This is another red herring to me. I don’t genuinely care what hardware I use to play games. If the types of games I prefer (FPS, turn-based strategy, flight & other sims) remain available, with my preferred or a similar control scheme (mouse & keyboard), then I don’t care what someone wants to call the electronic computational device I’m using to play them. I hear all the time in the console choice wars, “It’s all about the games,” but it is also about the control devices. Bring me games I like with suitable controllers & I’ll buy the hardware I need to play them.[/quote]
While I don’t think my statement is a red herring, I otherwise agree 100% with you (so should I say I agree 94% with you?)
I don’t think it’s a red herring because I know a number of people who are so attached to the paradigm of “beige box at a desk” gaming that they insist they will never purchase a console regardless of the game / input options.
This is another red herring to me. I don’t genuinely care what hardware I use to play games. If the types of games I prefer (FPS, turn-based strategy, flight & other sims) remain available, with my preferred or a similar control scheme (mouse & keyboard), then I don’t care what someone wants to call the electronic computational device I’m using to play them. I hear all the time in the console choice wars, “It’s all about the games,” but it is also about the control devices. Bring me games I like with suitable controllers & I’ll buy the hardware I need to play them.[/quote]
Right. When a console gaming experience is identical to a PC gaming experience (vis-a-vis design, but also controls & monitor resolution) then the distinction will disappear. I’ll still want a PC around to play the weird orphans and garage games though. I can’t see myself playing Angband or Avernum on a Gamecube. Or emulated 2600 games or all the other neat odds and ends. But PC upgrades will be less urgent in that case, as such games tend to have low system requirements.
I will have a PC of some sort for the foreseeable future, I think. I absolutely require web browsing and word processing, and a number of other activities I do (music, video editing, etc.) are best done on a computer so far. Where I do my gaming is less of an issue, as long as the games are what I want them to be.
And yes, long long long term it may all converge into some house-installed HAL that takes care of everything. But I’m looking more at how things will play out over the next 5 years or so.
Companies such as ID, Ensemble, Verant, Epic, Blizzard and Maxis have made made there fortunes on the PC. I just can’t see them abandoning the PC anytime soon. Why would they risk going into an market that is severly overcrowded?
There’s no risk…companies like Sony, Infogrames, Microsoft, Vivendi and Activision are footing the bill. Of your list above, Sony (Verant) just put out Everquest Online Adventures for PS2, Epic has released Unreal games on consoles since the Dreamcast, Blizzard is working with another developer to release a console Starcraft-based game and is doing GBA ports of their SNES lineup, Maxis isn’t really Maxis anymore as far as I’m aware, and if you think someone isn’t throwing huge fat sacks full of cash money at id to get them to put DOOM III on a console, well, you’re just not in tune with what’s going on.
Not on your list is Raven, who just announced a console game and ported one to Gamecube/Xbox already. We’ve heard already that Ensemble is producing a console game. So really, there is no risk for these guys. As talented developers, they’re wanted for Microsoft’s system at the very least (due to the development crossover) and wanted for the US market in general on all consoles. Talented people are in demand now and the most talented PC developers stand to make a LOT more money on a console than they’ve ever seen on a PC. Just ask Derek “Xbox” Smart, the latest to announce his intentions to do something in that arena.
If you check the front page of Qt3, Mark has info there from FI that states Gamestop’s sales of PC games only accounted for 7% of their revenue. 7%! That’s peanuts. The only good thing the PC games are doing for them in that case is keeping that crowd coming to their stores in the hopes that they’ll break down and pick up one of the hot consoles.
I haven’t had any hands-on experience with a PS2, but it seems like the XBox is close… if they came out with a keyboard/mouse and some decent pc-gamer-centric titles, I’d probably be won over into purchasing one.
Here’s a bit of console nostalgia for strategy lovers…
Back in the heyday of the Sega Genesis, there was a game called Herzog Zwei… essentially an RTS… a way better RTS than many (maybe most) of the PC RTS games that weren’t even on the horizon yet.
But then again, I’m no longer much of a fan of the brain-dead RTS gameplay that so many seem to like. (collect…build…mob…collect…build…mob…collect…build…mob…)
Unless we’re talking about Total War RTS… that another story entirely. 8)
I have been unable to convince my nephew (he’s almost 15 & a big Halo player) that a mouse/keyboard combo is a superior controller for FPSs. Today I saw an article on HardOCP about how to convert an Xbox controller to standard USB (easier to buy a converter cable from these guys though). I think when Halo comes out for the PC, I may have to haul my PC up to Vegas and teach some lessons about controllers. :D
If their earnings went down 7%, that would be a very bad thing. I’m sure they’re ecstatic for 7%, which it were higher, and maybe, just maybe, they’d like to boost that in the coming year instead of see it disappear, at which point they’ll have to find something else to replace that lost revenue. Which is easier said than done, since they’re also losing revenue from console hardware sales, which is dropping at a fast rate.
Projections for PC sales are up for 2003. We’ll see if software sales increase as well, which is usually what happens. SimCity 4 outsold most console games in January; think Electronic Arts is ready to drop PC games?
And a lot of the console game makers, despite all the lovey-dovey sentiments, are hurting. Your THQs, Infogrames, Midway, the recently merged Sega. If everyone in the console biz is wearing money hats, why such doom and gloom in their fiscals?
It is if you remove the cost of a television and sound system. Yes, they have other uses, but so does a computer. If you want your games to look their best, you either need a new, fast computer or a better television. Once you’ve seen your console on an HDTV, you’ll never go back. It’s like playing a computer game on your monitor, only it’s a really big monitor. (Ignore this if you own a PS2–you don’t want to see your games with that much clarity.)
Agree or disagree… consoles are becoming more like personal computers. If this trend continues, the PC will become irrelevent as a gaming device.
Disagree. They may eventually become the same thing, true convergence, at which point the disinction is irrelevant.
If I’m a musician, web designer or amature movie producer I’m not going to pursue my hobby or career on a console. Consoles are limiting in so many ways, that it would be foolish to think that they could totally replace a computer. If I needed to work on a graphics project, I’m not going to fire up my console in the middle of my living room. And that is what your also forgetting . PC’s are so much more then gaming machines.
With a PC I can:
type reports
turn my system into a mini studio (audio and video)
rip cd’s and dvd’s
work on different types of gaming mods
watch dvd’s and listen to cd’s
put together a web site
further my education (take on-line classes)
put together a portfolio
put together a digital family album
crunch data
etc…
This is just a small example of what a PC can do. So if your spending $1,000-$3,000 on a PC, it’s more then likely will not be used just for gaming. If you purchase a console, the sole use of that device will primarily be used for gaming and that’s it. And if your not gaming, maybe to watch some dvd’s or to listen to some cd’s.
But what could be argued is that, if PCs cease to be a gaming platform, there would be less need to constantly (and expensively) upgrade them. If all you are doing is wordprocessing, web browsing, etc., etc., then maybe a 5 year old PC will still suffice.
Of course, many non-gaming activities do require powerful PCs. I was mixing some music in N-track recently and I had to do several pre-mixes because the CPU couldn’t handle rendering 20-odd tracks in real-time. And Adobe Premiere, my video editing software, is something of a system hog. So gaming isn’t the only thing that can push a PC’s capabilities to the limits.
I suspect ultimately your network will emerge spontaneously from the frightening level of computational firepower in your TV, stereo, video game systems, microwave oven, telephones, MP3 players, clothing, and yes, even some little white (though I prefer black myself) boxes somewhere in your home, all going clackety-clack over a heavily encrypted home network. Think of it as SETI@Home gone all emergent.
The little white boxes will probably stick around just for storage purposes, and while they’re at it, why not throw in a few CPUs just to keep things interesting? It’ll all be dirt cheap.
I for one would LOVE to have my noisy white boxes sitting in a closet somewhere rather than in-my-face making whirring noises like a leaf blower. Believe it or not, in days of yore, that’s exactly how mainframes were.
It’s all a matter of bandwidth, time and making this stuff cheap and stable which is a lot easier said than done.
I was able to get my house wired up with hot and cold running Internet, cable, and phone for $1500. I would have gone wireless, but my wife the composer gets all tinfoil helmet-like at the merest thought of stray RF. I pipe video and data all over the place here. I can see big bucks for anyone making this braindead and simple.
Of course, all IMO… The future has a way of making us all look foolish…
I think that’s already happening. My 4 year-old P3-500 is just great for word-processing and its ilk.
Of course, many non-gaming activities do require powerful PCs. I was mixing some music in N-track recently and I had to do several pre-mixes because the CPU couldn’t handle rendering 20-odd tracks in real-time. And Adobe Premiere, my video editing software, is something of a system hog. So gaming isn’t the only thing that can push a PC’s capabilities to the limits.
Absolutely, but Moore’s Law shows no sign of abating. The only thing that seems to be abating is the computational demands of killer apps. So now we’ve got all these silly games doing computationally demanding stuff - badly - i.e. C&C Generals. If someone could explain why TA runs like gangbusters in software on my P3-500 while this puppy chokes on my 2 GHz P4 plus GeForce Ti4600, I’d be most thankful.
If you noticed Maxis has a hit with Sim City 4, and it’s a PC title. My argument is this. Companies such EA and Maxis are still making money on titles that play better on a PC. I want to purchase Sim City 4, but I’m sure as hell will not be playing this game on a television set. So basically… if they went head first into the console market with Sim City 4, and didn’t put out a PC version then I guarantee you that the game would not have sold as well.
If you look at the top ten selling PC titles from last year, EA has made a killing. Why should they give this up? Battlefields new expansion pack shot to number one. Would it have done well on a console? Maybe… but it would have faced stiffer competition and probably wouldn’t have sold so many copies.
And as I stated previously, I know Raven, Ensemble, Verant, Id, Blizzard are all making or porting over titles to varying consoles. So what? That doesn’t mean anything. So what if Verant just released Everquest for the PS2? There also producing an Everquest 2 that’s heading to the PC market. Blizzard is producing a console only title, but yet are also producing Warcraft (online) for the PC. And I will lay down money that Raven will announce some type of PC project over the next 6 months. They are producing Quake 4 which is primarily a PC game. I’m sure there will be a port of the game.
As Mark has stated time and again, just because you produce a console game doesn’t neccesairly mean that your in the clear. I wish Derek a lot of luck, but to be honest I don’t know too many console gamers that are into space sims. Most people that I know that play console games play Sports, Action and Fighting games. And most have the PS2. And ask Acclaim about how there doing. How many copies did BMX sell? Not many, but it’s a console game.
Even after all that, I do believe that the Xbox 2 and PS3 will be a major threat to the PC gaming market. If it is then so be it. I’ll pick up a console, as I’m definitely interested in one anyway. But to act like the sky is falling just because certain companies are releasing console titles is crazy. Dave… those companies that have console games in the works have all stated that they aren’t abandoning the PC anytime soon. Hell… Roper (from Blizzard) has gone on Gamespy and in his interviews has stated that we can expect more PC titles from them in the near future.
THQ announced its financial results for the fourth quarter of 2002. Net income (profit) plummeted 89% from $28.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2001 to $3.13 million in the fourth quarter of 2002. THQ’s CEO Brian Farrell pointed the finger at lower-than-expected sales of Red Faction 2 as well as disappointing sales for other GameCube titles. According to Farrell, THQ cancelled 20 games in development (a third of them for the GameCube) because the company didn’t think there was a market for them. The company is predicting heavy losses for the next two quarters. In addition, THQ is changing its fiscal year from the calendar year to a fiscal year that ends March 31. That’s what many companies in this industry (as well as others that rely heavily on the Christmas shopping season) do, but it also has the salutary effect of making it difficult to compare THQ’s current troubled year to other financial periods.
THQ cancelled 20 games in development, a third slated for the gamecube. Now if they were PC titles, Dave would have been telling us that this is further proof that PC gaming is in decline. But oh look… most were Gamecube games. It looks like the gamecube is the one that’s hurting.
Midway announced that they experienced a net loss of $24.7 million in the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2002. This compares to a net loss of $305,000 in the same period the prior year, and Midway blames this result on lower than expected sales of three titles: Defender, Dr. Muto and Haven: Call of the King. Net loss for the full fiscal year ended December 31, 2002 was $53.8 million compared to a net loss of $61.4 million the prior year. They also reiterated that they have cut 74 jobs in the process of closing their operations in Milpitas, California
Two console companies that have reported loses. In my opinion, were going to be seeing a lot of this in the near future.
Also, don’t forget that most technologies are developed on the PC first, then trickle down to consoles. Everything from analog joysticks to 3D acceleration to force feedback to CDs were innovated on the PC, the details were worked out, then they were packaged for mass consumption on consoles.
If the PC died as a game platform, would there be less innovation in consoles? Who’d take the risk? Well, Sony might with PS3 if all the rumors are true.
And Blizzard started out as a console developer, so it’s not like they’re abandoning the PC–they’re returning to consoles after a long absense.[/quote]
Of course… I know that Blizzard started out in the console business. Blizzard is going back to there roots.
I’m putting together a new PC for myself right now, and I’m going pretty much all-out with one of the new Barton core Athlons on the Asus Deluxe nForce2 board, 1 GB of PC3200 RAM, a Radeon 9700 Pro, 120 GB WD hard drive with an 8 MB cache, a bunch of little extras (like a 3.5" multi-memory card reader), all crammed into one of those slick black Lian-Li aluminum cases. Cost is working out to be about $1200-1300. Now granted, I already had the Radeon. But even if I didn’t, I could skimp on the case and easily make up the difference.
As recently as two or three years, you’d be paying $3000 for a machine like this. Not any more. And this is the high end of PC-dom–you can buy perfectly serviceable machines now for well under $1000.
