However, most people who use computers these days are just fine with a much less powerful computer because they watch videos, listen to music, and use social networking services like Facebook. The iPhone fits into this use pattern too; it's a shift from creating content to primarily consuming content. While geeks may bemoan the closed nature of the iPad's app store, most users don't really care; they're happy as long as they can watch/listen to what they want and communicate with who they want.

Gaming has shifted this way too. While mod communities are still active, they're nowhere near as prolific as they were back in the first decade of the 21st century. I think the main driving forces for this were the coming of the Xbox and Xbox Live, and the massive popularity of World of Warcraft. As online gaming was opened up to the masses via Live, and many gamers got older and found it harder to spend time tweaking their PCs the convenience of being able to simply join up with a group of friends and play online without searching for a server (or setting up a private one), the fact that the platform was closed didn't matter. World of Warcraft is also a pretty tightly closed platform from what I understand; most users want a large game world which just isn't possible on smaller home-brew servers, and so players are left with what Blizzard sells to them in much the same way that Xbox gamers play on whatever maps Bungie or Activision release for Halo/CoD respectively.

Is there something wrong with this? Maybe; I feel this has lead to a less rich experience when using technology. Remember how exciting the FRED software was when you first saw it in Freespace, and how amazing some of the user created missions were? Or do you remember the excitement of finding a great multiplayer map for Half-Life or Unreal Tournament, and playing it for weeks on end with your friends on a dedicated server? Some of this is gone, and I fear that it may impact the next generation of game creators since the days of multitudes of map makers may soon be over; it may be harder to hire someone who just went out and made maps or mods for the sheer love of creating and playing, and some of the strongest development teams (I'm thinking of Epic and id most prominently) were built on that sort of recruitment.

So, do you think I have a valid point here, or am I just an old man shaking his cane at the damn kids walking all over his lawn?

I think the majority of people want to watch videos, play games, listen to music, socialise, etc. They don't care how it' done, just that it's done.

Only the minority actually want to go out there and create their own content, while the majority, it seems, are perfectly happy with XBoxes, iPods, iPhones, iPads, Netbooks, and other solutions which give them what they want to do, nothing more.

Most games for the PC these days are console ports, the PC isn't being used in the most effective way. Most new gadgets give people the ability to do something, but not the ability to do "everything", so to speak.

Companies will market to the majority because that's where the money is. Until the majority beciome more demanding, which will eventually happen, I'd imagine, then the nature of the gadgets will not change.

Online gaming, and gaming in general, has opened up to the majority by becoming more restrictive. People don't want the hassle of upgrading all the time.

Things change, and as things become more attractive, the majority want specific things. As this happens, companies develop ways to exploit these wants. Over time, the wants become more demanding.

We'll just have to see where it all goes, but at the moment I think you're an old guy waving his cane at some kids on his lawn, making a valid point about their tresspass!

However. I don't think PC gaming is going any place. Or the mod comunities. It may have down sized a bit but... it's still there. Faster processers are still being made new vid cards are still coming out. If anything parts are cheaper then ever before. Down side is they don't last as long.

Yeah maybe you'll see less games for PC but again I don't think they are going any place. I have a 360 but it's pretty much for X-box only games that I have to have. Halo, Gears of War ect. Nothing beats a mouse IMO. If it can be had for PC (& it's usally cheaper) I'll get it.

However my buddy doesn't share my sentiments. He had a bad experiance with the PC port of Gears of War & now only buys PC only games for the PC like Dawn of War.

As for WoW it's also improving it's requirement. When I first played it around the release of Burning Crusade I could run it on full settings. I took a break & came back for Litch King & found I couldn't really run it on full settings espically in Northrend. So while you can play WoW on a laptop there is still some reason to upgrade. But you are right the average addict probably won't care.

Just live some place in the middle. Have a PC & an X-box. I guess you could get a PS3 too but... Unless you are a Metal Gear fan I don't see the point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cyclone Jack:
Main streaming tech is nice in a way. Problem with PCs is that you have so many different part combations that it's a problem that's probably going to be around forever.

---

quote:

---

For instance I just picked up Fallout 3 for PC. I have this funny little bug that fouls up the textures when I mess around in the inventory for too long. I believe it's something to do with my new vid card (yes the game is fully patched & I have the lastest drivers). But that would NEVER happen on the x-box. Crap like that has been around for as long as I can remeber. Oh sweet I got a new game but the sound is all messed up cuz I don't have a sound blaster card & my sound card only "emulates" sound blaster.

---

But is that laziness on the part of bethesda, driver development team, microsoft, etc. Is it a conspiracy to drive people away from PC gaming?! Wait, no, probably not!

But.. Wasn't Fallout 3 a console port?

quote:

---

However. I don't think PC gaming is going any place. Or the mod comunities. It may have down sized a bit but... it's still there. Faster processers are still being made new vid cards are still coming out. If anything parts are cheaper then ever before. Down side is they don't last as long.

Yeah maybe you'll see less games for PC but again I don't think they are going any place. I have a 360 but it's pretty much for X-box only games that I have to have. Halo, Gears of War ect. Nothing beats a mouse IMO. If it can be had for PC (& it's usally cheaper) I'll get it.

---

I don't think it's possible to remove PC games, as it is the easiest to develop for. You don't need a special console, your home pc or laptop will do just fine. Can't afford a development package? Download a free one and make a start.
Can't code? Time to learn!

PC Gaming won't "die", but it may not be "mainstream" or "big business" for a while... Which is fine, as long as you have "other options"...

quote:

---

However my buddy doesn't share my sentiments. He had a bad experiance with the PC port of Gears of War & now only buys PC only games for the PC like Dawn of War.

---

Yeah, because "it's not worth porting games to the PC. No-one likes it, it's pirated waaay too often and it costs too much"...

No-one likes it because most ports aren't properly done...
It's pirated way too often because most ports have stupid DRM or aren't worth the price tag...
It costs too much because they don't have Microsoft/Sony sponsorship!

quote:

---

As for WoW it's also improving it's requirement. When I first played it around the release of Burning Crusade I could run it on full settings. I took a break & came back for Litch King & found I couldn't really run it on full settings espically in Northrend. So while you can play WoW on a laptop there is still some reason to upgrade. But you are right the average addict probably won't care.

---

In my experience, every MMO these days, if it lasts long enough, will have to improve their graphical engine at least once. Guess it's something to do with the "what are we paying each month for?!" solution...

quote:

---

Just live some place in the middle. Have a PC & an X-box. I guess you could get a PS3 too but... Unless you are a Metal Gear fan I don't see the point.

---

Or unless you have an HD tv and no Blueray player...
There are other good reasons too.. I have a 360, PS3 and PC... Not touched the 360 in over a year. Also, it seems some of the recent releases are actually better on the PS3, also some "interesting" exclusives, Mag, etc.

quote:

---

Just my thoughts. Forgive the speeling.

---

OMG! Speeling?! Call the Language Police!

(edited:Couldn't find the preview button!)

[ Message edited by: Keef on 27-06-2010 ]

I leave my 360 untouched for long streaches. Mostly cuz I have some PC game I'm playing. But none of the PS3 exclusives really catch my eye cept for Metal Gear. & a few of them are jumping ship to the 360. The latest Final Fantsy was on the 360. Not sure if there was a PS3 version but Resident Evil was also out on 360. That seems to be where the money is going.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cyclone Jack:
The PS3 used to be the least expensive Blu Ray player on the market. So there was a time when that would've been a good buy but now Blu Rays are a lot cheaper then the PS3.

---

Yeah, well. I've had my PS3 a while now. Back then it was the cheapest Blueray player

I've not been keeping up on such prices, but I see that the 360 is now "cheap" as are Blueray players. PS3 is still "expensive"....

quote:

---

The latest Final Fantsy was on the 360.

---

Yeah, but the overall sound and graphics quality on the 360 was quite poor, as I read. I believe the graphics out put was 517i or something. If you had an HD tv, the best option for that was on the PS3. As games become even bigger, this may well happen with more games. That Blueray reader has made a big difference, not only to games...

quote:

---

Not sure if there was a PS3 version but Resident Evil was also out on 360. That seems to be where the money is going.

---

Microsoft is probably paying publishers/developers more.

Plus the 360 is "cheap" so there are probably "more" of them so therefore it makes sense to concentrate development for that console?

I'm sure that Microsoft wants everyone to stop developing for PS3 and PC and just develop for the 360. Sony also probably want everyone devloping for the PS3. More games = More Sale = More money, and that's what every big company wants, right?

If either company gets knocked out of the console market, the other will suffer.

We may well end up with a video games market where World of Warcraft is the only "recognised" game on PC, but there will always be other options.

Unfortunatly, the people who grew up with gmaes in their infancy, are probably not running the companies making games now. The people running those companies have one thing on their mind: Profit. With that in mind, stop making PC Games... It's not worth the trouble! Now, which console manufacturer wants to "help" me make a game for their machine most?

Things will change in the future, they always do. I guess really it's just a "wait and see"..

(edited:Really need a preview button...)

[ Message edited by: Keef on 28-06-2010 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MadMac:
With the proliferation of netbooks and tablet devices like the iPad, I came to a bit of a realization in the past few days. One of the biggest reasons why I still have a powerful desktop computer is that when I want to do data analysis for work or play some serious games, I need to have that much computing grunt available.

However, most people who use computers these days are just fine with a much less powerful computer because they watch videos, listen to music, and use social networking services like Facebook. The iPhone fits into this use pattern too; it's a shift from creating content to primarily consuming content. While geeks may bemoan the closed nature of the iPad's app store, most users don't really care; they're happy as long as they can watch/listen to what they want and communicate with who they want.

Gaming has shifted this way too. While mod communities are still active, they're nowhere near as prolific as they were back in the first decade of the 21st century. I think the main driving forces for this were the coming of the Xbox and Xbox Live, and the massive popularity of World of Warcraft. As online gaming was opened up to the masses via Live, and many gamers got older and found it harder to spend time tweaking their PCs the convenience of being able to simply join up with a group of friends and play online without searching for a server (or setting up a private one), the fact that the platform was closed didn't matter. World of Warcraft is also a pretty tightly closed platform from what I understand; most users want a large game world which just isn't possible on smaller home-brew servers, and so players are left with what Blizzard sells to them in much the same way that Xbox gamers play on whatever maps Bungie or Activision release for Halo/CoD respectively.

Is there something wrong with this? Maybe; I feel this has lead to a less rich experience when using technology. Remember how exciting the FRED software was when you first saw it in Freespace, and how amazing some of the user created missions were? Or do you remember the excitement of finding a great multiplayer map for Half-Life or Unreal Tournament, and playing it for weeks on end with your friends on a dedicated server? Some of this is gone, and I fear that it may impact the next generation of game creators since the days of multitudes of map makers may soon be over; it may be harder to hire someone who just went out and made maps or mods for the sheer love of creating and playing, and some of the strongest development teams (I'm thinking of Epic and id most prominently) were built on that sort of recruitment.

So, do you think I have a valid point here, or am I just an old man shaking his cane at the damn kids walking all over his lawn?

---

Re-hijacked! Back on-topic!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keef:
Unfortunatly, the people who grew up with gmaes in their infancy, are probably not running the companies making games now. The people running those companies have one thing on their mind: Profit. With that in mind, stop making PC Games... It's not worth the trouble! Now, which console manufacturer wants to "help" me make a game for their machine most?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MadMac:
And that right there is part of the issue, I think. It's why Activision bought Blizzard; they didn't do it because they values the effort that Blizzard puts into every single game they develop, they did it because they could make money hand over fist via skimming off some of the World of Warcraft revenue and the massive amount of sales that Starcraft II will have. The "profit first" mentality is the reason why the Guitar Hero franchise is in the crapper, and Call of Duty seems to be heading in the same direction. I think Bobby Kotick even said once that his goal was to "exploit" their franchises as much as they can, aka "run them into the fucking ground."

---

But that right there is the way modern business seems to work!

Find something that sells, exploit it until it no longer sells, while finding something else to exploit.

Once games achieved "critical mass" it was inevitable it would get this far. Where it goes from here depends on what happens next... Until the public wants something the gadgets are not providing, everythign is great!

But wait, aren't the marketing departments telling people what they want?

So if they have control over what people want, and over what people can buy... Then surely... ?

Welcome to modern business! Create something you can exploit. Exploit it until it no longer sells. Create a spin-off. Exploit it. etc.

Computer games are made to make money, not to have fun with them. Gone are the days where the majority of game were made by peopel making the game they wanted to play. Most games are made based on a forulaic method of "Well we know everyone likes this, and this and this and this and this sells well....So lets start a series of games based around it!"

So yeah... Things are a bit screwed up at the moment, but then that's life. Things change, some get better, others worse. Cherish the good, rememeber the bad, aim to make things better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keef:

Computer games are made to make money, not to have fun with them. Gone are the days where the majority of game were made by peopel making the game they wanted to play. Most games are made based on a forulaic method of "Well we know everyone likes this, and this and this and this and this sells well....So lets start a series of games based around it!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MadMac:
Sort of like this?

---

Yeah, something like that! Nice find!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cyclone Jack:
Did a bit of pricing over the weekend & man... you can get a new X-box or Wii for less then a "good" video card.

---

There's probably more processing power in that video card than an entire xbox 360...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cyclone Jack:
Did a bit of pricing over the weekend & man... you can get a new X-box or Wii for less then a "good" video card.

---

These days you can grab a 1 GB Radeon 5770 for ~$170 or so, even less if you catch a crazy sale/rebate. I can also walk into a store and buy a slightly slower 1 GB GeForce 250 GTS for $110 right now, which would be just fine for running Crysis at high (not "enthusiast") detail at 1680x1050. The highest end video cards are still uber-expensive, but a "good enough" card is cheaper than it's been in a long time.

Part of it is the fact that we're at the end of this console generation's 5 year lifespan; the 360 uses a triple-core IBM CPU with the equivalent of an ATI X1900 as its GPU, while the PS3 uses the (massively powerful but tricky to exploit fully) Cell coupled with the equivalent of a Nvidia 7900 GTX. This has led to a bit of stagnation on the PC front as most games that are cross-platform only use Shader Model 3.0; we haven't really had a big game other than Crysis that's pushed PC visuals forward to SM 4.0 or SM 5.0.