Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 11th, 2011, 6:45 pm 
Site Owner
Offline

Joined: September 9th, 2004, 9:26 am
Posts: 6991
Location: Wild Rose Country ca
RS Name: shane12088
RS Status: P2P
I've written this for my February Informer article. I figured I would share this here for an extra arena of discussion.

Shane wrote:
This article is something new for me as I’m not technically a gaming writer. This article will be about one-third tech and two-thirds gaming. Before I start out I feel I should highlight my past experience in this area. I currently own a mid-range gaming PC, Xbox 360, and a Wii. In the past I’ve always had a gaming PC and the Nintendo console of the day (Gamecube, N64, etc.) I will be drawing on my experiences from all of these platforms to present an idealistic view of how the gaming space should be.

The first “next generation” console to launch was the Xbox 360 on November 22, 2005. The Xbox 360 hasn’t had a smooth ride when it comes to hardware reliability, specifically, the red ring of death epidemic. As of writing this in February 2011 the Xbox 360 is still using the same hardware. For those interested the hardware consists of a triple-core 3.2GHz PowerPC Xenon CPU, a 500MHz ATi Xenos graphics card with 512MB graphics memory. The only major change we’ve seen is a design change this past summer which made the unit look more modern and provided an auto-shutdown utility for the red ring of death problem.

The next, “next generation” console shipped almost a year later. This console was the PlayStation 3. The PlayStation 3 (PS3) also ships with a Blu-Ray player, there was a time when a PS3 was the cheapest Blu-Ray player on the market. The PS3 was amazing from a hardware point of view since it included a 3.2GHz Cell processor. Cell processors are also used in IBM super computers which shows the net power of the PS3. The PS3 has a 550MHz NVIDIA RSX “Reality Synthesizer” with 256MB graphics memory. As we saw with the PS2, the PS3 also received a re-design into a slimmer form factor in September 2009.

The last “next generation” console to ship was the Wii. The Wii shipped a few days after the PS3 on November 19, 2006. It’s no surprise that the Wii isn’t as strong as the Xbox 360 or PS3 in terms of raw performance. The Wii was only slightly better than the GameCube in terms of hardware specifications. The Wii features an IBM PowerPC based CPU and an ATi graphics card. The main draw of the Wii was the new form of interaction with the Wii-mote and nunchucks.

The Wii took most of the market for casual gamers with it’s interactive games while the Xbox 360 and PS3 took the remainder of the console gaming share. Xbox Live has certainly become the dominate online gaming community with the PS3 in second. The Xbox took this position for three reasons: they launched first, backwards compatibility with the original Xbox, and stronger exclusive titles. At this point buying a console should be considered carefully and if you decide to buy a console, buy it based on which games are available that you are interested in.

The alternate to a console is a gaming PC. Some people who are used to console gaming will hear the term gaming PC and blindly assume that a gaming PC must mean something like Alienware or an expensive custom build. The pure truth about this is that a gaming PC actually costs less than a Xbox 360 or PS3. While we could go ahead and use my build from last month for a gaming PC, we won’t use the exact version because of Intel’s recall. For the purpose of this article I will be using a previous generation Core i5-760 2.8GHz quad core CPU and a different motherboard. This takes the price down to $837.87. If anyone out there is interested in a build that is cheaper, please send me a message on the forums. Paul has graciously put together a build that uses AMD for those interested.

This system will play any game currently released and probably any game that is going to be released in 2011. The typical misinformed argument about PC gaming is that, PC gaming is too expensive. An Xbox 360 by itself costs $300 or $400 (American) if you are interested in having a Kinect sensor. Assume you buy three games for $60 (American) each when you buy your console, that’s an extra $180. An Xbox live subscription for a year after the first complimentary month will add another $60. If you buy the Kinect the current cost of entry is $640, $540 if you don’t buy Kinect. That’s $590 on average for hardware that is 6 years old. Our gaming PC is $837 for hardware that is less than a year old. Our gaming PC doesn’t require a subscription to play online. Our gaming PC can also be used for other things such as homework, social networking, and content creation. The extra $200-$300 you pay for the PC can be thought of as the cost of performing all other activities other than gaming. Essentially the cheap basic PC a person would buy if they bought or already owned a Xbox.

Another common complaint about PC gaming is the fact that upgrading hardware is expensive. PC upgrades are not needed that often. The only PC upgrade that could potentially be needed with this build is a memory expansion to 8GB in a couple of years or a new graphics card when your current graphics card can no longer decently run the games you wish to play. For $200 every 2 years a person can get a new graphics card that will offer a significant performance boost. It would seem most RSBandB community members are using relatively new computers which goes to show we already spend this money on our computers. This extra cost can be thought of as two years of Xbox Live + 1.5 Xbox games, or alternatively maybe taking a pass on Kinect or the next addon to the Xbox.

This situation didn’t happen by accident. This situation was created by a perfect storm between the gaming console manufacturers and the users of the consoles. The “next generation” consoles received a massive amount of research and development funding, this funding is the reason why Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are still pushing these consoles. This then creates a perfect environment for game developers because they don’t need to change their game engines, they can just use the same game engine with minor tweaks. The game developers are able to take this knowledge of the game engine to squeeze more performance out of the console to create better looking games. This has had the unfortunate side effect of holding PC gaming back since console games are where the money lies. As a piece of anecdotal evidence to support PC gaming being held back I can report that Modern Warfare 2 looks better and plays much smoother on a PC than the Xbox 360 due to the PC’s graphics card, it should be the other way around. Finally, one of the most obvious reasons we’re stuck in this situation is due to the onslaught of misinformed consumers buying this 6 year old hardware and then buying new game releases in record numbers.

We as consumers have no way of preventing the demise of PC gaming in this fashion since we are the minority and we are not profitable. A true response would need to come from a company dedicated to PC gaming. The first company that comes to mind is Valve, the creators of the popular Steam store and Steam community. Valve could form corporate relationships with companies such as Intel and NVIDIA in order to create a PC gaming platform that’s as easy to use as a console. Imagine a computer that is no more than $400 that would play games easily, fit in a confined space, and connect to a TV or computer monitor. This computer would utilize digital downloads to retrieve games from the Steam store for purchase or rent. The computer would run an enhanced steam client that hides Windows unless a user wants to see it. With this being said the computer could be used for anything we currently use a computer for ranging from Runescape to watching rented movies from iTunes. Oh and for those wondering you would be able to use your Xbox 360 controllers ;).

If you have any suggestions for future articles or want a modified build as discussed above send me a message on the forums. See you next month.


Originally posted on Informer.

So, thoughts :)?

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear
PostPosted: February 11th, 2011, 6:45 pm 
Site Owner

Joined: September 9th, 2004, 1:47am
Posts: 9047
Location: In your web browserz


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 11th, 2011, 7:09 pm 
Moderator
Offline

Joined: February 22nd, 2005, 6:49 pm
Posts: 6927
Location: somewhere over the rainbow us
RS Name: j1j2j3
RS Status: P2P
You forgot about adding blizzard near the end. Keep in mind that pc gaming will not die outright. PC gaming is a child who has a finger that constantly bleeds but nobody wants to help him. Much of the focus is still on console gamers, and console games right now love FPS.

even previous PC companies are starting to move toward the FPS, mainstream players like Bioware.
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/5141/biowa ... ll-of-dutys-audience
Quote:
Speaking to NowGamer Melo said: "We have data that shows there are a lot of people that enjoy playing RPGs although they won't necessarily call them RPGs. They'll play Fallout, Assassin's Creed and even Call Of Duty, which have these progression elements - you're putting points into things - but they don't necessarily associate that as an RPG. So we think that if we expand that out we'll attract a much bigger audience."


What is keeping PC gaming alive? because PC can still do so much more than consoles, at least for now.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 11th, 2011, 10:21 pm 
Dragon Member
Offline

Joined: May 13th, 2005, 7:51 pm
Posts: 3099
Location: Arizona us
RS Name: Evalithia
RS Status: P2P
PC's also have more hardware capabilities than console, and of course there are a few die-hards that refuse to leave the keyboard+mouse for game input. (like me!)

But seriously, aside from a controller shaped like a gun, nothing comes close to keyboard and mouse for controlling an FPS game.

_________________
Image
2014.3.28
[size=70]Steam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 12:30 am 
Rsbandb Donor
Offline

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:18 pm
Posts: 3366
Location: USA us
RS Name: Duke Juker
RS Status: P2P
Clan Name: Clan Quest
Agreed. Point-and-click is much better (accurate and fast) then any controller any day. I feel sad that PC gaming could go away. Unfortunately, developers like to make proprietary consoles and parts that only profit them. They can only profit off sales of a game with the PC. And like trekkie said, Blizzard is quite important as well as Valve. I still believe PC gaming will always be preserved, just in a minor state. It won't be the most popular, but it will still be "the best" for certain things. Anyways, though the future looks grim for PCs, I'm hopeful. I've never liked consoles tbh (except the n64, ofc) and new consoles are just expensive and a hassle. PC gaming all the way! :D

_________________
Image
RSBANDBInformer! Gaming Writer: 08/31/2011-09/30/15
RSBandB Donor since 07/01/2010
82nd Dragon Member since 05/12/2010
RSBandB Member #517
Current Activities: Ports, Dailies/Monthlies, DXP
Skill Masteries: Firemaking, Cooking, Woodcutting, Fletching, Mining, Agility, Prayer, Smithing, Fishing, Summoning, Construction, Herblore, Hunter, Thieving, Crafting, Divination, Dungeoneering, Farming, Runecrafting, Slayer, Magic, Ranged, Defence, Constitution, Attack, Strength, Invention & 1st Max (3/9/19), Archaeology & 2nd Max (4/16/21), 200m Firemaking, Necromancy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 1:20 am 
Moderator
Offline

Joined: February 22nd, 2005, 6:49 pm
Posts: 6927
Location: somewhere over the rainbow us
RS Name: j1j2j3
RS Status: P2P
for me, i went only PC after the gamecube. me being a teenage boy loved nintedo. i bought a few games, very very few. and when gamecube was starting to die, and i looked at my gameboy advance... i had 2-3 games for each console after so many years.

after that i figured i don't play consoles anymore so i quit. when i get the chance, i will play xbox/ ps3/ wii with my friends and family. but i would never buy them because i just have no interest for them.

and also very stupid idea to pay 60 a year to get internet service and still get ads while paying it.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 3:34 am 
Dragon Member
Offline

Joined: May 13th, 2005, 7:51 pm
Posts: 3099
Location: Arizona us
RS Name: Evalithia
RS Status: P2P
trekkie wrote:
and also very stupid idea to pay 60 a year to get internet service and still get ads while paying it.


Paying for XBOX live on top of paying your ISP for internet and then paying $60 for every new game that you want.
Too much. Also DLC.

(games are $50 release on PC, and that is still a tad bit high)

_________________
Image
2014.3.28
[size=70]Steam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 3:34 am 
Dragon Member

Joined: September 9th, 2004, 1:47am
Posts: 9047
Location: In your web browserz


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 5:45 pm 
Rsbandb Donor
Offline

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:18 pm
Posts: 3366
Location: USA us
RS Name: Duke Juker
RS Status: P2P
Clan Name: Clan Quest
Cliff Dude wrote:
trekkie wrote:
and also very stupid idea to pay 60 a year to get internet service and still get ads while paying it.


Paying for XBOX live on top of paying your ISP for internet and then paying $60 for every new game that you want.
Too much. Also DLC.

(games are $50 release on PC, and that is still a tad bit high)

You mean $60. Most of the FPS games that come out are $60. Only a few games come out at $50 or even $40 anymore.

_________________
Image
RSBANDBInformer! Gaming Writer: 08/31/2011-09/30/15
RSBandB Donor since 07/01/2010
82nd Dragon Member since 05/12/2010
RSBandB Member #517
Current Activities: Ports, Dailies/Monthlies, DXP
Skill Masteries: Firemaking, Cooking, Woodcutting, Fletching, Mining, Agility, Prayer, Smithing, Fishing, Summoning, Construction, Herblore, Hunter, Thieving, Crafting, Divination, Dungeoneering, Farming, Runecrafting, Slayer, Magic, Ranged, Defence, Constitution, Attack, Strength, Invention & 1st Max (3/9/19), Archaeology & 2nd Max (4/16/21), 200m Firemaking, Necromancy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 6:40 pm 
Dragon Member
Offline

Joined: May 13th, 2005, 7:51 pm
Posts: 3099
Location: Arizona us
RS Name: Evalithia
RS Status: P2P
Duke Juker wrote:
Cliff Dude wrote:
trekkie wrote:
and also very stupid idea to pay 60 a year to get internet service and still get ads while paying it.


Paying for XBOX live on top of paying your ISP for internet and then paying $60 for every new game that you want.
Too much. Also DLC.

(games are $50 release on PC, and that is still a tad bit high)

You mean $60. Most of the FPS games that come out are $60. Only a few games come out at $50 or even $40 anymore.

No, $50. Only stuff like CoD sells for $60 because Activision is nothing but greed. Stuff like the Battlefield series are $50 on release.

_________________
Image
2014.3.28
[size=70]Steam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 12:49 am 
Rsbandb Donor
Offline

Joined: January 28th, 2006, 12:22 pm
Posts: 4453
Location: ONTARIbrO ca
RS Name: Skype Jay
RS Status: F2P
Lol I don't understand why you would want to use a keyboard/mouse for some games. I guess like WoW and stuff it's better, but otherwise the environment around a keyboard and mouse just creates a too serious atmosphere out of something that shouldn't be serious. Like I would rather sit in a nice chair and hold a controller than sitting upright in a computer chair like a foot away from the screen with my hands onto the desk..... I don't even like sitting in a computer chair with a console, a regular distance from the tv. Then again I know people who have their console at the computer desk to the computer monitor and use the computer chair and stuff and they think that setup is sweet so.. XD

And I like how in the price comparison argument of the article, the price of 3 games is thrown into the mix as if you aren't going to buy games for your gaming pc. XD Also how the Kinect is thrown in to the price comparison when, at least right now, it is hardly crucial and isn't it like planned to go to pc gaming anyways and then even general pc/entertainment thingy use? So even if you could argue reason to include Kinect in a 360 vs pc price comparison, it is pretty irrelevant since it should be included in the pc price as well.

I don't really feel it goes too deeply into why pc gaming has a significant advantage to console warranting it to be highly focused on.
From what I've picked up in it:
PC can be upgraded compared to the consoles which are upgraded whenever the maker says so and thus games are being held back or something. Yeah I guess it sucks that that stops games from expanding and stuff but keeping hardware at the same level as long as it can sustain value keeps it accessible to a greater amount of people. If games were continuously requiring current hardware and stuff then anyone on the old **** is forced to upgrade or be forgotten. And the proposed solution to that it would only cost like $100 a year to upgrade with pc gaming- big deal. Well that is a big deal to a lot of people. So you can get a gaming pc for like $800 and pour $100 into it every year, after 5 years you would have spent $1300 on the machine alone... And that's to have access to newer games. Significantly cheaper to everyone to extend the life of something as low as $200 and have it considered current. Maybe it holds back games compared to what might be possible but I think explosive + gradual improvement is better than just gradual improvement anyways.

And the upgradability aspect is about the only reason argued why PC games shouldn't be an after thought... I don't see any other noted advantages unique to computers. And while it was proved pc gaming would be nearly the same price as console, albeit biased in including some things into the console gaming mix that shouldn't have been, the only thing that has riding on it is that the hardware paid for is current... which is more of a reason that consoles should have lower price tags than why PC gaming should be main stage. Personally I am certainly more for having the experience available to a lot more people even if it means holding back games rather than having games to complete potential but the experience limited to those who can afford it (not saying it would cost a fortune but I do think it would cost more) (ironically not having a lot of money doesn't mean you/your family is lazy). If that way of doing consoles means holding back PC games (and since I don't feel that is adequate reasoning that PC has a significant advantage), then I don't see why can't just do consoles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 1:08 am 
Moderator
Offline

Joined: February 22nd, 2005, 6:49 pm
Posts: 6927
Location: somewhere over the rainbow us
RS Name: j1j2j3
RS Status: P2P
but warren. also keep in mind that soon or later the next generation of console will come out. ps4 and xbox 720 with wii wii.

if each one is going to cost at least 400 for the library, you also end up paying more or less the same price upgrading your computer in that time frame. remember, ps3 used to be 600.

yes there are some games where using a controller is a lot better. assassins creed, batman, street fighter etc. but there are some games such as cod4 that you can never do on a pc. i swear, nothing beats being on a server on cod4 with 46 people playing. it's AWESOME!

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 7:47 am 
Dragon Member
Offline

Joined: May 13th, 2005, 7:51 pm
Posts: 3099
Location: Arizona us
RS Name: Evalithia
RS Status: P2P
Controllers are good for certain game types, like racing and fighting. Keyboard+mouse is good for FPS, RTS, and some RPG.

I'm sure that your APM on SCII will shoot to 0.01 if you used a controller and I'm pretty sure I can't map my 20 magic spells to a game controller.
I also can't whip-shot in FPS games with a controller.

On the other side, racing games are terrible if you can only steer with your arrow keys, and the analog stick on a controller can let you decide how sharp of a turn you want to make.

_________________
Image
2014.3.28
[size=70]Steam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 1:07 pm 
Rsbandb Donor
Offline

Joined: January 28th, 2006, 12:22 pm
Posts: 4453
Location: ONTARIbrO ca
RS Name: Skype Jay
RS Status: F2P
Yeah I know a new generation of consoles will come out eventually but I was saying if you delay it as long as value is sustained you will have the gradual improvement of games, and then the explosive improvement with the new consoles. Pretend new console every 5 years which isn't happening right now anyways and it is $400 for it.... if you stayed current consoles, after 9 years you would only have spent $800 on them altho getting ready to spend another $400 soon but that is cheaper right there than the $1300 after 5 years on pc anyways.

And keyboard and mouse on FPS I don't really know the significant advantage of that? Besides that people say it's more accurate than a controller but that is irrelevant because on a console everyone has the 'disadvantage' of using the controller so that would only play into controller vs keyboard/mouse on pc which doesn't really have anything to do with consoles.
The RTS and RPGs on computer are generally designed for computer too so they would be designed to take advantage of having a mouse and keyboard rather than a controller. I agree you wouldn't have it a different way for that. Not like they couldn't be brought to consoles and require mouse/keyboard anyways tho? but since they aren't it's good for you that they don't get held back by consoles?

Lol 46 players on cod maybe awesome to you, doesn't sound so good to me. XD Seems like you would just be killed every time you spawn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 2:10 pm 
Moderator
Offline

Joined: February 22nd, 2005, 6:49 pm
Posts: 6927
Location: somewhere over the rainbow us
RS Name: j1j2j3
RS Status: P2P
there are actually add ons when you can plug in a mouse and keyboard into a ps3, or xbox. although some people consider it cheating.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 3:26 pm 
Rsbandb Donor
Offline

Joined: January 28th, 2006, 12:22 pm
Posts: 4453
Location: ONTARIbrO ca
RS Name: Skype Jay
RS Status: F2P
I thought it was only a few games you could only do that


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My Take on Consoles and Console Development
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 4:00 pm 
Moderator
Offline

Joined: February 22nd, 2005, 6:49 pm
Posts: 6927
Location: somewhere over the rainbow us
RS Name: j1j2j3
RS Status: P2P
this is the eagle eye. it invented so people can use mouse and key with the ps3 for almost any game.


_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to: