured. "FPS games on consoles suck!" ...yet the sales numbers disagree.
Click to expand...

Sales figures have nothing to do with the quality of a game.

Kane and Lynch: Sold over a million copies
Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games: Sold over 3.5 million copies
Hannah Montana: Sold about 1 million copies on the DS

All of the above sold more than BioShock on the PC. Yes, I realize that BioShock came on multiple systems, but so did Kane and Lynch and Hannah Montana. Yet BioShock on the 360 sold under 2 million copies.

You'll have to try really hard, and I mean really ****ing hard to even try to convince me that any of the above games are better than BioShock. And I even think BioShock is heavily overrated to begin with.
 
Koslov said:
SUPPORT KEYBOARD/MOUSE for console!! I'll shed a tear if they do..
Click to expand...

OMG, I would LOVE KB/M support for the XBOX 360! Halo 3 would be so much better that way . . . actually I would be a whole lot better at Halo on MP lol.
 
I does make sense though. There is more money in the console sales, less support for them. They save money. It would also stopped the half assed port that the PC gets or the dumbed down consolitis games (like bioshock)
I'd say, less piracy issues for them also.
Tighter standards and hardware. They don't need to worry about scaling for people who have still have 6800s nor the performance issues of games like crysis.

Now the bad is, the innovation will go. Games like Crysis push the envelope on what they CAN do in a game, but there is no way a console can keep up if the PC isn't. All the new innovation starts with the PC and gets carried down to the consoles.

If it really got out of control and there was a mass exodus from the PC gaming market, we might as well go back to the mid 90s where a 4meg trident card and a cyrix 200 was enough of a PC for everyone.
 
The thing is - in the perspective of a game developer sales are worth a hell of a lot more than any critical acclaim or demands on an enthusiast messageboard.
Yes, PC gamers will forever say that Halo is "average" and this and that - but it's outsold every PC shooter in the last 10 years and it got stellar ratings to boot. All 3 did in fact. Yet, I'm sure PC gamers will find a way to discard that critical acclaim (and $ made) yet accept the acclaim for a PC game like HL2. It's a double standard.
Fact is, the developers see that console shooters can be great and they're selling like hotcakes.
People here will forever be anal about KB/M control configurations (rightfully so) but in the big picture - you're a minority now. Still, you had Epic who was nice enough to implement proper KB/M for the PS3 version of Unreal Tournament 3. MS is really the only holdout as the PS3 can handle that scheme with no problems. If they can ever do that, you'll see even more of the hardcore PC gamers (the few left) make the switch, too.
 
Bigbacon said:
Now the bad is, the innovation will go. Games like Crysis push the envelope on what they CAN do in a game, but there is no way a console can keep up if the PC isn't. All the new innovation starts with the PC and gets carried down to the consoles.
Click to expand...

Yet how many truly great games were innovative graphically? Crysis isn't anything special gameplay-wise. Doom3 wasn't anything spectacular when it came out.

It'd be a good thing for developers to stop trying to push the envelope graphically and spend time making quality games. cutting-edge graphics are nothing without a great game behind it.

i mean many PC 'gamers' get a hard-on seeing new tech, but personally I like great games.
 
Domingo said:
The thing is - in the perspective of a game developer sales are worth a hell of a lot more than any critical acclaim or demands on an enthusiast messageboard.
Yes, PC gamers will forever say that Halo is "average" and this and that - but it's outsold every PC shooter in the last 10 years and it got stellar ratings to boot. All 3 did in fact. Yet, I'm sure PC gamers will find a way to discard that critical acclaim (and $ made) yet accept the acclaim for a PC game like HL2. It's a double standard.
Fact is, the developers see that console shooters can be great and they're selling like hotcakes.
People here will forever be anal about KB/M control configurations (rightfully so) but in the big picture - you're a minority now. Still, you had Epic who was nice enough to implement proper KB/M for the PS3 version of Unreal Tournament 3. MS is really the only holdout as the PS3 can handle that scheme with no problems. If they can ever do that, you'll see even more of the hardcore PC gamers (the few left) make the switch, too.
Click to expand...

KB/M is the superior control setup in pretty much every way for the FPS genre. The faster console platform holders and developers realize this, the better FPS games will be on the console.

I think the reason it hasn't been adapted is because KB/M really is a huge advantage that could put off people who don't have the ability to use those controls.

Same could be said of RTS style games. Some styles of games simply play better with different inputs. Try playing GH with the wii mote some time.
 
obs said:
KB/M is the superior control setup in pretty much every way for the FPS genre. The faster console platform holders and developers realize this, the better FPS games will be on the console.

I think the reason it hasn't been adapted is because KB/M really is a huge advantage that could put off people who don't have the ability to use those controls.

Same could be said of RTS style games. Some styles of games simply play better with different inputs. Try playing GH with the wii mote some time.
Click to expand...

No. not superior in every way, mr biased pc gamer. there are only 2 things the mouse/keyboard setup is better at, and that is precision(mouse) and the capacity for more buttons(keyboard). thats it.

The weaknesses of the keyboard/mouse setup are that it requires a large flat surface to fit both of the devices. which is why on a couch its impractical. Another weakness is that it's simply more ergonomic and relaxing to use a console controller.

Many gamers just want to chill. they aren't like some amped up PC gamers who can only think about competition on a game(thus makinga big deal about mouse speed). some gamers like to have fun. crazy I know.
 
The thing about it being a "superior" form of control is an opinion. Yes, the mouse aims faster - but with a pad everything is all there. There's a whole generation of players who consider playing games with a keyboard to be akin to playing with a Coleco paddle. After all, it had an analog stick and a ton of buttons 15 years before any other controllers did.
That's the infamous PC gamer myth. The mouse is a faster mode of aiming - but it's still a clumsy set-up of having to have 2 large devices to play a simple game.
10 years ago when fighting games got big, there was a huge movement that gamepads were inferior to a joystick. Now more people are using them in tournaments than sticks are - and they're doing just fine.
 
Once a PC gamer, always a PC gamer! ID is out to lunch, IMO. Sure, I have a PS3 but that is just to enhance my gaming experience and to allow me to play BluRay movies. PS3 will never replace my gaming rig, never. You hear me ID? You philistines! The main reason I bought a PC in the first place was for PC gaming. I was bored of the shallow gaming on my Sega Genesis so bought a PC and have never looked back.
 
Sphere said:
I'd like to know where he got his information as well.

I own a Wii and 360, and there is no way in hell I'd abandon my pc with kb/mouse for a FPS on a console.

I've tried, and it just doesn't work for me, nor does the auto aim feature, how fucking lame is that, you put your crosshair near an enemy, until it turns red (doesn't have to be on him, just near) and that allows a hit to be detected.

/rant
Click to expand...

What he said. Ive got a Wii, and PS3. I have a few FPS games for the PS3, but cant bring myself to play them with the controller. Although, I really want to play Resistance, Im holding off. Playing a FPS game with a controller just makes me feel stupid. Its like trying to play basketball in the water, slow, annoying, and just wrong.
 
damonposey said:
No. not superior in every way, mr biased pc gamer. there are only 2 things the mouse/keyboard setup is better at, and that is precision(mouse) and the capacity for more buttons(keyboard). thats it.

The weaknesses of the keyboard/mouse setup are that it requires a large flat surface to fit both of the devices. which is why on a couch its impractical. Another weakness is that it's simply more ergonomic and relaxing to use a console controller.

Many gamers just want to chill. they aren't like some amped up PC gamers who can only think about competition on a game(thus makinga big deal about mouse speed). some gamers like to have fun. crazy I know.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... when I am FPS'ing precision is the most important part. If you're worried about playable area turn up the sensitivity.

Thats all well and good ID can go to consoles. They can enjoy their restricted unified hardware set and the royalties to the console maker. I have yet to see shooter on the consoles that has impressed me. Even Goldeneye wasn't that special.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top