gears of war on 360 was about fighting the controller more than fighting any bad guys. I haven't played the pc version, but I imagine they'd have to tweak it considerably to make it more difficult.

2/21/2008 9:46:44 AM

Quote :

"Basically, I think that the limitations of stick controls create better gameplay, since it is somewhat harder to have perfect precision with a thumbstick when compared with the point-and-click action of a mouse. The more difficulty there is to overcome, the more player skill comes into play."

I'm going to go ahead and quote legatic (from the TF2 thread) on this one:

Quote :

"so you only play games on the smallest possible tv to make shit hard to see, and only the games with the worst controls and camera angles, and you take all the buttons out of your controller and just stick a screwdriver in the hole when you need to put a button, right? because all those things make playing games easier."

2/21/2008 11:58:14 AM

from your first 2 words...

Quote :

"Until MMOs"

massively multiplayer online games FPS, RPG, or otherwise...


isn't a ACTION RPG still a RPG?!

also from the same article I posted:

Quote :

"Unlike most MMO games, all versions of PSO before PSO Blue Burst store the player's character, inventory and other information locally on a memory card or similar storage device instead of on a server controlled by the game studio. This method of saving is required to allow the player to play offline with the same characters. This makes the player data more easily accessible to hackers, and as a result, cheating is much easier in PSO than in a conventional MMO game."

___________________

Quote :

"so you only play games on the smallest possible tv to make shit hard to see, and only the games with the worst controls and camera angles, and you take all the buttons out of your controller and just stick a screwdriver in the hole when you need to put a button, right? because all those things make playing games easier."

exactly

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 12:05 PM. Reason : g]

2/21/2008 12:04:17 PM

Quote :

"gears of war on 360 was about fighting the controller more than fighting any bad guys. I haven't played the pc version, but I imagine they'd have to tweak it considerably to make it more difficult."

Gears is a terrible indicator of the merits of thumbstick controls. That was one of its weakest points.

Quote :

"i mean i can set it up so one click turns me 180 degrees in several games. cant do that with a thumbstick"

One of the many reasons a thumbstick offers better gameplay. Why should someone be able to turn around instantly? If someone got behind you without you knowing it, you shouldn't be able to start shooting them as soon as you feel the first bullet. Can a real person turn around instantly? No. They can turn around quickly, which one can do with the sticks, but not instantly (or as close to it as can be perceived), as someone can with the mouse.

Quote :

" thats like saying im going to use old golf clubs or an old tennis racket because, even tho the new ones are faster and allow for more control and accuracy, Its more fun to try and overcome the shortcomings are equipment that isnt as good as it could be. I guess some people like that, but I dont. I have so much more control for a FPS with a mouse and always prefer that control."

Quote :

"so you only play games on the smallest possible tv to make shit hard to see, and only the games with the worst controls and camera angles, and you take all the buttons out of your controller and just stick a screwdriver in the hole when you need to put a button, right? because all those things make playing games easier."

No. Not at all. In fact, both of you completely missed the point. With a console controller, perfection is still fully possible, it just takes more skill to achieve. With broken/old/bad equipment, you as a player can be doing everything perfectly, and still not achieve perfection in-game.

It's just an adjustment of the skill curve. Sticks make it much easier to tell who is a bad player and who is good. An FPS game is better when there's more of a difference between people of varying skill levels.

2/21/2008 12:35:17 PM

i still disagree. when i can do something to the same level of accuracy and achieve what i want faster with one method, thats the one im going to use. maybe its the engineer or the musician side of me thinking here but thats just how i feel.

also lets not start comparing what a real person can do when talking about video game FPSs in the first place haha. if i can carry a rocket launcher in my back pocket while using a jetpack to fly through the air seamlessly while accurately firing a fully automatic weapon i think that negates whether you should be allowed to turn instantly. lets not forget aircraft that nearly never have physics anywhere close to real aviation available today. im not saying i mind any of this, but that aspect should be thrown out when talking about these kind of video games.

2/21/2008 12:47:06 PM

Dude, I understand what you're saying, but you're just plain wrong. If you want to talk about console FPS's and skill, you should talk about how everyone is using the same hardware and no one has an advantage because they have a faster PC. That's actually a legitimate argument.

The controller thing is not, and just makes you look like a homer. There is nothing positive about giving people an inferior tool for the job. Sure, you can still achieve "perfection" in the context of everyone using gamepads, but someone with mouse/keyboard would still crush you.

2/21/2008 12:52:23 PM

I've mentioned this before in previous threads, so I thought I'd bring it up here as well.

Quote :

"I will never buy a FPS or RTS game on a console until I can use a mouse to point with instead of a fucking thumbstick."

Quote :

"i think turn sensitivity is so much easier/more accurate for me personally with a mouse."

Quote :

"negative. theyre not bad, just nowhere close to a mouse. i mean i can set it up so one click turns me 180 degrees in several games. cant do that with a thumbstick"

If you own a 360, then the answer isn't out of reach... so long as you can afford it.

http://obsiv.spaces.live.com/blog/

This guy has created software which will allow you to use a mouse and keyboard with the 360. Building instructions are in the link.



I took the basic instructions one step further and put all of the components into a project enclosure. Since my 360 and my PC sit on the same desk, they're plugged right into each other.

This XIM adapter is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but if you were to see COD4 played with it, you would be amazed. OBsIV is currently beta testing a version of this adapter which will not require the XFPS or the wired controller (which would save at least $150 on construction costs), and will also have a substantially quicker refresh rate.

http://www.xim360.com

Here's the new website.

I am in total agreement that some games are simply much better played on a PC because of the control scheme. However, if you can bring the PC control scheme to the console, then I am all for it. I will absolutely never again attempt to play a FPS game with a controller because I SUCK at it. I'm not even that good with a mouse and keyboard, but at least now I don't get completely slaughtered.

2/21/2008 12:54:01 PM

^^^I understand where you're coming from there... but the thing is that everyone can do that more easily with the mouse than with the sticks, which decreases the disparity between a bad player and a good player. Everything just looks closer to average. Maybe you prefer that, and that's fine. I prefer there to be more of a skill disparity (and so does MLG, at least to some degree, given that they don't play PC shooters).

Yeah, realistic abilities are going down a bad road when discussing gaming... I just think that turning is one thing that needs to be kept roughly similar to what a real person can do.

Quote :

"but someone with mouse/keyboard would still crush you."

Wrong. Perfect aim is still perfect aim, whether it's on a PC or console. Two people with such aim would break even. My problem with PC controls is that there is just such little skill involved in having perfect aim when compared to consoles. An above-average console player would be killed by an above-average PC player, because on PC above-average is nearly perfect, while on console, above-average is just... above average. But the "best" console player would go roughly even with the "best" PC player... and if that PC player were put onto the skill curve of a console, he/she would be crushed by the "best" console player.

My problem with PC is that the highest bracket of skill should not have so many players in it. Yes, it is an elitist opinion thinking that people who are not as good should not look as good. But that's the way it should be (in my opinion).

Quote :

"I will absolutely never again attempt to play a FPS game with a controller because I SUCK at it. I'm not even that good with a mouse and keyboard, but at least now I don't get completely slaughtered."

See? This guy agrees, at least with my comments on the skill curve. His lack of skill puts him lower on a console than it does on PC.
(No offense intended... it's cool to be bad at a certain control scheme. Not trying to bash you.)



[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM. Reason : ^, ^^]

2/21/2008 12:56:05 PM

it really doesnt require more skill. it requires stepping down in the level of control you have over your character and adapting and practicing with it. period.

when a game is available for PC and also for a console, why get it for the console when im already comfortable with the mouse/keyboard.

i am fully 100% confident that i can handle controls on a console controller just as well as the next guy using a controller if i put the same time into using them as i have playing PC games in the past. but i have no desire/reason to do relearn a way to do something i can already do more efficiently on another platform.

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2008 1:08:05 PM

Quote :

" when a game is available for PC and also for a console, why get it for the console when im already comfortable with the mouse/keyboard. i am fully 100% confident that i can handle controls on a console controller just as well as the next guy using a controller if i put the same time into using them as i have playing PC games in the past. but i have no desire/reason to do relearn a way to do something i can already do more efficiently on another platform."

I actually agree with what you're saying here. (Excluding that first sentence, which I didn't quote. Practice factors in to skill, but it is not just about practice.)

I'm not advocating someone changing to a different setup. That's just not needed. If you're used to PC and not console, that's a perfectly legitimate reason to continue playing PC games, and I'm not going to call you out for it. I wouldn't want to spend a lot of time becoming acclimated to a new system, either.

In my arguments, I'm assuming that someone out there is going to be playing these games in a professional capacity, which is why I emphasize the need for a larger gap between good and bad players. That's really the only scenario that PC vs console skill matters in, anyway. Anything else is just doing what you enjoy most, in which case, what you enjoy most is obviously the better choice.


What I enjoy most: For gaming in general, I enjoy console controls more because they feel more immersive. It's hard for me to feel like I'm in the character's shoes when I'm pointing and clicking with a mouse. Using PC controls and staring at a computer screen always feels a little silly to me, and there is virtually no immersion at all, especially in an FPS. But that's also one of the many reasons an RTS is better on PC. You're not supposed to be immersed in an RTS, you're the overlord looking down upon your troops.

Maybe some of the rest of you can feel immersed in a PC game. I just can't, which is why I don't really play games that go for an immersive feel on the PC.

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 1:32 PM. Reason : personal opinion.]

2/21/2008 1:13:48 PM

One thing I have loved about console gaming over PC gaming is not having to pick up the damned mouse and move it, when I end up weaving all over the place with my character getting my mouse out of center pad... I still contend that with a PC game achitecture, much of your skill and competitiveness in FPS's is going to be in the hardware that you had to purchase to give yourself an edge (better framerate/resolution/refresh).

2/21/2008 3:05:57 PM

which is why trackballs are the shit

2/21/2008 3:44:53 PM

Quote :

"See? This guy agrees, at least with my comments on the skill curve. His lack of skill puts him lower on a console than it does on PC. (No offense intended... it's cool to be bad at a certain control scheme. Not trying to bash you.)"

None taken! I honestly just lack the mechanical motor skill to be as precise with a control pad as I am with a mouse. It's all about gross motor control vs. fine motor control. I just can't "twitch" with a control pad instantly as well as I can with a mouse. Playing FPS games with a control pad is, to me, nothing short of infuriating. Now, not all games give me this trouble, and many are substantially easier to play with a pad.

I know a lot of people bitch that having a mouse and keyboard in something like COD4 for the 360 is cheating. Well, if people want to feel that way, so be it. It's a fact that if I use a pad, I am a TERRIBLE gamer, but if I use a mouse and keyboard, then I am just moderately talented. Not great, and certainly not invincible by any stretch. There are control pad players out there who whip my mouse-using ass regularly. It's all a matter of frustration for me. If I have to use a pad, then I'd most likely just not play the game at all. If I can use a mouse/keyboard, though, then at least I am able to play in a way which gives me a fighting chance.

2/21/2008 4:16:25 PM

I'm joining this thread kind of late, coming from the jokethread. I'm going out for the night, so this'll just be from a salespoint. I'll bring up what industry leaders have said when i get back.

PC Best Sellers
1. World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade* – Vivendi (Blizzard) – 2.25 million
2. World of Warcraft* – Vivendi (Blizzard) – 914K
3. The Sims 2* – Electronic Arts – 534K
4. The Sims 2 Seasons Expansion Pack – Electronic Arts – 433K
5. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare* – Activision – 383K
6. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars* – Electronic Arts – 350K
7. MS Age of Empires III* – Microsoft – 313K
8. Sim City 4* - Electronic Arts – 294K
9. MS Flight Simulator X* - Microsoft - 280K
10. The Sims 2 Bon Voyage Expansion Pack – Electronic Arts – 272K

As for consoles:
1. Halo 3 (Bungie, Microsoft Game Studios, X360) - 4.82 million
2. Wii Play with Wii Remote (Nintendo, Wii) - 4.12 million
3. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Infinity Ward, Activision, X360) - 3.04 million
4. Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock (Neversoft, Activision, PS2) - 2.72 million
5. Super Mario Galaxy (Nintendo EAD Tokyo, Nintendo, Wii) - 2.52 million
6. Pokemon Diamond Version (Game Freak, Nintendo, NDS) - 2.48 million
7. Madden NFL 08 (EA Sports, Electronic Arts, PS2) - 1.90 million
8. Guitar Hero II (Harmonix, Activision, PS2) - 1.89 million
9. Assassin's Creed (Ubisoft Montreal, Ubisoft, X360) - 1.87 million
10. Mario Party 8 (Hudson Soft, Wii) - 1.82 million

If you disregard MMO's and Casual Games (italicized), its pretty obvious why a developer would want to release their game on a console (CoD4).

Let's go with the OP and stick with FPS's for the time being.

CoD4 sold more copies last month on the 360, than the pc version did in 2007. Even the PS3 version sold 445k copies its first month. THE PS3.

I'm going to call BEU out by saying that FPS's are not inherently better on the PC. I think that given the same amount of time with each, that in the end a keyboard/mouse player would be more accurate than a joypad player. True. Custom maps are good sometimes, yes.

But if you take into account everything else, you'd be wrong. Finding my friends to play with online has never been easier than with XBL. Everyone in CoD4 is playing on a level playing field with the same controller, system. The joypad does not suck for fps's, it just takes alot (more) time to become good with it. Also, take into account the matchmaking system. All too often I've gone into a server and was either owned, or was owning at a wildly varying rate. With Trueskill, you'll usually only play with people in your skill range, and there is no effort involved in finding them.

I don't have the time to find the actual numbers, but IIRC Crysis has not broken 300k. We can tell from the chart they did not break 272k in 2007 atleast. The game cost millions of dollars to make, and was PC Gamers' darling child for why it was a superior platform. The game was great, but it was a failure.

Unreal Tournament 3 is another great example. I'll be back

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 4:58 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2008 4:55:10 PM

COD4, UT3, and gears of war are great examples of mediocre games that pc gamers all played 5 years ago, but have not been done to death on consoles yet.

crysis has sold over 1 mil so far btw. Dont know where the 300k is from.

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 5:01 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2008 5:00:51 PM

are these numbers US only? because burning crusade sold a lot more than that worldwide on its release day alone, and 2X that number in the first month alone.

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 5:08 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2008 5:06:30 PM

btw NPD doesn't track digital sales. So games on steam wouldn't be counted to those numbers. Nor would EAs own digital distrubution methods.

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 5:10 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2008 5:10:23 PM

WoW has moved a ton of digital copies too. but then again i think we already agreed that mmos are a thriving pc gaming sector.

2/21/2008 5:14:06 PM

2/21/2008 7:56:39 PM

Quote :

"COD4, UT3, and gears of war are great examples of mediocre games that pc gamers all played 5 years ago, but have not been done to death on consoles yet."

QFT

seriously, CoD4 was great when it was called BF2...it's seriously the same dame game except not nearly as intricate as BF2 was

UT3 is meh, but then again, I haven't liked an UT since 2000

Gears of War...man what a fucking disappointment that was. Heard all this great shit about it on the 360. My bro got it for the PC and I just thought it was pretty much like half a dozen other games I've played before

face it, gaming is seriously dumbed down on consoles...which is probably half the reason why they sell well (the other half being people being too poor to afford PC gaming). I shudder to think what the new Civ game is going to be like. Just a couple of weeks ago I played a civ game that went at least two hours a night over 7 nights.

As far as XBL being so great for finding friends to game with...I guess that's your opinion. Between Steam friends, xfire, AIM, MSN, etc for messaging and free voice chat over programs like Teamspeak and Ventrillo (and the multiple games with in game voice chat), I have never had a problem connecting with people to play (oh yeah, other software like All Seeing Eye and GameSpy also eliminate the need for a centralized system like XBL).

In short, XBL is just another example of things being dumbed down rather than creating something that never existed before. Hell, I've been using teamspeak and xfire since the time the original xbox was released, and before that I was using RogerWilco as far back as 1999 for in game voice chat).

2/21/2008 9:23:29 PM

You can play games on a pc?

2/21/2008 9:25:37 PM

I just like sitting on my couch and being able to play games on a screen bigger than 19". Not to mention sports games, the controls on them are absolutely shitty on a pc, we had this discusson in the past and we had 2 Madden guys who had it n their pc admit to using a controller for it.

PC does kick ass concerning customization though. I get crazy jealous of map edtors.

2/21/2008 9:47:12 PM

Quote :

"In short, XBL is just another example of things being dumbed down rather than creating something that never existed before. Hell, I've been using teamspeak and xfire since the time the original xbox was released, and before that I was using RogerWilco as far back as 1999 for in game voice chat)."

I fail to see how integration of friends lists, chat support, messaging support, matchmaking, demo and other media distribution, etc is "dumbed down."

2/21/2008 10:59:05 PM

it's dumbed down in the way that things get dumbed down to make it accessible for the mass market...it's not a bad thing, but it is all functionality that has been on the pc for the better part of a decade (and longer in some areas) - it does get old hearing 360 owners talk like MS invented the whole concept

i mean, if you think consoles don't present dumbed down versions of stuff vs. the PC (again, not that it's bad), then I guess it's all lost on you anyway

Quote :

"I just like sitting on my couch and being able to play games on a screen bigger than 19""

That's funny, because I'm sitting here typing this from my couch after playing a night of Civ on a 50" HDTV

[Edited on February 21, 2008 at 11:58 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2008 11:56:39 PM

Quote :

"I just like sitting on my couch and being able to play games on a screen bigger than 19". Not to mention sports games, the controls on them are absolutely shitty on a pc, we had this discusson in the past and we had 2 Madden guys who had it n their pc admit to using a controller for it."

even PC gamers will admit that sports games are better on a console so thats nothing of note

2/22/2008 12:06:16 AM

^Like I've brought up before, as a PC gamer I would have always went to a console for a sports game, which was mainly due to the controller. That's no longer a problem. In Madden 08 I just plugged in a 360 controller and the system mapped everything to the 360 control layout. The receivers even have the xbox 360 buttons over their heads when passing, etc. Problem solved. Now there is a new problem.

EA doesn't put any effort into updating the PC versions of their games. Madden for the PC isn't next-gen yet. I guess the reason being them not wanting to limit their target market by creating a game with higher system requirements. Tiger Woods has also been ignored. EA has yet to put in the option to upload your face into the game (which they could have done 3+ years ago).

You do get the ability to upload user created golf courses/mods with PC games, but I suspect the consoles are closing the gaps there.

Quote :

"I just like sitting on my couch and being able to play games on a screen bigger than 19". Not to mention sports games, the controls on them are absolutely ****** on a pc, we had this discusson in the past and we had 2 Madden guys who had it n their pc admit to using a controller for it."

Yeah, to each their own. My 19" screen that's less than 2 feet away is just as good as my 32" TV that's 10+ feet away. I don't really miss the couch, so it doesn't bother me.

I don't get the Madden guys comment.
1) The controls for the console are exactly the same on the PC.
2) "admit to using a controller?" You act like having and using a controller is a bad thing. Or do you want to artificially limit someone on a PC to using just a keyboard and mouse? I have a few friends that own a 360 and they admitted to me that they use a controller for all their games.

[Edited on February 22, 2008 at 8:33 AM. Reason : -]

2/22/2008 8:32:28 AM

Quote :

"COD4, UT3, and gears of war are great examples of mediocre games that pc gamers all played 5 years ago, but have not been done to death on consoles yet. crysis has sold over 1 mil so far btw. Dont know where the 300k is from."

I'm not sure what you're trying to say exactly.

CoD4 is a PC game that is the 3rd sequel to the original PC game CoD. Like almost every FPS being released for every system: there has been a game like it, before it.

UT3 is the same thing, except has been relatively exclusive to the PC.

There has never been a game like Gears of War on the PC before the PC version came out. Kill.switch and Rainbow 6: Vegas had the same cover system, but R6 isn't the same type of game. That's like saying there was NFL blitz on the PC, therefore Madden was on the PC.

You're saying that these genres have been done to death on the PC, but not on the consoles. I fail to see the point in saying this. So you're saying that the PC is coming out with little innovation, not selling the games, and dying? I guess you're right

I cannot find total sales of Crysis or UT3, but these are the numbers sold in the first month of release.

Last month’s sales numbers are in, and they spell bad news for PC gamers. The system destroyer Crysis, which was released Nov. 13, only sold 86,633 units. Needless to say, this is surprising for such a critically acclaimed game. Even worse, Unreal Tournament 3, which was released Nov. 19, only sold 33,995 units.

2/22/2008 9:04:38 AM

Quote :

"QFT seriously, CoD4 was great when it was called BF2...it's seriously the same dame game except not nearly as intricate as BF2 was UT3 is meh, but then again, I haven't liked an UT since 2000 Gears of War...man what a fucking disappointment that was. Heard all this great shit about it on the 360. My bro got it for the PC and I just thought it was pretty much like half a dozen other games I've played before face it, gaming is seriously dumbed down on consoles...which is probably half the reason why they sell well (the other half being people being too poor to afford PC gaming). I shudder to think what the new Civ game is going to be like. Just a couple of weeks ago I played a civ game that went at least two hours a night over 7 nights. As far as XBL being so great for finding friends to game with...I guess that's your opinion. Between Steam friends, xfire, AIM, MSN, etc for messaging and free voice chat over programs like Teamspeak and Ventrillo (and the multiple games with in game voice chat), I have never had a problem connecting with people to play (oh yeah, other software like All Seeing Eye and GameSpy also eliminate the need for a centralized system like XBL). In short, XBL is just another example of things being dumbed down rather than creating"

CoD4 is not like BF2, sorry. If you want to play BF2, why don't you try BF2 for the 360?

I'm sorry you don't like UT3 and Gears of war. I'd love to play the games similar to it, if you could list them.

I wouldn't necessarily say that all games are dumbed down for their console release. Decisions are made, in the instances of RTS's, to make them more suitable for the controller, but most are feature complete (C&C3 as an example).

I didn't say that it was impossible to meet up with your friends to play a game on the PC. It's just so much harder. I press 3 buttons to join a CoD4 game with my friend, and we're both talking over the same voice chat when I enter. You just listed about 10 programs that are needed to be switched between to play the various games with your friends. I fail to see how thats easier than turning on your machine.

I think what you really meant to say is that XBL "streamlined" the process. Not "Dumbed-down." It provides all the same features, but no effort is taken to use the universal system.

2/22/2008 9:14:51 AM

BF2 for the console is basically an entirely different experience. The two dont even compare.

You will never find a game with the quality and depth of PC BF2 on a console, ever.

2/22/2008 9:41:42 AM

warhawk? or BF: Bad Company?

2/22/2008 10:25:59 AM

Quote :

"I'm sorry you don't like UT3 and Gears of war. I'd love to play the games similar to it, if you could list them."

any fps in the last 10 years. Hell, UT3 is pretty much an identical copy of UT2k4, but somehow they made it look and play worse? COD4 brings nothing new to the FPS genre at all. Just like the 3 CoDs before it. UT3 didn't sell because its not a good game. As opposed to crysis, which has sold over a million so far. Which is pretty good considering its system requirements.

By dumbed down we mean no innovation, less complex gameplay, and trimmed down plots. Bioshock is a great example of this. In system shock 2 you had 3 distinct skill trees and you had to carefully plan the spending of your points. In bioshock you ended up with everything pretty much maxed out. Not that it mattered since if you died you respawn 3 feet away.

As for dificulty playing games with friends, thats up to the developer. Its 2 mouse clicks in steam. Games using their own ingame browsers, or worse, gamespy's browser system, can be a pain to use. On the other hand, for the longest time that barrier to entry meant those people you did meet in game were much more fun to play with. As compared to the shitfest of players on xbox live. Dedicated servers develop much better communities than pickup games.

Im just sad we'll probably never see a game as well designed as Tribes 1. The best netcode, complex gameplay, deployables, vehicles, etc... Tribes could do 128 players and up to 8 teams on a server. It had an awesome mod system that required nothing on the client side. But we wont ever see a game that good again because its too complex for console gamers. And if its too complex for console gamers, it wont sell.

2/22/2008 12:18:23 PM

Voice chat on console gaming is really annoying too. You can't get any teamwork done without some 10 yr old kid screaming that everyone is a fag and that he hates you all every 5 seconds. You get that every now and then on PC games but for the most part the people are a lot more mature.

2/22/2008 12:33:10 PM

Quote :

" PC Best Sellers 1. World of Warcraft: Burning Crusade* – Vivendi (Blizzard) – 2.25 million 2. World of Warcraft* – Vivendi (Blizzard) – 914K 3. The Sims 2* – Electronic Arts – 534K 4. The Sims 2 Seasons Expansion Pack – Electronic Arts – 433K 5. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare* – Activision – 383K 6. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars* – Electronic Arts – 350K 7. MS Age of Empires III* – Microsoft – 313K 8. Sim City 4* - Electronic Arts – 294K 9. MS Flight Simulator X* - Microsoft - 280K 10. The Sims 2 Bon Voyage Expansion Pack – Electronic Arts – 272K"

Did you use lube when you pulled these numbers out of your ass?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games#PC

try again.

[Edited on February 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM. Reason : a]

2/22/2008 12:36:19 PM

http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2008/02/21/gdc_will_steam_add_movies_music/

Heres an article about how sales over steam (not tracked by NPD) are doing.

Quote :

"Rob Wright: Steam had a pretty impressive growth spurt last year. Were you surprised by the sales numbers, especially for third party titles like BioShock and Call of Duty 4? Doug Lombari: We were very surprised. The numbers for those titles in particular blew us away. It was a great year for PC games. I don't think that any publisher that's released a game on Steam hasn't come back to it with another title. "

Quote :

"Rob Wright: You released The Orange Box for both the PC and the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 consoles. Were you happy with the business the console versions did, and how did it compare to the game's PC sales? Doug Lombari: We were very happy with both the Xbox 360 and PS3 sales. I think the Xbox 360 version did just over a million, while the PS3 [released later in December] version did a few hundred thousand copies. So I think when all is said and done, The Orange Box will have sold about 1.5 million copies on the console, which is great. But the game's PC sales were much stronger. Rob Wright: How much stronger, exactly? Doug Lombari: I'd say significantly stronger, at least a two-digit percentage increase over the console sales. And that includes Steam sales, retail sales, and now individual sales of Portal, Team Fortress 2, and Half-Life 2: Episode 2. So when you take the PC numbers for The Orange Box a la carte, they're significantly higher. "

Suprise suprise the better version of the best games to come out last year had the best sales on the best platform!

2/22/2008 12:47:47 PM

Quote :

"any fps in the last 10 years. Hell, UT3 is pretty much an identical copy of UT2k4, but somehow they made it look and play worse? COD4 brings nothing new to the FPS genre at all. Just like the 3 CoDs before it. UT3 didn't sell because its not a good game. As opposed to crysis, which has sold over a million so far. Which is pretty good considering its system requirements."

I was referring to Gears of War when referring to similar third person shooters on the pc. I agree with you whole heartedly. CoD4 and UT3 don't bring anything new to the genre. They're 2 of the many PC games that didn't have innovation, and didn't sell well. Thank you.

I don't know where the numbers from Crysis are coming from exactly. I'd imagine that the number would be total number shipped worldwide, as apposed to total number sold in the US which is from the NPD where I got my numbers from. It was a good game, but they have gone on record saying it didn't sell enough.

Quote :

"By dumbed down we mean no innovation, less complex gameplay, and trimmed down plots. Bioshock is a great example of this. In system shock 2 you had 3 distinct skill trees and you had to carefully plan the spending of your points. In bioshock you ended up with everything pretty much maxed out. Not that it mattered since if you died you respawn 3 feet away."

It baffles me as to why you continue to list "bad" PC games in your examples of the reason PC's are superior.

Regardless, while Bioshock was simplified from its spiritual predecessor SS2, I don't feel that anything was taken away that didn't need to be. I played SS2 for about 6 hours before bioshock came out, and I found the micromanagement to be tedious and annoying. I was constantly entertained playing bioshock. I'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that PC gaming is dying, but I'll continue to entertain you.

Quote :

"As for dificulty playing games with friends, thats up to the developer. Its 2 mouse clicks in steam. Games using their own ingame browsers, or worse, gamespy's browser system, can be a pain to use. On the other hand, for the longest time that barrier to entry meant those people you did meet in game were much more fun to play with. As compared to the shitfest of players on xbox live. Dedicated servers develop much better communities than pickup games."

You're absolutely right. Each individual developer in the PC market is required to come up with their own proprietary network code, matchmaking, etc. for each game they release. And it is difficult to switch between multiple games with the same people; infact, its really frustrating. Dedicated servers do develop their own little communities for each individual game. This idea is translated to the party system on XBL, to a greater effect.

In halo3 I'd be playing with about 6 random friends in a party, and we'd be playing matchmaking. We would still come across random people to play against, and would add them to our party after the match. We actually found people playing at NC State on multiple occasions, and I play with them regularly.

Quote :

"Im just sad we'll probably never see a game as well designed as Tribes 1. The best netcode, complex gameplay, deployables, vehicles, etc... Tribes could do 128 players and up to 8 teams on a server. It had an awesome mod system that required nothing on the client side. But we wont ever see a game that good again because its too complex for console gamers. And if its too complex for console gamers, it wont sell."

I really don't have to say anything but to google APB.

But I will.

That game was amazing. It was from PC's hay-day.
PC Gaming is dying.
It is sad that we won't see these types of games (BF2, tribes) on consoles until dedicated servers like resistance/r2/warhawk start really hitting their stride. But you must understand, that they were just as few and far between on the PC.

I was a hardcore PC gamer up until the last generation (before 360, Wii, PS3), and I can totally see where you're coming from, but you must understand that these are facts. Give Microsoft one more generation to get into the type of gaming that you're reminiscing about.

[Edited on February 22, 2008 at 4:51 PM. Reason : ]

2/22/2008 4:46:49 PM

Quote :

"Did you use lube when you pulled these numbers out of your ass? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games#PC try again. [Edited on February 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM. Reason : a]"

Actually I used the publicly available, professionally collected, most-used NPD numbers from the US in 2007 as opposed to a user-edited, cluster-fuck of incredulous sources.

No lube was involved.

I understand that it doesn't track Digital downloads, but other than steam, I really fail to see the issue. Also, there is probably a specific reason why Doug was so vague in his PC vs. Console numbers. I don't doubt that Half life sold more on PC's, but I think he's trying to include the individual sales of each of those games in the total sum. Which in reality is less money than the 60 dollar 360 and PS3 packages.

Steam is a wonderful platform, and I would deem it PC Gaming's last hope.

[Edited on February 22, 2008 at 5:06 PM. Reason : ]

2/22/2008 5:04:38 PM

Quote :

"I'm going to call BEU out by saying that FPS's are not inherently better on the PC."

sentences like these are why i really really really can't wait for pc-console common servers for a good fps...

Quote :

"Give Microsoft one more generation to get into the type of gaming that you're reminiscing about."

what? like they did with mechwarrior? no thanks. they typically dumb games down way too much, hell even valve did that with TF2.... and the game is slightly weaker for it...

there are several games that will always be better on the console, sports games for the most part (even though they still dont update enough when compared to the pc versions), racing games are hit and miss, fps games other than halo, which imho wasn't as cosmically divined as all the fan boys insist (so-so, at best) what's really been notable on the console? RPG games (again hit or miss, on both, hits on both, misses on both) strategy games? pc only RTS games? PC only, good MMO's PC only

there are places for both and they both have their advantages and disadvantages. consoles are limited by outdated hardware and poor interface objects, though they are getting better. PC's are limited by typically not having the same level of development for games and by being much more expensive across the board.

Quote :

"is not having to pick up the damned mouse and move it,"

not the games fault you A: have the mouse sensitivity off or B: lack the space to freely move the mouse

you can always sub in your control of choice on a pc though...

[Edited on February 23, 2008 at 12:32 AM. Reason : s]

2/23/2008 12:12:33 AM

Mechassault was designed to be a fun pick-up-and-play action game, not a replacement for any other mechwarrior game. you know what? it was pretty damn fun too and was enjoyable online.

I'm a fan of mech 2/3/etc as well as mechassault.

2/23/2008 9:54:50 AM

snippy arnt we chris

2/23/2008 10:17:41 AM

yep, cuz its dumb to act like 2 games in the same universe MUST be exactly the same. i mean thats like saying the quests in war3 werent as fleshed out as those in WoW. well, no shit, wow is an "rpg." of course mechwarrior is more complex, it is a sim.

2/23/2008 10:32:21 AM

Quote :

"We can all agree that a FPS is better on the PC. But I been reading and hearing that the trend tends to favor games coming out on PC and consoles and eventually might move exclusivly to consoles. "

says who??

My favorite FPS games were council games.

Golden Eye
Halo
Cod4

Also i like the fact taht for 300-500 dollars i can get all the latest games and not have to out and buy an upgrade if some new game has a slightly higher performance demand.
exception being Counter Strike

The only games better in my mind on PC are RPG games, and whatever genre games like warcraft fall into

[Edited on February 25, 2008 at 12:56 AM. Reason : l]

2/25/2008 12:49:07 AM

Quote :

"council games"

Must be hard to play having to consult with a group like that.

2/25/2008 3:05:25 AM