Export thread

I wrote out a pretty long thing with this, but it became unweildy. Here's the long and short of it. Has the proliferation of consoles been a good or bad thing for the PC gaming community? And what are your thoughts on it?

Edit: Changed the title, this is specifically about its effect on PC games, not the community as a whole.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Why are we pairing two sub-cultures of the same community against eachother? That's like saying "Have hot nerdy girls in movies boosted the overall attractiveness of nerdy girls?"

In short, guys are going to use their joysticks for both no matter what so everyone wins.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

You really can't compare the two. Both are good at different things and both sides are taking things from each other.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Necronic said:

I wrote out a pretty long thing with this, but it became unweildy. Here's the long and short of it. Has the proliferation of consoles been a good or bad thing for the PC gaming community? And what are your thoughts on it?

Click to expand...

No.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

I voted "no" just because the bad things console gaming has done to PC gaming easily come to mind (clunkier interfaces, bad ports) but some of the things blamed on consoles might have happened to PCs anyway (microtransations and charging for "horse armor", less support for dedicated servers, etc.) On the other hand, the spread of gaming as a hobby, either on console or on PC, has done a lot of good things. It's not a yes or no question, the answer is both.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

It's taken a lot of the arcanum out of video games. It took games out of nerdy virgins basements and moved it into jock dorms, whether that be for good or ill. In some ways I miss it being a sort of exclusive thing, but I think overall, the video game industry as a whole has moved forward because of it. As the industry moves forward, corporations take them more seriously and are more willing to shell out the development money it takes to make really innovative games.

On the other hand, it can also be said that it opened the door for blatant corporate schilling and caused more "fluff" to be produced. Either way, it's more complicated than a yes or no question.

Is console gaming killing PC gaming? Not really. PC gaming has always been more niche than console gaming.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Bowielee said:

On the other hand, it can also be said that it opened the door for blatant corporate schilling and caused more "fluff" to be produced.

Click to expand...

There's a lot of fluff being put out on the PC as well. Some of the fluff is awesome flavored cotton candy, like Pop Cap puts out, but most of the rest of "casual" PC gaming is crap like Facebook games and bejeweled/zuma/tetris-clones.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Bowielee said:

Is console gaming killing PC gaming? Not really. PC gaming has always been more niche than console gaming.

Click to expand...

Only in the US and Japan. In the rest of the world, PC gaming is on the forefront. That's why all those new Russian game studios aren't making console games: No one has a console. It's especially true in Korea and China.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

I'd say that console gaming has been influenced by PC gaming, really. Consoles are starting to have some of the benefits and the downsides of PC games: Now you can buy a game that doesn't work, since it needs you to download a patch, on a console (The Orange Box); you get downloadable expansions; you get games that the system can't really run (FFXI on the PS2) without needing extra hardware; you can play online with your friends. So there's good and bad that isn't really a feature of one or the other anymore. Now that the best games cost as much as a blockbuster movie to develop, I see exclusivity becoming far less common.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Socially it lead to more acceptance, which i guess you could say is good.

From a gaming perspective consoles lead to 6 hour SP's and no dedicated servers.

AshburnerX said:

That's why all those new Russian game studios aren't making console games: No one has a console. It's especially true in Korea and China.

Click to expand...

Not true, it's just that 99% the consoles there (which aren't many, i was just pointing out that it's not true that there aren't none) are modded... (and Korea just plays Starcraft and MMO's).

But it's also that Russia in one of the places that TBS's still sell well, even when you can buy a pirates version on the street corner even before the release date.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

i don't know. I"m 30 so the golden age of gaming is 1998-2002 for me.

I believe games in general are dumbed down now and made easier and less interesting to cater to consolers.

But yet, it might just be that i grew older and i'm slowly starting to lose interest. (2009 was a great year tho. Fallout 3, Dragon Age, DoW2...)

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Math242 said:

i don't know. I"m 30 so the golden age of gaming is 1998-2002 for me.

Click to expand...

I'm younger, and i'd say '96 is a better starting point. And i didn't even have a PC until '98.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

You are absolutely right. Daggerfall got released in 1996 and fallout in 97.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Quake and Red Alert was what we played at the internet café (which at the time didn't have internet). also NFS 2, but that's '97 it seems (that's the year we where skipping class for games the most, 7th grade).

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

No, but WOW has turned computer gaming into something I have no interest in spending my time on.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Yes and no.

It lead to more acceptance of the gaming subculture and showed that we weren't really the stereotype the media and such made us out to be. It lead to more profits and thus more investments in the gaming industry, which leads to more and/or better games.

However, bad ports are a pain. Developers leaving PC development and making consoles priority is hurting the quality of games somewhat, due to console games still being more of a jump in, jump out kind of gaming, rather then long intense and immersed gaming sessions.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

redapples said:

No, but WOW has turned computer gaming into something I have no interest in spending my time on.

Click to expand...

Yah, it's not like you can just ignore MMO's and buy only the good titles...

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Overall, the spread of console gaming is a good thing.

Consoles are what's been keeping the game industry alive for the last decade or so. You can talk about PC game development suffering as developer priorities shift, but at the end of the day, we would not have reached the point where direct download casual games were a cottage industry if the overall game industry had gone down into the dust, which it would have but for console gaming.

It would be hard to name something in the industry that as a whole has been less profitable for major developers in the last decade than the PC gaming market. While there have been lots of individual hits (and WoW, obviously), returns on high-end PC games are just not that good, thanks to high development costs, compatibility issues, and piracy, and the sales just aren't there in comparison to console and mobile/portable.

We've finally reached the point where publishers are willing to be flexible in how they sell their games, and small developers are able to easily release lots of great stuff on PC, so I think PC gaming is heading for a bit of a renaissance, but we wouldn't have gotten there without consoles pulling most of the weight for years.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

For the better part of a decade, the EB/GameStop was almost exclusively PC games. Over time that selection has dwindled from three whole sides of the store, to two, to one, to part of one, and finally to what we have today. One small movable rack in the middle of the floor.

I'd say that's a pretty good case for NO.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

Meh, games are games. Got a few on my pc, more on my consoles. I do not go exclusive to one or the other. So really, it works fine.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

DarkAudit said:

For the better part of a decade, the EB/GameStop was almost exclusively PC games. Over time that selection has dwindled from three whole sides of the store, to two, to one, to part of one, and finally to what we have today. One small movable rack in the middle of the floor.

I'd say that's a pretty good case for NO.

Click to expand...

That's mainly because PC games can't be traded in, so there really isn't any reason for GameStop, the chain founded on screwing people over in trade ins, to push them. It's not because PC games have become less popular.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

TeKeo said:

and the sales just aren't there in comparison to console and mobile/portable.

Click to expand...

Yeas, it's not like certain "content delivery" platforms refuse to release sales data and everywhere you look estimates for actual sales on the PC are absent...


Also, i take the WoW stuff back... 11 million PC gamers paying 15$ a month to play the same game must have some sort of effect on sales of other games...

It would be hard to name something in the industry that as a whole has been less profitable for major developers in the last decade than the PC gaming market.

Click to expand...

How about RTS, or even strategy games overall...

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

I grew up playing console games and I am still a console gamer. And as it goes I find it much easier to play games on my console systems just because I have gotten used to playing them that way. Now that is not to say I don't like PC games I just simply have gotten used to my console games. I don't believe that console games are the cause of fluff games (although Nintendo sure is trying my patience this generation). There has been plenty of soccer mom games for the PC for years.


Now granted console games seems to draw more mainstreamers/sport game fanatics/rockband whores. But I think that is just simply becuase the console systems are a little less daunting to those types of idiots. But I think the point is starting to become moot. Consoles games and PC games are starting to merge together into one blurry line. Now that is not too say that they will be completely merged but the line is blurring and the day will come where there is no major difference.


Now I have to admit that console games are hurting the PC gamers to a certain extent but I think that may have more to do with PC games seeming to be so daunting to your average Joe. On an interesting note console games have started to imitate the PC games in certain aspects (downloadable content, Online matches, etc) and I think that has been a mixed bag for console games/pc games.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

Paragraphs, man. Paragraphs.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

The answer is yes AND no depending on who you really asking.

No
Companies are out to make money. It is easier to make a game for a console since the specs remains the same. I.E. xbox 360 regardless of version still have the same video and input devices. The main difference is HDD space and CPU (possible when we are talking about series 1 and 2 of a console)

While making a game for the PC, the dev would have to consider the low, average or top end graphic cards. What can you do with it? How much pixel can you cram into it, what kind of input devices and configuration (customizable is a good thing) Also if the dev goes this route, the port to PC usually are "crappier" IMO.

Yes
Some games play "better" on a PC. I say "better" mainly the keyboard allows more options than say a controller. I play L4D on Xbox360 vs PC. I LOVE the PC version better due to control but that is just me.

Why is this good? In the U.S. people buy console all the time, but this COULD lead them to buy a higher end PC to play the "good port" version for the PC. Of course the PC can utilize higher level graphics, sound, control, and CPU power than a console.

These are pretty much my two quick answers

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

It would be hard to name something in the industry that as a whole has been less profitable for major developers in the last decade than the PC gaming market.

Click to expand...

How about RTS, or even strategy games overall...

Click to expand...

Yep, but part of this lack of revenue is the support for online gaming. Rise of Nations support, for example, was almost non existant and the community liason was even worse. They released a patch into beta which split the already fragile community into half killing it right there. Rise of Legends, I don't talk about.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n;301553][quote=TeKeo said:

and the sales just aren't there in comparison to console and mobile/portable.

Click to expand...

Yeas, it's not like certain "content delivery" platforms refuse to release sales data and everywhere you look estimates for actual sales on the PC are absent...
[/quote]

Generally-speaking, I think the ESA estimates are pretty close. Valve is probably the only major player in content-delivery (at least outside of Asia) who is a private corporation, and most of the games on their catalogue are owned by public companies anyway. While folks like Apple don't release exact sales by unit data, they do release total sales figures that you can make a reasonably accurate estimate from.

However, one thing I don't believe the ESA numbers cover are subscription model games, which are technically not "unit sales".

WoW makes the whole situation difficult to judge, because according to Activision's last quarterly release, WoW makes around $80-90 million a month in subscriptions at the moment, top line. This means that subscription revenue, as opposed to direct sales revenue, is around $1-1.2 Bn every year, which is more than the ESA revenue estimates on PC game units sold.

So the question is, is it reasonable to believe that Blizzard makes more in revenue from subs than the entire rest of the PC game industry does in one year?

I don't know. It seems possible. Not a lot of $50 PC games break 1 million units sold. And a lot of big earners get most of their numbers from console sales these days.

That said, this year might be a better showing. IF the ESA follows most game companies in starting their fiscal year calculations in the holiday season, this year's financials will be including Fallout 3 and GTA IV being released for the PC.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

redapples;301621][quote=@Li3n said:

It would be hard to name something in the industry that as a whole has been less profitable for major developers in the last decade than the PC gaming market.

Click to expand...

How about RTS, or even strategy games overall...

Click to expand...

Yep, but part of this lack of revenue is the support for online gaming. Rise of Nations support, for example, was almost non existant and the community liason was even worse. They released a patch into beta which split the already fragile community into half killing it right there. Rise of Legends, I don't talk about.[/QUOTE]

What, lack of support? Nah, it must be piracy... oh wait!


Even RTS's that are console-only like Halo Wars only sell a fraction of what FPS's or hack&slash games do on consoles.

hylian said:

I don't believe that console games are the cause of fluff games (although Nintendo sure is trying my patience this generation). There has been plenty of soccer mom games for the PC for years.

Click to expand...

Name the most harcore console games... unles they're jRPG's chances are they would be considered casual games on the PC 5 years ago.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

hylian said:

I don't believe that console games are the cause of fluff games (although Nintendo sure is trying my patience this generation). There has been plenty of soccer mom games for the PC for years.

Click to expand...

Name the most harcore console games... unles they're jRPG's chances are they would be considered casual games on the PC 5 years ago.

Click to expand...

The ultima series

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

Fine... you can have the j... i just couldn't remember any recent wRPG's on consoles that where hardcore (man, i need to play some Dragon Age, see how it is).
​

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "hardcore"?

And how exclusive are we talking? I would think Dragon Age counts, but it's multi-platform....

And then there's Fallout.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

I was implying i forgot about Dragon Age...

And does Fallout even count as a RPG?! Hexen did the whole FPS with classes ages ago (heh, i've been itching to get Hexen in somewhere all day, ever since Math mentioned those golden age dates, and i only played a short shareware version).

But i already gave you the j...

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

figmentPez;301378][quote=Bowielee said:

On the other hand, it can also be said that it opened the door for blatant corporate schilling and caused more "fluff" to be produced.

Click to expand...

There's a lot of fluff being put out on the PC as well. Some of the fluff is awesome flavored cotton candy, like Pop Cap puts out, but most of the rest of "casual" PC gaming is crap like Facebook games and bejeweled/zuma/tetris-clones.[/QUOTE]

I've been PC gaming from the start. There has always been fluff, and crap out there. The corporations have always been throwing crap together to try and get a foothold in the market.

Console gaming has been around longer than PC gaming. I've never owned a console since Pong came out, but I've seen the changes over the years with machines that belong to friends or roommates.

I want to decry the death of the combat flight simulator. It was killed by first person shooters and MMO's... The last couple of combat flight simulators that I've tried have been nothing but twitch games since Lucas Arts had their big hits.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

And does Fallout even count as a RPG?!

Click to expand...

I really don't see why not. There are no classes, but skillsets you can sink points into, it has an open world with non-linear questing and items to collect that get steadily better as you go to meaner areas, there's the VAT system, and everyone can play it a little differently.

It may not necessarily be the good old turn-based, menu-selected type of RPG, but in a lot of ways, neither is Dragon-Age.

Are RPGs the only games allowed to be "hardcore"?

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

Nah, i was just wandering about Fallout, which looks more like a hybrid. it's just that RPGs are the only console genre that isn't somewhat "easy" to get into.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

Nah, i was just wandering about Fallout, which looks more like a hybrid

Click to expand...

Wait, you haven't played it? Dude, you gotta, it's fantastic. Highly recommended.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

Another good thing consoles did for PC, better gamepad support. Before the X-box 360 controllers were made compatible with Windows, gamepad support was poor for games, IMO. Psychonauts, Beyond Good and Evil and Prince of Persia Sands of Time are all games I've played where the gamepad support is problematic. None of them have a very good way of configuring the pad without having to look up where the buttons are mapped on the console. Complicating that PoPSoT has actions divided up that are combined in one button on consoles, and Psychonauts doesn't allow the analog triggers to be mapped as buttons. I never did get BG&E to work with my gamepad, but that might not be the games fault. I don't think any of them support rumble. All this despite various gamepads being available for years on the PC. Granted, these are all console ports, but I had similar problems with Mr. Robot, a PC-only game. So much trouble that I gave up trying to play it.

Compare that to more recent games like Trine and Overlord. Trine works so well with a 360 pad that I thought it was originally an XBLA title (to my surprise, it's on PS3 but not yet on Xbox). Overlord works similarly well, and both games support rumble.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

figmentPez said:

Another good thing consoles did for PC, better gamepad support. Before the X-box 360 controllers were made compatible with Windows, gamepad support was poor for games, IMO. Psychonauts, Beyond Good and Evil and Prince of Persia Sands of Time are all games I've played where the gamepad support is problematic. None of them have a very good way of configuring the pad without having to look up where the buttons are mapped on the console. Complicating that PoPSoT has actions divided up that are combined in one button on consoles, and Psychonauts doesn't allow the analog triggers to be mapped as buttons. I never did get BG&E to work with my gamepad, but that might not be the games fault. I don't think any of them support rumble. All this despite various gamepads being available for years on the PC. Granted, these are all console ports, but I had similar problems with Mr. Robot, a PC-only game. So much trouble that I gave up trying to play it.

Compare that to more recent games like Trine and Overlord. Trine works so well with a 360 pad that I thought it was originally an XBLA title (to my surprise, it's on PS3 but not yet on Xbox). Overlord works similarly well, and both games support rumble.

Click to expand...

I'll definitely agree to this, and add to the list of games that I played on PC that had excellent 360 controller support: Spiderman web of shadows, Xmen Origins Wolverine, Braid, Gears of War, Fallout 3.

I wish they had done a direct port of controls for Oblivion as it seems like it would be less awkward for some reason if it were with a controller.

Is the spread of console gaming a good thing?

TeKeo;301870][quote=@Li3n said:

Nah, i was just wandering about Fallout, which looks more like a hybrid

Click to expand...

Wait, you haven't played it? Dude, you gotta, it's fantastic. Highly recommended.[/QUOTE]


I'm planning to, but i still haven't managed to finish all the games i installed when i got the new PC a year and some change ago. Work sucks.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Seraphyn said:

Yes and no.

It lead to more acceptance of the gaming subculture and showed that we weren't really the stereotype the media and such made us out to be. It lead to more profits and thus more investments in the gaming industry, which leads to more and/or better games.

However, bad ports are a pain. Developers leaving PC development and making consoles priority is hurting the quality of games somewhat, due to console games still being more of a jump in, jump out kind of gaming, rather then long intense and immersed gaming sessions.

Click to expand...

Good way to say it. Much better than my long speech that I deleted.

However the "more profits/better investments" argument is questionable. Since consoles drove a lot of that profit then developers will focus their time on consoles. How many people here can remember a time where an FPS on a console was a complete and utter joke. Now developers develop FPSs for the consoles then port it to PC. That is completely insane from a perspective less than a decade old.

Also, I'm willing to bet that the damage consoles have done to PC gaming has been severely heightened by piracy, or vice versa. Its a synergistic thing. Why develop on a PC where some 15 year old shit head will just steal from you when you can develop on a console where it is much much more secure?

In the end the PC is starting to go back more towards its roots, the one thing you can do on a PC that you will never do on a console is homebrew. Oblivion plays good on a 360, but it pales in comparison to what you get with mods. Same goes for tons of games. The freeware realm is awesome too. Yeah, you can buy some 5$ quicky game on arcade but I can get that and thousands other freeware games for nothing on a PC.

ah...I just don't know where I'm going with this. I was listening to a gaming podcast the other day, Rebel.FM, and one of their hosts Tyler Barber (a published games journalist) said that he had never plaid an FPS on a keyboard/mouse combo (just controllers).

There is something so fucking wrong with that. Someone who is supposed to be an expert. Never played an FPS with a keyboard/mouse.

That's like saying you are an expert carpenter and then you bust out this:



To be fair, when someone starts playing Tekken or GTA on a computer it makes me cringe just as bad. Something is just not right about that.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

Necronic said:

There is something so fucking wrong with that. Someone who is supposed to be an expert. Never played an FPS with a keyboard/mouse.

That's like saying you are an expert carpenter and then you bust out this:

To be fair, when someone starts playing Tekken or GTA on a computer it makes me cringe just as bad. Something is just not right about that.

Click to expand...

It was more than a little weird for me to play CoD4 on my 360 when I had all the previous ones on my PC, but I got used to it.

I buy most games now for my consoles if there is a choice, except for WoW, and the average RTS.

Much as I miss modding potential, I don't miss needing to regularly upgrade my PC, and most of my friends prefer to play online games on Xbox Live (with the exception of WoW, of course).

And as folks have pointed out, a lot of FPS games are designed for consoles then ported anyways....

Why would you need to upgrade your PC to play a game that works on a 4 year old console?!

@Li3n said:

Why would you need to upgrade your PC to play a game that works on a 4 year old console?!

Click to expand...

My PC is also four years old, and much worse for gaming than my consoles.

Oh noes, console games are tep popularz! I cannot feelz special to all those other jocks and peepz anymorez! But at least I haz my PC!! ALWAYZ BETTUH, AND U'Z GUYZ'LL NEVR UZE IT!! HAHahhaAHAHAhA!!

---------- Post added at 03:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:53 PM ----------

I am just fuckin with ya.

Shannow said:

Oh noes, console games are tep popularz! I cannot feelz special to all those other jocks and peepz anymorez! But at least I haz my PC!! ALWAYZ BETTUH, AND U'Z GUYZ'LL NEVR UZE IT!! HAHahhaAHAHAhA!!

---------- Post added at 03:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:53 PM ----------

I am just fuckin with ya.

Click to expand...

Oh, I know, you little scamp.

anywho...

Anyone played the halo wars game? That little bitch popped the last cherry (RTS). I was playing it and, honestly, its kind of fun, but its not nearly as good as a more complex RTS like DoW or C&C.

Also, to clarify, I love consoles. I think that they are the bees knees. Shit I grew up on consoles. Compared to computers they are so massively economically superior. I just think that they have gotten "too good" if you will, as devs are devoting so much more time for them.

At least we still have blizzard...

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

Quake and Red Alert was what we played at the internet café (which at the time didn't have internet)

Click to expand...

When you play Red Alert 3 or Quake 4, they're sad mockeries of the originals. RA3 tries so desperatley to capture westwood's old magic, but falls flat and just feels empty. I think the issue is that consoles have made games accessible enough that everybody's playing now, so they're bleeding out things that made games great in order to make them more presentable/playable. Even in the short span from KOTOR to Mass effect/Dragon Age, it seems like something's been lost.

@Li3n said:

Name the most harcore console games... unles they're jRPG's chances are they would be considered casual games on the PC 5 years ago.

Click to expand...

Someone missed the glory days of the NES, which had such wonderful hurdles as "die in one hit" "always 100 bullets on the screen" and "three lives, no continues"

Necronic;303367][quote=Shannow said:

Oh noes, console games are tep popularz! I cannot feelz special to all those other jocks and peepz anymorez! But at least I haz my PC!! ALWAYZ BETTUH, AND U'Z GUYZ'LL NEVR UZE IT!! HAHahhaAHAHAhA!!

---------- Post added at 03:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:53 PM ----------

I am just fuckin with ya.

Click to expand...

Oh, I know, you little scamp.

anywho...

Anyone played the halo wars game? That little bitch popped the last cherry (RTS). I was playing it and, honestly, its kind of fun, but its not nearly as good as a more complex RTS like DoW or C&C.

Also, to clarify, I love consoles. I think that they are the bees knees. Shit I grew up on consoles. Compared to computers they are so massively economically superior. I just think that they have gotten "too good" if you will, as devs are devoting so much more time for them.

At least we still have blizzard...[/QUOTE]

Halo Wars wasn't even close to the first RTS released on consoles, FYI.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Bowielee

I think he meant it was the 1st one he knows of not to suck...

"GeneralOrder24 said:

@Li3n said:

Quake and Red Alert was what we played at the internet café (which at the time didn't have internet)

Click to expand...

When you play Red Alert 3 or Quake 4, they're sad mockeries of the originals. RA3 tries so desperatley to capture westwood's old magic, but falls flat and just feels empty. I think the issue is that consoles have made games accessible enough that everybody's playing now, so they're bleeding out things that made games great in order to make them more presentable/playable. Even in the short span from KOTOR to Mass effect/Dragon Age, it seems like something's been lost.

Click to expand...

Tell me about it.

Actually i disliked RA2 when it first came out too, but after i played it for real it grew on me, even if it never felt "better" then RA1.

GeneralOrder24 said:

Someone missed the glory days of the NES, which had such wonderful hurdles as \"die in one hit\" \"always 100 bullets on the screen\" and \"three lives, no continues\"

Click to expand...

That was back in the day when the line between arcade/console/PC was more blurry in terms of games (no mouse or many keys to use etc.)

Never experienced it 1st hand though (we did get a lot of 80's games and hardware here in the early 90's after communism fell so i do remember some stuff, but not that well).

actually I would argue that back then the line was very clear. No games would show up on both a console and a PC. Maybe console and arcade, but PC was a very distinct gaming world.

I didn't mean in the "exclusivity" kinda way. Back then all games had simple control schemes and where hard so you'd have to play them longer to finish.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

@Li3n said:

Actually i disliked RA2 when it first came out too, but after i played it for real it grew on me, even if it never felt "better" then RA1.

Click to expand...

I think I can see where you're coming from. The use of the tiberian sun engine making more complex units/gameplay, and the omission of Kane, (original RA soviet ending seemed to be setting up the GDI/NOD thing.) was initially a bit of a bummer. RA2 was fun overall (much better than tiberium sun was!) and it's a damn shame that westwood was dissolved by EA so soon after.

Necronic said:

actually I would argue that back then the line was very clear. No games would show up on both a console and a PC. Maybe console and arcade, but PC was a very distinct gaming world.

Click to expand...

This is actually wrong. I still have my PC copy of Castlevania 1, so it clearly wasn't a matter of not wanting to port. It just didn't happen very often because fewer people had PCs than Consoles back then.

AshburnerX;303645][quote=Necronic said:

actually I would argue that back then the line was very clear. No games would show up on both a console and a PC. Maybe console and arcade, but PC was a very distinct gaming world.

Click to expand...

This is actually wrong. I still have my PC copy of Castlevania 1, so it clearly wasn't a matter of not wanting to port. It just didn't happen very often because fewer people had PCs than Consoles back then.[/QUOTE]

I remember playing Pitfall on the comadore 64, so, yeah, PC ports of console games have been around since the beginning.

Is the spred of console gaming a good thing?

GeneralOrder24;303612][quote=@Li3n said:

Actually i disliked RA2 when it first came out too, but after i played it for real it grew on me, even if it never felt "better" then RA1.

Click to expand...

I think I can see where you're coming from. The use of the tiberian sun engine making more complex units/gameplay, and the omission of Kane, was initially a bit of a bummer. RA2 was fun overall (much better than tiberium sun was!) and it's a damn shame that westwood was dissolved by EA so soon after.[/QUOTE]

It was just that RA2 just didn't feel the same, and they embraced the cheese too much... the first one was more like they tried to be more serious, but they all knew it was rather ridiculous, and that made for some well matured cheese, while RA2 had cheese right out of the barrel.

(original RA soviet ending seemed to be setting up the GDI/NOD thing.)

Click to expand...

Except that the timeline makes no sense if the Soviets had control of Europe, i always took it that Kane being there was more of a hint to why Nod comes from Africa in C&C1 (coz Russia was a failure). And the Allied ending hints at the forming of the GDI as i recall.

Bowielee;303650][quote=AshburnerX;303645][quote=Necronic said:

actually I would argue that back then the line was very clear. No games would show up on both a console and a PC. Maybe console and arcade, but PC was a very distinct gaming world.

Click to expand...

This is actually wrong. I still have my PC copy of Castlevania 1, so it clearly wasn't a matter of not wanting to port. It just didn't happen very often because fewer people had PCs than Consoles back then.[/QUOTE]

I remember playing Pitfall on the comadore 64, so, yeah, PC ports of console games have been around since the beginning.[/QUOTE]

Commadore 64 isn't a fair example, as its almost a console. However, I concede that I was wrong in saying "no games", instead I will say "very very few games"

Necronic said:

Commodore 64 isn't a fair example, as its almost a console. However, I concede that I was wrong in saying "no games", instead I will say "very very few games"

Click to expand...

And that's another thing... back then hardware wise the PC was also limited almost as much as a console.

Stolen from here (posted the day after this thread got created): http://www.halforums.com/forum/blog.php?b=71